Like I said, the people who are inclined to disbelieve her will disbelieve her, and the people who are inclined to believe her will believe her.
I grant you, she's given everyone good reason to doubt her word. So I'm not faulting anyone who chooses to disbelieve her. But don't expect me to accept that you disbelieve objectively, because of some evidence. All we have in this case are her statements, and our own inclinations, based on our own interpretations.
I choose to believe her because I don't see any clear evidence that she's lying, and because I know that she has involved herself in political and cultural debates several times in the past, both here and on Discord, and is part of a demographic which is statistically likely to participate in political protest. So it makes sense to me that she would be at the protest. And, if she was at the protest, then there's no reason to disbelieve her claim to have gotten into a stew.
Sure, she could be lying. That's just as possible as her telling the truth, but not more likely. Everyone here is going to decide what they want to believe based on their predisposition, because we don't have access to any reliable data.