|
Post by Wolf Hawkfield no1 NZ poster on Oct 19, 2017 20:40:14 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2017 20:45:36 GMT -5
What is it with all this sexual deviance coming out suddenly?
Harvey Weinstein, Chris Savino, and now this.
|
|
H-Virus
Hank Scorpio
A Real Contagious Experience
Posts: 5,962
|
Post by H-Virus on Oct 19, 2017 20:47:06 GMT -5
What the f*** is going on lately!?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2017 20:49:15 GMT -5
Uh. Something, magic joke, something...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 19, 2017 21:14:40 GMT -5
Uh. Something, magic joke, something... For my next trick, I will make this lawsuit... disappear!
|
|
|
Post by Captain Stud Muffin (BLM) on Oct 19, 2017 21:22:21 GMT -5
The floodgates have been opened
It's not to say everyone is guilty but yeah if you did anything to a woman in the past you had no business doing, you are f***ed
Of course there could be some Derrick Rose type situations but yeah getting rape and any type of abuse thrown at your name is going to hurt you greatly by association and even worse if it's true
|
|
Juice
El Dandy
Wrong? Oh he can tell ya about being wrong.
I'm the one who raised you from perdition.
Posts: 8,172
|
Post by Juice on Oct 19, 2017 21:25:53 GMT -5
Im not saying witch hunt, and as a victim myself who took literally 20 years to ever say sanything I know it takes time. But all of these scream safe space accusations now that the flood gates are opening. It's shitty it happens, it's shitty it has to come to this. It's shitty people can't come forward when it happens. When a big purge like this happens, it almost takes credence away from the incidents. Being lumped into a larger Weinstien incident.
Also im glad the country is taking,this shit seriously I just hope they do something about a particular sexual predator when all is said and done with this outcry.
|
|
|
Post by DiBiase is Good on Oct 19, 2017 21:50:49 GMT -5
The same thing happened here a few years ago when all the Savile stuff broke. Some people finally speak out about the accusations and others who have similar allegations with the same/different people see it as the time to make their claims. One person having the courage to speak out about something always gives others the courage to do the same. Fast forward a couple of years... A few of the accused will be cleared of any wrongdoing, some of them will be sentenced to prison.
The only issue I have with this is that some innocent people get caught up in it. A few big name celebs here have had their name dragged through the mire over various accusations and when they’ve had their day in court, they were cleared. Unfortunately for them, regardless of the verdict, the association will always stick with them.
|
|
|
Post by Ryback on a Pole! on Oct 19, 2017 21:57:31 GMT -5
I honestly think it's the tip of the mountain and lots more have been at it.
Just like when Saville broke and more allegations appeared, alot which were true.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyoldman on Oct 20, 2017 3:18:53 GMT -5
The only issue I have with this is that some innocent people get caught up in it. A few big name celebs here have had their name dragged through the mire over various accusations and when they’ve had their day in court, they were cleared. Unfortunately for them, regardless of the verdict, the association will always stick with them. Yeah, remember Mathew Kelly? He was doing well hosting TV shows, then some sort of accusation came out (or was his house not searched for something) and he disappeared. He never got done for anything and I think he *may* even have been proven innocent of whatever it was he was acuused (as opposed to being not guilty) but he's pretty much vanished.
|
|
hassanchop
Grimlock
Who are you to doubt Belldandy?
Posts: 14,790
|
Post by hassanchop on Oct 20, 2017 3:56:04 GMT -5
Do people still think Michael Jackson did ya know what? The only issue I have with this is that some innocent people get caught up in it. A few big name celebs here have had their name dragged through the mire over various accusations and when they’ve had their day in court, they were cleared. Unfortunately for them, regardless of the verdict, the association will always stick with them. youtu.be/Is0oHPL-nis?t=6m23s
|
|
|
Post by DiBiase is Good on Oct 20, 2017 4:15:52 GMT -5
The only issue I have with this is that some innocent people get caught up in it. A few big name celebs here have had their name dragged through the mire over various accusations and when they’ve had their day in court, they were cleared. Unfortunately for them, regardless of the verdict, the association will always stick with them. Yeah, remember Mathew Kelly? He was doing well hosting TV shows, then some sort of accusation came out (or was his house not searched for something) and he disappeared. He never got done for anything and I think he *may* even have been proven innocent of whatever it was he was acuused (as opposed to being not guilty) but he's pretty much vanished. It was one of those “arrested, appeared in the press, cleared of all charges” cases which are pretty unfair, especially when it’s in the case of accusations involving minors. That shit sticks, even when you’re exonerated. He’s far from the only one and it’s damaged several careers. Another example is Jim Davidson. I’ll happily say that I think he’s a loathsome turd of a human being with some of his comments over the years but I don’t think it’s fair that he was named in the press before any formal charges were brought against him. It’s kind of a catch-22. Whilst there is an argument that all arrests should be a matter of public record, it’s also fair to argue that those accused shouldn’t be named until they have been formally charged. And some might argue even then, they shouldn’t be named until it goes to trial.
