Sexual Assault and Harassment in Hollywood

[J.T.]

1 hour ago, Zimbra said:

Right to due process is not actually a thing outside of a courtroom; folks on the internet (and everywhere else) can make their opinions based on whatever evidence they choose. 

So we're at the point where it is just the digital version of mob rule complete with pitchforks and torches.

I am all for taking these dickbags out of circulation permanently, but I will always be wary about what can be taken away from innocent people in these sorts of movements and the first casualty of this appears to be the 6th Amendment right to confront your accuser. 

Something that is unenforceable in the Court of Public Opinion.

It also does not help that in that Court of Public Opinion, you will have folks like Donna Karan who have shit opinions and will defend the accused's bad behavior unconditionally. For every ten decent people that slam her comments, you will still have a few grognards that will agree.

"Oh, that's just Harvey," will burn in my ears for all of eternity.

The most heartening thing about #metoo is that the voiceless at least have a voice now.  This isn't just social justice for the already empowered.  As uneasy as it makes me feel sometimes, I will count that as a win.

1 hour ago, Zimbra said:

 In this case the actor's legal recourse would be against the person who made the false accusation.

And since bad apples tend to spoil bunches, we'll be back to the days of not believing the women who are brave enough to make these allegations at great personal risk because we will assume that they are all lying.

[Victator]

1 hour ago, Zimbra said:

You're creating rights where none exist.  Right to due process is not actually a thing outside of a courtroom; folks on the internet (and everywhere else) can make their opinions based on whatever evidence they choose.  The only difference is that people stopped giving the benefit of the doubt to the perpetrators and started giving it to the victims.

So you think this is the right way to do things? 

[Jiji]

2 hours ago, J.T. said:

Precisely.  All it will take is for even one of these women to either be incorrect or (even worse) deliberately indicate someone falsely ala Abigail Williams and we're back to the bad old days of blaming the victims for being victims.

Chauvinistic sexist douchebaggery isn't just going to roll over and die quietly and the men you most want to see get theirs may very well evade what should be coming to them.

I am praying to God that I am not moved to start a dumpster fire following the elections in Alabama on Tuesday.

Did you miss the woman "accusing" Roy Moore to the Washington Post actually being a paid agent by a right-wing group trying to expose "liberal bias" in the mainstream media? The Post did their homework and found inconsistencies with her story, thus having the completely opposite outcome Project Veritas was hoping for. So, we're already past that point. 

[J.T.]

24 minutes ago, Oyaji said:

Did you miss the woman "accusing" Roy Moore to the Washington Post actually being a paid agent by a right-wing group trying to expose "liberal bias" in the mainstream media?

The Post did their homework and found inconsistencies with her story, thus having the completely opposite outcome Project Veritas was hoping for. So, we're already past that point. 

No offense, but fact checking does not make me feel better.  If anything, finding a fraud only harms the credibility of the remaining women who have a legit grievance with Roy Moore.

Right wing groups seeking to expose librulmediabias should not be surprised to see that people will find it easier to believe horrible things about Roy Moore.  He strikes me as the typical puritanical nightmare that passes moral judgment on others yet still keeps a copy of Hustler hidden in his sock drawer for just in case.

No one seems to miss the civil liberties we cheerfully forfeit for the sake of protection during times like these until it is our time to attempt to employ these civil liberties.

[Jiji]

28 minutes ago, J.T. said:

No offense, but fact checking does not make me feel better.  If anything, finding a fraud only harms the credibility of the remaining women who have a legit grievance with Roy Moore.

Right wing groups seeking to expose librulmediabias should not be surprised to see that people will find it easier to believe horrible things about Roy Moore.  He strikes me as the typical puritanical nightmare that passes moral judgment on others yet still keeps a copy of Hustler hidden in his sock drawer for just in case.

No one seems to miss the civil liberties we cheerfully forfeit for the sake of protection during times like these until it is our time to attempt to employ these civil liberties.

That was my initial reaction too. That woman just made life for actual victims (and not just of Moore) so much harder than it need be and for what purpose?

[Zimbra]

I'm sorry, what civil liberty is being violated by the public believing credible assault accusations against someone?  Must be stuck somewhere in the back of the constitution.

45 minutes ago, Victator said:

So you think this is the right way to do things? 

If I started ranking my concerns about the world "The public is overly credulous towards rape accusations" would not crack the top 500.

[J.T.]

11 minutes ago, Zimbra said:

I'm sorry, what civil liberty is being violated by the public believing credible assault accusations against someone?  Must be stuck somewhere in the back of the constitution.

