Allie Kitsune
Crow T. Robot
Always Feelin' Foxy.
HaHa U FaLL 4 LaVa TriK
Posts: 46,933 
|
Post by Allie Kitsune on Jun 20, 2020 11:18:33 GMT -5
No. That is how it is suppose to functions in the legal court room. The court of public opinion gives no poops, and will jump to whatever reaction or conclusion a person wants. And right now? Water keeps being used to put out a grease fire, all over. And in the case specific to wrestling, women have power now more than ever in the thing, so they have more visibility. And there are no old carny codes to adhere to in a Post-Territory business. This stuff has to come out, there needs to be public shaming and stigmatization. Consequences need to be visible. Because certainly if they didn't learn to not be crapwaffles before, then real consequences, and the threat of ruination will teach people to not be effin' monsters. Also, to root this back to WWE's side of things, you have to think of their association with all this. Not that they caused any of these events to happen but their own image if they do the bare minimum with these incidents. They might have fired Gallagher but there's a lot of people who are right now having a lot of skeletons exposed from their closets, some have put out (pretty bad) statements, some are getting lawyers, some have deleted accounts or said nothing but all of them are associated with WWE. Obviously it can't happen ASAP but if we're a week into this and nothing else has happened, how does that look to WWE or any other company? For the UK guys especially, does WWE want to wait and see comes from this police investigation and risk isolating fans and wrestlers alike or do they want to take action now and risk whatever happens to that one guy? Because that's the choice they have to make and, honestly, it's not a hard one for them to make. Ironically, that's actually the one thing Vince has going for him, in a rueful, dark sort of way. Everybody's already fully aware that he's a morally bankrupt evil bastard, so nobody's going to be surprised when he acts in a way that disgusts them. |
|
|
|
Post by The Captain on Jun 20, 2020 12:39:02 GMT -5
For Riddle's sake, I'd hope his lawyer is more competent in court than he is with sending out statements. Otherwise, it could go as badly for him as it did with Vic Mignogna and his fly-by-night lawyer.
|
|
MolotovMocktail
Grimlock
Home of the 5-time, 5-time, 5-time, 5-time 5-time Super Bowl Champion 49ers-and Wrestlemania 31
Posts: 14,070
|
Post by MolotovMocktail on Jun 20, 2020 12:53:51 GMT -5
Agreed. Innocent until proven guilty is how it’s supposed to be No. That is how it is suppose to functions in the legal court room. The court of public opinion gives no poops, and will jump to whatever reaction or conclusion a person wants. And right now? Water keeps being used to put out a grease fire, all over. And in the case specific to wrestling, women have power now more than ever in the thing, so they have more visibility. And there are no old carny codes to adhere to in a Post-Territory business. This stuff has to come out, there needs to be public shaming and stigmatization. Consequences need to be visible. Because certainly if they didn't learn to not be crapwaffles before, then real consequences, and the threat of ruination will teach people to not be effin' monsters. And it's not right for the court of public opinion to jump to a conclusion based on one person's word with little or no evidence, either. In the McCarthy era, most people didn't face criminal charges if someone outed them during the hearings, but they lost their ability to work, and the world branded them a Communist solely because one person pointed their finger and said he was a Communist. Similarly, public shaming and stigmatization should come when there's actual evidence that this happened. In Riddle's case, if this woman claims he choked her, why wait 2 years to mention it? Had she come out with it immediately after it happened, we could have seen the bruise marks on her neck, and known for sure that something happened. It's also pretty convenient that she came forward the night before he was set to make his TV debut on the main roster. I agree that there should be consequences when the incident is credible and backed up by evidence, but wait until there's something, preferentially physical evidence, to come out to verify that something happened before we all grab the pitchforks and torches. Some of these are undoubtedly true, and the perpetrators should be dealt with appropriately, whether that be facing criminal charges or being blackballed from the industry. But some of these could very well be a real-life version of the Chaz domestic violence storyline. |
|
|
|
Post by Feargus McReddit on Jun 20, 2020 13:02:43 GMT -5
In Riddle's case, if this woman claims he choked her, why wait 2 years to mention it? Dude...we all know the answer to this. It's the same answer that's with all these cases and it's happened time and time and time again. If we're talking about two years ago, for a star Riddle was one of the biggest names on the indies, close to signing with WWE, do you know the reaction that would have happened if someone came out and said they did that? She would have immediately be accused of faking it, people would have swarmed her and her case, she'd go into hiding and we'd move on to the next wrestling story. It's not easy to come out with stuff like that when it could potentially put your entire livelihood on the line. |
|
|
|
Post by honsou on Jun 20, 2020 13:17:24 GMT -5
It would be kinda interesting if they decided to basically just ignore it unless there were criminal charges filed. I could see Vince figuring that they are scummy business in the first place and this will all blow over. At this point their fan base is down to the hardest of the hardcores so who will stop watching if there are sexual predators on the roster? Vince probably feels like they have more to lose by firing potential stars.
|
|
|
|
Post by romanstylesiii on Jun 20, 2020 13:31:30 GMT -5
Most of the people in this thread are a microcosm of why the internet is so bad. You should really look at the full scope of everything before you react.
