“Trial by social media”
I dunno. He certainly didn’t help his cause there when he released that creepy vague cringe vid he did about the accusations in his House of Cards character.
Testifying at your own trial is almost always a bad idea, even if it’s a social media trial
He did like 3 of those, one per year, consecutively
I’m still surprised how quickly this guy’s 30 year career imploded. He went from a household name to basically non-existent in the span of a week. Can’t say he didn’t bring it upon himself but it’s still surprising.
Its really not.
A LOT of celebrities are complete assholes. And everyone knows it. But nobody is going to say anything because it will just hurt them. Its why almost nobody bothers to bring up that Tom Cruise is a deranged cultist (linked to more than a few “disappearances”).
But when someone fucks up? EVERYONE comes out of the woodwork. Chevy Chase basically went from “he is one of the funniest people alive” to “We all would be a lot happier if he was dead” almost overnight. Bill Murray isn’t QUITE at that level, but all the “Ha ha ha, Bill was always so funny with how he would rib us” became “He is a dipshit who is hard to work with but I guess he is still funny”. And Jim Carey is always on the verge of that with most interviews about him being “Oh yeah. He is a real character. He was always so funny on set and never broke character and yeah. He is a card. Oh, but I love all the stupid bullshit he did because he is an artist. Please stop writing. STOP!!!”.
Or, just look at Jonathan Majors. He was THE it guy in hollywood and was well on his way to Denzel status. Then he got into an altercation with his girlfriend (I want to say he violently abused her in public, but I think the investigation of that has been “weird”). And pretty much INSTANTLY social media was full of other actors and production crews basically saying “I don’t know if he did THIS, but he is an abusive piece of shit with a long history of this and everyone hates working with him”.
And studios are generally okay with it because… it means they aren’t expected to pay the big bucks for the current it person. And, in the case of happy stories like Robert Downey Jr, it means they get an amazing actor/actress for dirt cheap during the inevitable comeback.
Ooh, another good example is Tom Hardy. He is notoriously an asshole and hard to work with, but he is a moderately good actor who is friends with a lot of REALLY good directors. The Fury Road stuff was particularly funny because basically EVERYONE was talking about what an asshole he was on set. And then Charlize Theron basically had to spin it as “oh, I hated working with him. But we were both being jerks so it really isn’t his fault and I have no hard feelings.” Because, for her “okay-good” acting, Charlize Theron has pretty much demonstrated herself to know how to work Hollywood over the past few decades and she knows who is winning if there is “beef” between her and Tom Hardy.
But if you are making the kind of movie that Tom Hardy would be great in? You are expected to at least try and budget him in because it will “help the film” so much.
You are still allowed to dislike innocent people. The law is not morality.
He also wasn’t found “innocent”, but “not guilty”.
There’s a vast difference between that. Not guilty means that we can’t prove he’s guilty beyond reasonable doubt, not that we can prove that he’s innocent.
It’s still very likely he committed crimes, but we can’t be sure enough to send him to jail.
Came here to say this! With all we’ve heard about the man, I’d say he’s slam-dunk “not innocent”. BUT, he was found not guilty as charged.
People really get up in arms because they don’t know the difference. And it’s not just some legal shenanigans, it’s a real-world thing.
Another example is my sleezebag Congressman, Matt Gaetz. People act like he wasn’t prosecuted due to being in Congress, money, whatever. No, he wasn’t prosecuted due to lack of evidence and witness testimony.
Is he an innocent man? Fuck no. But that’s not enough to lock him up. Given the nature of the case, I wouldn’t have prosecuted either. About zero chance of a jury returning a guilty verdict. Pretty sad about it, I really hoped to see that man in orange.
I have never heard about an “innocent” verdict, is that really a thing?
They are just making a point. No such thing, just pointing out that criminal courts don’t prove innocence.
I think the closest you get to that is if you counter-sue (or they get sued for lying in court, etc.) the accusers and win.
When Depp won against Heard, Reddit went full on circle jerk around Depp. Sure his ex was an abusive fuck, but that doesn’t excuse Depp’s horrendous actions and his general creepyness. Dude is 60 chasing after 20 year olds and complains when they’re immature. His ex may have been worse than him, but he’s still an abusive creep.
semen (the body fluid)
You are still allowed to dislike innocent people.
Just a small correction. Being not proven guilty doesn’t proves innocence. It just means that the accusation couldn’t be proven in court. That’s the price we pay for our justice system which tries to keep wrong convictions as small as possible, quite a few guilty people will walk free.
And I think in this case a guilty person walks free.