|
|
|
Post by Cvslfc123 on Oct 20, 2017 4:20:44 GMT -5
Do people still think Michael Jackson did ya know what? The only issue I have with this is that some innocent people get caught up in it. A few big name celebs here have had their name dragged through the mire over various accusations and when they’ve had their day in court, they were cleared. Unfortunately for them, regardless of the verdict, the association will always stick with them. youtu.be/Is0oHPL-nis?t=6m23sWhen Michael Jackson died I still remember seeing people on my Facebook saying they didn't have any sympathy because of those allegations.
|
|
67 more
King Koopa
He's just a Sexy Kurt
Posts: 11,510
Member is Online
|
Post by 67 more on Oct 20, 2017 4:56:50 GMT -5
Yeah, remember Mathew Kelly? He was doing well hosting TV shows, then some sort of accusation came out (or was his house not searched for something) and he disappeared. He never got done for anything and I think he *may* even have been proven innocent of whatever it was he was acuused (as opposed to being not guilty) but he's pretty much vanished. It was one of those “arrested, appeared in the press, cleared of all charges” cases which are pretty unfair, especially when it’s in the case of accusations involving minors. That shit sticks, even when you’re exonerated. He’s far from the only one and it’s damaged several careers. Another example is Jim Davidson. I’ll happily say that I think he’s a loathsome turd of a human being with some of his comments over the years but I don’t think it’s fair that he was named in the press before any formal charges were brought against him. It’s kind of a catch-22. Whilst there is an argument that all arrests should be a matter of public record, it’s also fair to argue that those accused shouldn’t be named until they have been formally charged. And some might argue even then, they shouldn’t be named until it goes to trial. I would argue for any sexual offences no one should be named until a guilty verdict has been reached just because it's such a damaging thing to be accused of if not true. Once a guilty verdict has been reached, f*** them but not until then. However, I also appreciate that the US has a statute of limitations on sex crimes, so perpetrators like Cosby or Weinstein wouldn't have been exposed, so either the statute should be lifted or in historic cases the US press should require permission to print the name once enough evidence has been obtained that it would have secured a conviction if it were in time. Obviously, the UK has no such statute so it wouldn't have an effect.
|
|
SmashTV
Dennis Stamp
Big Money, Big Prizes, I Love It!
The Excellence of Allocation
Posts: 4,488
|
Post by SmashTV on Oct 20, 2017 6:46:26 GMT -5
The only issue I have with this is that some innocent people get caught up in it. A few big name celebs here have had their name dragged through the mire over various accusations and when they’ve had their day in court, they were cleared. Unfortunately for them, regardless of the verdict, the association will always stick with them. Yeah, remember Mathew Kelly? He was doing well hosting TV shows, then some sort of accusation came out (or was his house not searched for something) and he disappeared. He never got done for anything and I think he *may* even have been proven innocent of whatever it was he was acuused (as opposed to being not guilty) but he's pretty much vanished. He's been in things like Benidorm and has worked in theatre, so while he's not as high profile as he was he's not lost his career totally. It might have been his choice to keep a low profile under the circumstances. Even Cliff Richard opted to do so when the police raided his house - despite having nothing to hide and offering full cooperation with the police. If he'd gone publicly about his business he'd leave himself open to verbal (or worse, physical) abuse, if he keeps a low profile then people think he's hiding. It's a no win situation, on any level.
|
|
|
Post by dirtyoldman on Oct 20, 2017 7:49:32 GMT -5
Ah, well that's good old MAthew Kelly is still working. Seems like a decent enough bloke.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2017 8:58:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Porky's Butthole on Oct 20, 2017 11:09:02 GMT -5
Uh. Something, magic joke, something... "For my next trick, I need a volunteer from the audience and a roofie." or... "For my next trick, I'm gonna make my penis disappear!"
|
|
|
Post by Natural Born Farmer on Oct 20, 2017 13:52:37 GMT -5
Not for nothing, but what we essentially have here is someone making an incredibly damaging accusation with no evidence over a decade after the fact. In the absence of any corroboration or supporting evidence (complaints to the police from her or other victims, etc.), publishing this at all strikes me as a gross breach of journalistic ethics.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 20, 2017 14:26:10 GMT -5
Reporting on an accusation is pretty routine for most news outlets.
Also, there's not much corroborating evidence you can really present here - it's essentially he said/she said.
It'll be a tough case though, because iirc Blaine admitted to being on heavy drugs during that period of his life so even his own memory probably isn't iron-clad.
Well, hopefully the truth of the matter comes out in the end.
|
|