Hollywood Sex Allegations?

[Cuchculan]

I am not putting down people who have been sexually abused at all. That [BEEP] is just wrong. We had the first person come and make allegations about Harvey Weinstein. They are still been looked into. So far he has not been charged with anything at all. But he looks the most certain person to be charged with something. Now my first question is this, is it right to have a trial by media before you have a trial by court? Will they be actually able to find a jury, should a case go to court, who have not already heard what this man was said to have done? Thus a partial jury. Should they have a full black out on the media giving out names in advance of a trial. Then only give out the name if found guilty. In the UK a few years back there were similar claims made against certain people. Papers hung them out to dry. People were calling them all the names under the sun. Only to see some found not guilty in a court of law. One woman even admitted she had made the claims up. But the media hung this bloke out to dry.

Now we are hearing allegations against a few actors as well. The gripe I have with this is that it happened so many years ago. These women are now in their 50's. We can understand them not wanting to say anything maybe when younger. Teen years or even twenties. Why wait until you are 50 plus? So many years have passed. Is not all abuse allegations either. Some are just women who are claiming the way they were spoken to was wrong. Sexual comments and the likes. Is this sort of stuff I see as so wrong. Back when it happened, as in the sexual comments, was a different age. Different way of living. Most of what you could say back then, you would not get away with today. That much I accept. But should it not be looked at in that exact same way? As in it was another age? I am not talking rape or sexual abuse here. Just the verbal comments.

If you think about it, anybody could say anything about anybody. But it happened in a different era when we used different words and they were accepted back them. What next? Anybody whoever used the N word in the 70's, 80, and 90's will be pulled up and charged for using a word which is not allowed today. Where do we draw the line?

Here is your chance to have your say. So fire away.

[Cuchculan]

What is driving me mad about a lot of what is happening is that people are using new laws that only came in over the past decade or so to bring cases against people from 50 years ago. Those same laws would not have existed back then. The more serious sexual stuff would have been against the law back then too. So fair enough about those cases. But you should not be allowed to use new laws against a person from 50 years ago. A lot of things have changed in that time frame. But if the law did not exist when the so called crime was committed, it should not be allowed to stand using a new modern law.

[Otherside]

Eh, speaking of uk, uncomfortable topic here.

Often what was happening here was that complaints were made and the abuses reported. In some cases, investigations were started. In a few, the perpetrators were arrested. But then, for whatever reason, the case was dropped and the victim encouraged to keep quiet.

And then something happens thats impossible to deny, and everything comes out all at once. There's a big discussion into "historical sex abuse", even though half the time it's not historical and it was still happening, an investigation into why the cases were covered up which often ends in soneone being fired as a scapegoat without addressing the actual problem, and a whole load of promises that it won't happen again.

Then another situation that's eerily similar comes out in the newspaper. It's politicians at the moment here. It's been TV personalities before.

But, that could be what happened with Weinstein. Somebody (or many some bodies) raised it, and was encouraged to keep quiet and the details hushed up. If that was the case, it'll come out at some point. Followed by the investigation as to why.

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

[InvisibleGuy]

I disagree. Completely.

What's happened, from what I've heard, is not that people came forward. It's that people were afraid to come forward. Especially in the cases with Weinstein.

It's an entire population of people that were AFRAID to make complaints and report what was happening.

[Cuchculan]

We have a few cases over the years were people were afraid to come forward. Others were told to stay quiet. Bought off even. But there are also some cases of people been falsely accused. @Otherside might remember the bloke from Coronation Street ( UK Soap ) He played Kevin Webster? I have no idea how the case against him ever made it to court. The media branded him a rapist from day 1. He always denied everything. Turned out his accuser was lying. Once she took the stand the oath she took was explained to her. That she could not lie. Suddenly she broke down. It all came out that it was a story made up. Her name never made the papers once. She was one person I thought should have been named and shamed. Person she accused of raping her saved her from a jail sentence. It was put to him. But he simply wanted to get on with his life and saw no point in sending her to prison.

What is happening in Hollywood now happened in the UK big time a few years back. Mainly in the BBC. Shame one fecker died before they could ever get him to court. Kids used to love him on TV. Only he was abusing loads of them. Wasn't just him though. Was many more. Once one began to talk others came forward too. And I agree that they should have come forward. I said that in my original post. Hunt down feckers like that and hang them up by the balls once found guilty.

But here in Ireland the media are not allowed to name people before any case at all. It is not trial by media first. Trial by court first. If found guilty the media will go to town on you after the case. That is one thing I think every country should bring in. Because were you might get 10 found guilty, you will also get 5 found not guilty. Those 5 could be branded rapists by the media. When the fact is they done nothing at all.

There was also an odd case in the UK last year. Football player. Him and his mate and a girl. The girl cried rape on him, but not on his mate. It went to trial and he was found guilty. You have the right to appeal. Here is were it got all messed up. The accuser kept given different versions of events. Never once did she give the same version of what happened that night. Then she tripped herself up. She said she forgets if he gave him consent. This was after saying at the original trial that she had told him no. The judge had no option but to overturn the verdict. Not talking something that happened many years ago either. This was only something that happened in the year before the case. Tripped herself up. The media had hung him out to dry as a rapist too.

