The cheater side won

My boyfriend's sister started a competitive debate class in her university. She was an observer this time around and we came with her to listen in on a formal discussion on cheating. To my surprise the cheating side ended up winning.

To my understanding this was based on a true case but I'm not totally sure.

The tldr of the case was that the woman hadn't had sex with the man for over seven months so according to the cheating side, if you neglect and deprive your partner intimacy, you shouldn't be surprised that they feel lonely and find it elsewhere.

Opposing side objected we don't know why the woman didn't want to have sex, that some woman are not made to feel important, beautiful or desired, or are ignored and under-appreciated in the household, yet are expected to bring it on at night. There were many more points made, but these were basically the basic focus of each team.

When the votes came in, both the panel and audience voted in favor of the cheater. Now I know this mostly has to do with the students ability to delegate but I'm shocked to see how many people think it's excusable to cheat under these circumstances.

Now I know these students are lawyers in training and they need to see it more from a legal standpoint rather than morally but I was a bit shocked not gonna lie.