It's the 6th Amendment so it's right there near the front of the document.

Credible assault accusations are discussions about crimes which should be prosecuted, but the legal system is being circumnavigated entirely which means no charges, no trial and no fundamental right of the accused to confront the accuser.

Seeking justice by tarnishing someone's reputation and hoping they (or someone else) will do the honorable thing and fall on their sword will only go so far. 

For every Matt Lauer that gets fired, you will get a Bill O'Reilly that gets rehired.

For every Harvey Weinstein that is disgraced and publically humiliated, you will have a Roy Moore who could still be elected to Congress.

[Zimbra]

Just now, J.T. said:

It's the 6th Amendment so it's right there on the front. 

Credible assault accusations are discussions about crimes which should be prosecuted, but the legal system is being circumnavigated entirely which means no charges, no trial and no fundamental right of the accused to confront the accuser.

This, generously, is complete nonsense and a profound misreading of the 6th amendment.  

[J.T.]

12 minutes ago, Zimbra said:

This, generously, is complete nonsense and a profound misreading of the 6th amendment.  

The Sixth Amendment guarantees the rights of criminal defendants, including the right to a public trial without unnecessary delay, the right to a lawyer, the right to an impartial jury, and the right to know who your accusers are and the nature of the charges and evidence against you.

The Court of Public Opinion enforces none of those things and these allegations are about criminal conduct.  These allegations are credible, but few of them are proven and no one is requiting them to be proven. 

Al Franken was good enough to be a dumbass and pose for a photograph that could be used as evidence.

Leeanne Tweeden got an apology.  Was that justice?  IMO, no.

[Dolfan in NYC]

And I'm about this close to violating everyone's 1st Amendment rights in a second...

[Raziel]

4 minutes ago, Zimbra said:

This, generously, is complete nonsense and a profound misreading of the 6th amendment.  

You're right,

 

But we're just skipping the prosecutions and going straight to publicly destroying people with an accusation that at this point, doesn't need to be proven.  I'm all for removing sexual predators from circulation, but doing it in ONLY the public and media is ultimately a bad idea and is a step away of "I saw Goody Corey with the Devil!" and " Lionel Stander is a Communist."

[J.T.]

20 minutes ago, Dolfan in NYC said:

And I'm about this close to violating everyone's 1st Amendment rights in a second...

I apologize if I have offended anyone here, but the tone of the debate still seems civil if not a bit heated.  Zimbra and Raziel are my homies, so I respect their dissenting opinions highly and I will respectfully agree to disagree with them.

Besides, this board is a private entity that is multijurisdictional and international thanks to the internet so technically no one has 1st Amendment rights here. ...

I'll just show myself to the door now.  I've got a three and a half hour drive ahead of me and I still have to pick up my kid and the weather is turning to shit here in he 804.  I'd rather start the weekend off on a high note anyway since we're celebrating my daughter's 15th birthday on Saturday.

[Zimbra]

Yeah, I think this point has been successfully strip-mined and we can agree to disagree.

[Dolfan in NYC]

2 minutes ago, J.T. said:

Besides, this board is a private entity that is multijurisdictional and international thanks to the internet so technically no one has 1st Amendment rights here. 

Remind me to shoot you in the face the next time we're in Los Santos together.  

[J.T.]

2 minutes ago, Zimbra said:

Yeah, I think this point has been successfully strip-mined and we can agree to disagree.

No harm, no foul.

[J.T.]

1 minute ago, Dolfan in NYC said:

Remind me to shoot you in the face the next time we're in Los Santos together.  

Not if I shoot you first.

[jaedmc]

Civil discourse?

DVDVR got lame.

[J.T.]

I am the misguided voice of reason with apparently extremely shitty opinions and a horrible grasp on the proper interpretation of US Constitutional Law.

[Dolfan in NYC]

Uh oh.   This tsunami may be on its way to Stamford. 

 

 

[Zimbra]

I'm only surprised it took this long.

[Raziel]

 

[J.T.]

5 minutes ago, Dolfan in NYC said:

Uh oh.   This tsunami may be on its way to Stamford. 

 

Wow, if this is about who I think it's about we could be short one Guardian of the Galaxy.

[John from Cincinnati]

2 minutes ago, J.T. said:

Wow, if this is about who I think it's about we could be short one Guardian of the Galaxy.

If you've got a source, please share with class. Sharing is caring.

[EVA]

Raziel is winning this thread for me with the Crucible quoting.  SO very applicable to this situation.

[Raziel]

Circling back to the "one percieved misdoing by the victim can be jumped on"... Gloria Aldred is a fucking idiot.