Trial by court and not by media.

[Otherside]

We have a few cases over the years were people were afraid to come forward. Others were told to stay quiet. Bought off even. But there are also some cases of people been falsely accused. @Otherside might remember the bloke from Coronation Street ( UK Soap ) He played Kevin Webster? I have no idea how the case against him ever made it to court. The media branded him a rapist from day 1. He always denied everything. Turned out his accuser was lying. Once she took the stand the oath she took was explained to her. That she could not lie. Suddenly she broke down. It all came out that it was a story made up. Her name never made the papers once. She was one person I thought should have been named and shamed. Person she accused of raping her saved her from a jail sentence. It was put to him. But he simply wanted to get on with his life and saw no point in sending her to prison.

What is happening in Hollywood now happened in the UK big time a few years back. Mainly in the BBC. Shame one fecker died before they could ever get him to court. Kids used to love him on TV. Only he was abusing loads of them. Wasn't just him though. Was many more. Once one began to talk others came forward too. And I agree that they should have come forward. I said that in my original post. Hunt down feckers like that and hang them up by the balls once found guilty.

But here in Ireland the media are not allowed to name people before any case at all. It is not trial by media first. Trial by court first. If found guilty the media will go to town on you after the case. That is one thing I think every country should bring in. Because were you might get 10 found guilty, you will also get 5 found not guilty. Those 5 could be branded rapists by the media. When the fact is they done nothing at all.

There was also an odd case in the UK last year. Football player. Him and his mate and a girl. The girl cried rape on him, but not on his mate. It went to trial and he was found guilty. You have the right to appeal. Here is were it got all messed up. The accuser kept given different versions of events. Never once did she give the same version of what happened that night. Then she tripped herself up. She said she forgets if he gave him consent. This was after saying at the original trial that she had told him no. The judge had no option but to overturn the verdict. Not talking something that happened many years ago either. This was only something that happened in the year before the case. Tripped herself up. The media had hung him out to dry as a rapist too.

Trial by court and not by media.

Michael Le Vell, I think? Don't remember much about that case. Looking at the dates though... At that time everything was coming out. Everything regarding Saville was coming out. I'm not surprised it went to court. Everyone was angry, everyone wanted blood. And they certainly couldn't take it out on Jimmy Saville. He was dead. He literally got away with everything he did.

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

[Cuchculan]

Jimmy Saville was a sick fecker. Death was too good for him. Shame he died when he did. Would have been a target in prison. Not sure if you have a DPP over there? They are the people who say ' yes ' or ' No ' to a case taking place. They see the evidence in advance. Not it all. Just enough to say there should be a trial. With Michael Le Vell I would have loved to see what any DPP was shown. To let it go to trial.

[Ironman]

Hollywood is imploding.

[Cuchculan]

Is happening here in Ireland now. Stage acting. Lot are coming out making claims against a stage manger. Only this lot went to the media first. Which never happens here. So already we know who he is. Had a famous sports writer up last month. Didn't find out his name until after he was convicted. Which is the normal way they do things here.

[InvisibleGuy]

It's really scary, the number of allegations that are coming out. It's really scary to realize that all this is...real

[Otherside]

Jimmy Saville was a sick fecker. Death was too good for him. Shame he died when he did. Would have been a target in prison. Not sure if you have a DPP over there? They are the people who say ' yes ' or ' No ' to a case taking place. They see the evidence in advance. Not it all. Just enough to say there should be a trial. With Michael Le Vell I would have loved to see what any DPP was shown. To let it go to trial.

Err, think there is but not sure.

I have to agree with you there about Jimmy Saville. What happened with him incredibly disturbing.

Sent from my G3121 using Tapatalk

[Cuchculan]

When a person is arrested we always hear ' a file is been sent to the DPP '. He or she would determine if it fit for a trial. Plus they would also be first to say if you can appeal something. They do get into trouble a fair few times. Because they do have a big enough say in how things go. Thought every country have one. The one for your country is Alison Saunders.

[Ironman]

Another two men in the news. Movies being canceled is supposed to make everything better? Sheesh!

[InvisibleGuy]

The details about what Louis CK did are reeeeally disturbing to me. I don't know how in the hell you do things like that without being certifiably crazy. All these allegations are really disturbing to me.

[JamieWAgain]

I don?t know the details about Louis CK did, in fact, I don?t even know who Louis CK is.

Here?s what?s bothering me...

We have for instance, news anchors sitting behind lucite desks to show off their million dollar insured legs.
We have commentators with plunging necklines being shown in close ups on television from their cleavage on up.

We have the Kardashians running around naked and getting wealthy from exploiting themselves.

I?m not saying that it?s the woman?s fault at all. It?s not. No is no. Period.

I?m saying that there is a double standard it seems and women, every day, pay big money for breast lifts,
face lifts, butt implants?

Seriously, if we are to have this conversation we have to also examine why intelligent women would agree to a lucite desk so their legs would be on display while reporting serious news.
Or why a woman would agree to allowing closeups of her cleavage while discussing serious topics.
I wouldn?t do that.