I thought the latest accuser sounded suspicious because the modus operandi described is completely inconsistent with what the other accusers said. They were fairly consistent that he was a sketchy guy who hit on young girls and tried to see how far he could get even when they were not comfortable/happy with what he was doing (which could be considered molestation considering how far it went with the 14-year-old).

The new accuser makes him out to be a violent rapist type, forcing women's faces into his crotch and what not. Then there's this yearbook thing which seems totally fake. They made mistakes when they faked it (like the "D.A.", which were the initials of his assistant in the 1999 divorce decree he signed for the accuser, not some pompous title he's throwing around, which he wouldn't have in 1977 considering he wasn't a full D.A. then).

While it doesn't invalidate the other 4 accusations, it does show us how attention-seeking people will jump on the accusation bandwagon, which is something that I'm sure has been happening quite a lot recently.

(In other words, I don't believe a damn word the fifth accuser is saying, without refuting the other four)