• Waldowal@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t think this changes thing. Not for me at least. He’s had at least a dozen other people accuse him - including people that don’t need his money or notoriety. And while he was cleared of criminal wrong doing in the Anthony Rapp case, I don’t think he ever denied making an advance on a 14 year old boy. Just that he “didn’t remember it” - which hardly matters. I don’t care how drunk I get. I’m not accidentally going to hit on children.

      • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        What kind of proof do you think typically exists when a crime is committed and the only individuals present are the alleged victim and perpetrator?

        • PolarPerspective@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That’s kind of the point. We live in a system that is supposed to be “innocent until proven guilty”. Not because people who commit crimes should get away with them, but because the opposite system would be completely untenable. How exactly is he supposed to prove that he is innocent? I don’t care how sure anyone is that he did it. Prove it, or by our legal standard, he must be considered innocent.

          If you want to live in a society where accusation is tantamount to fact, you’re going to regret it as soon as anyone says anything about you.

          • CmdrShepard@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Your conflating the legal system with greater society. He’s not in jail or paying a settlement because there wasn’t enough evidence to convict him in court. The rest of society is not bound by these same restrictions and are free to pass judgment as they please.

            I wouldn’t say accusations are tantamount to fact, but when you get dozens of people making the same accusation, about a crime that’s difficult to prosecute and convict because of the nature of the crime, it’s hard to give him the benefit of the doubt.

            Are you not also passing judgement on the accusers here? You’re essentially calling them all liars who are guilty of making false reports. Both sides can’t be “innocent” here.

            • ZodiacSF1969@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              They were responding to a comment about the legal system and problems with prosecuting SA cases, so of course they are going to be discussing that over the wider social implications.

              I don’t know why you are jumping to conclusions here. The point they made about the legal system is extremely valid. As a survivor of CSA myself it’s something I confront in my mind every single day, but they are right: the opposite method would be horrific.

              • Shardikprime@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                1 year ago

                I mean these types of comments come from the same crowd that chants “eat the rich” at every opportunity, without considering that, for the vast majority of the world, they are the rich and henceforth deserving of being “eaten”