What is the difference between a narrator whose hadith is abandoned and one who is accused?

The Shaykh : What is the difference between a narrator whose hadith is abandoned and one who is accused?
The distinction here involves a matter of generality and specificity. Every narrator accused in hadith is a narrator whose hadith is abandoned, but not every narrator whose hadith is abandoned is accused in hadith. However, they are of the same rank in terms of weakness. A narrator whose hadith is abandoned means his hadith is very weak, and a narrator accused in hadith means his hadith is very weak. The difference is that a narrator accused in hadith is one who is suspected of intentionally lying in hadith. When it is established that he lies, he is not called "accused"; he is called a liar, a fabricator, or something similar. But when the hadith scholar’s judgment in assessing a narrator does not reach the level of certainty that he lies, but only suspicion, he is described as "accused," meaning accused of lying. However, the man may be righteous and far removed from intentionally lying about the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), but he may be very poor in his memory of narrating hadiths to the extent that he might attribute sayings narrated from some people to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), or the Isra'iliyyat narrated from the People of the Book before Islam. He may have memorized them over time and attributed them to the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). Thus, despite being truthful in himself and not lying, or not being suspected of lying in hadith, he is still called a narrator whose hadith is abandoned due to the severity of his weakness and poor memory. This is the difference between the abandoned narrator and the accused one.