Matt has proof she stalked his family for years. She has nothing. Not even one witness from the car ride for which it may have happened.
Nearly everyone who spoke up had a text trail, pictures of their bruises or witnesses. In the only incident to happen within 2 feet of 6 people, the woman stocking Matt has nothing.
When you have a long history of doing crazy things, like harassing someone's family, you need to show proof.
|
|
|
|
Post by 3cheers4ramirez on Jun 20, 2020 13:32:12 GMT -5
It would be kinda interesting if they decided to basically just ignore it unless there were criminal charges filed. I could see Vince figuring that they are scummy business in the first place and this will all blow over. At this point their fan base is down to the hardest of the hardcores so who will stop watching if there are sexual predators on the roster? Vince probably feels like they have more to lose by firing potential stars. If nothing else comes to light, and the police don't get involved, I don't really see what they should be doing in this instance. With Dream and a few of the other cases, there are multiple victims, screenshots etc. With this there's no evidence either way. Nothing to suggest she's lying, nothing to suggest he's a rapist. I don't see how anyone can have a strong opinion one way or another. It's far from ideal, but you can't impose certainty where there isn't any. |
|
|
|
Post by 3cheers4ramirez on Jun 20, 2020 13:36:37 GMT -5
Most of the people in this thread are a microcosm of why the internet is so bad. You should really look at the full scope of everything before you react. Matt has proof she stalked his family for years. She has nothing. Not even one witness from the car ride for which it may have happened. Nearly everyone who spoke up had a text trail, pictures of their bruises or witnesses. In the only incident to happen within 2 feet of 6 people, the woman stocking Matt has nothing. When you have a long history of doing crazy things, like harassing someone's family, you need to show proof. Is there any real evidence she was stalking him? Would stalking him neccesarily mean she wasn't raped? Anyone who thinks they know one way or the other can't be basing it on evidence, because there isn't any. |
|
|
|
Post by ThereIsNoAbsurdistOnlyZuul on Jun 20, 2020 13:44:11 GMT -5
And it's not right for the court of public opinion to jump to a conclusion based on one person's word with little or no evidence, either. It's not right to lionize people based on a skill that is non-indicative of their moral fiber as well. But in these instances, conclusions made regarding people without an informed opinion happen.And honestly people will make snap judgments all the time, as that is inherent to human psychology. We are a bundle (initially written as bungle) of biases that are barely functioning. False parallel here, communism was not directly criminal/immoral. These acts are. Further, this ignores ALL of the additional circumstances around both. These are unrelated, non-analogous events, and drawing the parallel is an appeal to emotion. No, this is wrong. There is no play, there is no gain to be made here, and is really a problematic notion to entertain, more than than the stories are true. I get it, I get it. If we the like the person who has accusations levied against them, then what does that say about us? Nothing. It says nothing.We are not bad for enjoying their work, for having positive experiences because of, or with them. We can be wrong about people. Being wrong doesn't make us bad. Committing/allowing bad things does. |
|
|
|
Post by Mighty Attack Tribble on Jun 20, 2020 14:36:33 GMT -5
Matt has proof she stalked his family for years. She has nothing. Not even one witness from the car ride for which it may have happened. Riddle says he has proof, but that holds no more weight than her saying he assaulted her until that proof is produced in court. Lionel Hutz can print as many packing label declarations of legal intent as he wants, but if it never goes to court then the whole thing is her word against Riddle's. |
|
|
|
Post by Feargus McReddit on Jun 20, 2020 14:43:55 GMT -5
I get it, I get it. If we the like the person who has accusations levied against them, then what does that say about us? Nothing. It says nothing.We are not bad for enjoying their work, for having positive experiences because of, or with them. We can be wrong about people. Being wrong doesn't make us bad. Committing/allowing bad things does. I'll put it briefly so I'm not taking away from the topic; Jordan Devlin was practically royalty on this island. He was undefeated for over two years, won the OTT title in epic fashion and had great matches here and in Belfast. The storyline with him being chased off by people supporting David Starr because he was in WWE was really well put together with the payoff probably being them having one more match at some point for the title he lost. That time was some of the best times I had as a fan, watching in small bars, massive stadiums and stuff in between. I even met the guy once and he was one of the nicest guys in the business. And because of one assault he did not admit to...all that's gone. His legacy here, or even in WWE, is likely never going to be spoken much about except with headshaking and wondering if he did actually get lawyers, if more stuff was going to come out with it. But nobody here is blaming themselves as fans. Yes, Jordan was a reason why OTT became as popular as it did internationally but he wasn't the only reason. Those times still happened, those positive interactions still happened. And not a person should feel bad because how were they to know? I don't think many people he knew personally knew. It hurts but you can either fall into it or move on. And for the first time in decades, this is a chance to make the change we've wanted to see in the business. |
|
|
|
Post by Final Countdown Jones on Jun 20, 2020 15:39:30 GMT -5
I've got to add, aside from the actual meaning of "innocent until proven guilty", which does not mean any of what it's commonly perceived to mean and is a large part of why the court system renders "not guilty" verdicts instead of explicitly "innocent" verdicts, there's a very real factor to all this of how ineffective and broken the system is. "Sufficient evidence" for a rape case to even get to trial can be massive and a lot of the time, there's little to no actual investigation being done. Plenty of people have stories about rape or other crimes where the police basically said "We can't do anything" and didn't ever bother. In this Riddle situation here, it looks like a really complicated situation with a lot more going on than it seemed at the start, it's reasonable to reserve judgment here and want to see where it goes, if the evidence of lasting issues and testimony from the people there holds true. But to put the onus of belief solely onto the outcome of a trial is really shortsighted and I think being naive about the way the system actually works.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2020 15:51:48 GMT -5
This story is really strange to me because there are so many tunnels but also intrigued me enough that I wanted to find out something.
