Antipope John XXIII was accused and found guilty only of piracy, rape, sodomy, murder and incest after the more scandalous charges were suppressed according to to historian Edward Gibbon. Was there any merit to the accusations?

by hariseldon2

According to to historian Edward Gibbon

The more scandalous charges were suppressed; the vicar of Christ was accused only of piracy, rape, sodomy, murder and incest

Was there any merit to this accusations or was the trial politically motivated? If legit, were there any actual more severe accusations that were not included in the trial? Were such practices common of popes in this era?

xxXX69yourmom69XXxx

Here is an answer from /u/jezreelite that goes into depth on this question.

https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/dh18q9/comment/f3lwszk