So you have insider knowledge that the public is not aware of?
where there’s smoke, there is fire my friend
So false accusations simply don´t exist in your world?
Do you have proof these accusations were false? Remember, a not guilty verdict only means the evidence presented was insufficient for a conviction, and does not mean the accusations were not real.
Correct - however, it also does not mean that the accusations are true.
But in the case the original user clearly stated it was their opinion, not a fact. Individuals are allowed to have opinions of another person’s guilt, even if it differs from that of a jury.
No. But with these many accusations I really don’t need that to make an educated guess.
And nothing prevents me from doing so since I can’t do shit about that fucker beside not watching his movies.
No. But with these many accusations I really don’t need that to make an educated guess.
So when a certain number of accusations against a person is reached that makes the accusations true? Funny logic … so at what number of accusations do they magically turn from being just accusations to being the truth?
And nothing prevents me from doing so since I can’t do shit about that fucker beside not watching his movies.
You really think he gives a shit if you watch his movies? Cute but please keep in mind the dude is super fucking rich and his estimated worth is about 70.000.000$.
So when a certain number of accusations against a person is reached that makes the accusations true?
No, but much more likely.
You really think he gives a shit if you watch his movies? Cute but please keep in mind the dude is super fucking rich and his estimated worth is about 70.000.000$.
Yes? That’s my point!
No, but much more likely.
Yeah, I agree with that.
Yes? That’s my point!
Ah, then I think I misunderstood you in that point.
What’s the public sentiment on this verdict going to be? I have not been following the case.
I think he was found not guilty. Anyone that continues to demonize him should probably step up with more information than came out at the trial before they open their mouths again and ruin a man’s career.
I’m not sure where the first witch hunt came from, but I’d lay it at the feet of social media platforms like Reddit causing an echo chamber that drove it.
The fact that he was abandoned by the studios and the people he worked with said more about them than it does about him.
A verdict in a court of law is based on what is presented, not on what happened. This is what makes it possible for people to commit a crime, and get away with it (or get framed for something that they didn’t do).
This is a question that I do not want you to answer here, but one to ponder:
If your son/nephew/younger was up for a part in a project that was directed by, and starring Kevin Spacey? What weight would you assign to that Not Guilty due to insufficient evidence verdict?
Where does the judge say that evidence was insufficient for a verdict? I missed that part.
Also, are we going to start questioning every verdict as if any accusation was true, even when proved differently in court?
“Where does the judge say that evidence was insufficient for a verdict? I missed that part.”
The primary cause of your confusion is your insistence on missing the point.
“Also, are we going to start questioning every verdict as if any accusation was true, even when proved differently in court?”
Again, missing the point. Who is talking about every verdict, besides yourself? This is Kevin Spacey specific.
Do you believe that not getting convicted means that the accused did not do the thing that they are accused of?
Is it your personal belief that Kevin Spacey is completely harmless with respect to sexual predation? Does your confidence extend far enough that you would have no qualms about a young male relative of yours work on a movie with Kevin Spacey?
Reading you comment I searched for the differences between being “not guilty” and being “innocent” and boy I didn’t know enough about the US justice system. I thought a “not guilty” verdict was the same as “the guy didn’t do it”. I stand corrected, though. Thanks for your input.
I’m not sure where you’re from. But that principle by no means is limited to the US but pretty much present in every western country.
The whole idea is to prevent false convictions at the cost of guilty people walking free if their guilt can’t be proven.
deleted by creator
Calling it a social media witchunt is a bit trite. A number of people came forward, detailing a history that spanned years. His claims that they were motivated ‘by money’ and painting it as ‘aspiring actors’ when we’re talking a group that includes professionals with their own VERY well established careers also reeks of the rear end of the equine.
Yeah, let’s not confuse “not guilty” with “not a creepy old man”. The bar for the state taking away your rights based on your activity is fairly high – as it should be – but not being able to produce sufficient evidence of acts that don’t leave a whole lot of physical evidence behind doesn’t make the accusations false.
It just makes them not enough.
And, I’m sorry to everyone out there who seem weirdly motivated to want to believe that accusers are overwhelmingly liars, but his hand-waving away of the accusations was not confidence inspiring.
Let’s not forget that multiple accusers up and fucking died while waiting for their day in court, also.
Kinda hard to provide testimony that could have been compelling for the court when a number of key witnesses don’t survive the trial.
Multiple sources i’ve read indicate that Spacey seems to believe he can climb right back on top of the A-list again now this court case is over.
It was around the qanon situation
And after Weinstein
Edit: just read the harassment stuff on Wikipedia.