IF he did rape her IMO I would think this is an open and shut case because there would have to be DNA evidence that he raped her somewhere...whether it be in that van , on clothing his and hers.
I just wanted to research it for myself and it seems to varrie but it brought me to the boston strangler case where they managed to find DNA evidence from a blanket that was almost a perfect match and then got DNA from the deceased some 50yrs after he died to get a match and it got me thinking that with advancements in such fields that I would think it would be no issue.
|
|
|
|
Post by polarbearpete on Jun 20, 2020 17:19:45 GMT -5
This story is really strange to me because there are so many tunnels but also intrigued me enough that I wanted to find out something. IF he did rape her IMO I would think this is an open and shut case because there would have to be DNA evidence that he raped her somewhere...whether it be in that van , on clothing his and hers. I just wanted to research it for myself and it seems to varrie but it brought me to the boston strangler case where they managed to find DNA evidence from a blanket that was almost a perfect match and then got DNA from the deceased some 50yrs after he died to get a match and it got me thinking that with advancements in such fields that I would think it would be no issue. The question here may be more consensual vs. nonconsensual, not sure he’s denied an affair. |
|
|
|
Post by El Cokehead del Knife Fight on Jun 20, 2020 17:32:08 GMT -5
This story is really strange to me because there are so many tunnels but also intrigued me enough that I wanted to find out something. IF he did rape her IMO I would think this is an open and shut case because there would have to be DNA evidence that he raped her somewhere...whether it be in that van , on clothing his and hers. I just wanted to research it for myself and it seems to varrie but it brought me to the boston strangler case where they managed to find DNA evidence from a blanket that was almost a perfect match and then got DNA from the deceased some 50yrs after he died to get a match and it got me thinking that with advancements in such fields that I would think it would be no issue. The question here may be more consensual vs. nonconsensual, not sure he’s denied an affair. She alledges that she performed oral sex on him after he threatened her, he's probably thinking "she chose to blow me so it's not rape" when there's no enthusiastic consent. |
|
|
|
Post by cabbageboy on Jun 20, 2020 17:41:40 GMT -5
Maybe I'm wrong but I seriously doubt much comes from this. Did Riddle do something to this woman in the van? Is she Glenn Close from Fatal Attraction? Or is it a mix of both? I doubt we'll ever know for sure, but what prosecutor in the country is going to bother with a case where unless Riddle just admits everything there's really no feasible chance of a conviction.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2020 17:52:47 GMT -5
You think they've told Vince yet or waiting 'til next show at least? He seemed to be made a big deal in that SmackDown. Then again they kept showing The Dream...
|
|
|
|
Post by The Trashman on Jun 20, 2020 18:03:22 GMT -5
Agreed. Innocent until proven guilty is how it’s supposed to be In court. Not in public life. Sadly that's why people still think Richard Jewell did the Olympic bombing. |
|
|
|
Post by "Gizzark" Mike Wronglevenay on Jun 20, 2020 18:04:13 GMT -5
NXT guys keep surpassing 80s wrestlers in crazy scale. :S No they don't. Was it just Bulldog, or also Kid, who would drug and sodomise their wives? The 80s guys weren't crazier. They just got away with it, in almost all cases. |
|
|
|
Post by DerktheDerk on Jun 20, 2020 21:49:42 GMT -5
NXT guys keep surpassing 80s wrestlers in crazy scale. :S No they don't. Was it just Bulldog, or also Kid, who would drug and sodomise their wives? The 80s guys weren't crazier. They just got away with it, in almost all cases. It's going to get really weird when Matt Riddle calls Bret Hart at 3 AM saying, "Mistah Hitman... I've been smokin' crack in my HOOMTOWN!" |
|