I’m not sure if this trial tells anything about the whole truth with all that going on
Even the career is not important, whole life is ruined. Just imagine family and friends all ar least asking about it and some leaving you.
While I agree there should be severe and swift punishment for sexual offences, there should be some punishment for false accusations. I know that sometimes is just not prooved and sometimes it is in legally gray area, so not automatic, but if it can be prooven that someone was intentional lying - then there should be consequences.
but if it can be prooven that someone was intentional lying - then there should be consequences.
this is already the case today. thank you for playing.
Unfortunately, in most cases, there’s no real-world way to punish false accusation. The bar of proof for that sort of thing is, and should be, extraordinarily high. You pretty much have to have a confession.
Also, charging false accusers has a chilling effect on victims. Think how manipulative abusers are. “See what happened to that chick on the news? Go ahead, call the cops. You got nothin’ you dumb bitch, 'cept maybe a future in a concrete and steel cage. Here’s the phone, I’ll dial for you.”
I like how you gave the imaginary person an accent.
While I agree there should be severe and swift punishment for sexual offences, there should be some punishment for false accusations. I know that sometimes is just not prooved and sometimes it is in legally gray area, so not automatic, but if it can be prooven that someone was intentional lying - then there should be consequences.
But we actually have pretty clearly defined legal systems for slander, libel and defamation?
While I agree there should be severe and swift punishment for sexual offences, there should be some punishment for false accusations.
What are you talking about? There are punishment for false accusations. But that of course has the very same legal requirements of proven beyong reasonable doubt as any other accusation.
And no, just because someone is not proven guilty doesn’t mean that the accusation is false. It literally just means that, the court couldn’t prove the accusation and so couldn’t punish the accused.
His career is ruined! That’s what we all wanted, right? /s
yes
actually no i wanted him in jail too
Even though I haven’t been following the case, I’m quite surprised.
I wonder if Netflix will hire him to do an alternate ending for House Of Cards now that he’s been found not guilty.
I’m not too invested in this so I could be wrong but wasn’t there a news story just recently that like 3 people set to testify against him died mysteriously or something?
Will be interesting to see if his career rebounds after this or what.
No chance, he’s tainted goods. Maybe with the right social media spin, after a LONG time, he could come back.
Really sucks, loved his acting. Just watched American Beauty the other night and was able to see the actor and not the sins. But still, tell me Spacey is in a new movie, and guess what’s top of mind?
But nobody waited for the verdict, they canceled him to the end of the galaxy and the internet told me he was guilty. Would an “Oops, sorry” be enough until the next stampede?
While he wasn’t found guilty for these specific accusations, they were not the worst ones, and proving these cases from decades ago is pretty much impossible.
Court outcomes never clear someone of accusations that were not included in the court case and generally favor the defense. Spacey has so many accusers over such a long time period that the odds of him attracting that many false accusations is zero. There was both no reason to wait and no reason to think that being found not guilty is a free pass.
Is Cosby redeemed because a judge through out his conviction?
Is Cosby redeemed because a judge through out his conviction?
This asks a question that I think is valid, but is fraught with emotion and history. Should it not mean that Cosby is redeemed if the charges are thrown out? It is extremely difficult to prove cases from decades ago, but does that mean that someone should face social consequences for charges that haven’t been proven in a court of law? Statistics say that most sexual assaults go unreported. Which is why there is a good and understandable push to believe people who report. But experiencing consequences based only on those reports also doesn’t seem to be the best.
While I admit that I don’t know the intricacies of Spacey’s case and all of his accusers, yes, if we can’t 100% be sure that he is guilty, I would abstain from canceling just because it’s trendy now. I know, rage baiting is the most effective tool these days.
There are monsters out there that take advantage of people in lower positions but there are also people that are innocent but because somebody is either jealous or wants to cause havoc, they get “canceled” for life.
I guess I am more cynical when it comes to things like this because I know a case(good friend) where a guy’s life was practically destroyed by a vengeful ex-girlfriend/co-worker.
I guess if you can’t see the difference between 30 accusers over decades and one accuser, then the situations might look comparable.
Who was ever canceled over a single, non-credible, accusation?
There’s no such thing as “being cancelled.” It’s called facing the social repercussions for your actions, and it’s literally always been a thing, even long before people whined about it. If people don’t want to associate with Spacey or engage with his works because they think he’s a creepy old rapist, that’s their right, and nobody is required to change their minds even after he gets cleared in a court of law.
I understand your personal experience forms the basis of your opinion but the fact is it only happened once to your friend, whereas Spacey has (and continues to) face multiple accusations from multiple people from multiple nations. That is not just a one-off.
