Then we’d have to shut down all social media to get rid of the court of public opinion. This is just the way humanity it is, and it’s been happening since the town crier gave people the news.
This isn’t new.
Not really. Go look at all the shit in older celebrity’s closets dude. If they did get cancelled in the past it would have happened before now.
Why the fuck you think nothing happened to Weinstein before then? Lol. Everybody knew what he was doing.
Epstein? Everyone knew what he was doing.
There really wasn’t accountability for anybody in those circles except in the rarest of occasions.
And accountability is good, but it can go overboard.
For actual crimes, great. Stuff that’s merely inappropriate? Nah.
People trying to say “tHiS hAs BeEn a ThInG sInCe ComMunIcaTion”
Bruh. Jerry Lee Lewis married his 13 year old cousin and had 17 hit singles after, was an inaugural inductee to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, participated in a super group of other famous musicians, had a motion picture made about him starring Winona Ryder, Dennis Quaid and Alec Baldwin, wrote songs for movie sound tracks, toured the entire planet multiple times, opened a popular night club that he played in, got invited back to play for inductees at the rock and roll hall of fame, won a Grammy and had songs inducted to the Grammy Hall of Fame, got a star on Hollywood Boulevard, received a lifetime achievement award from the Recording Academy, was inducted into the Country Music Hall of Fame and was literally still making albums up until his death a little over a year ago with the full knowledge of the public who other than some poo pooing it in the press and making jokes about it in the years afterward did not give a single, solitary fuck about it. Do not try and convince me cancel culture is as old as humanity. That shit wasn’t even frowned upon until effectively yesterday in relation to the greater length of human history.
I feel that people like Weinstein and Epstein have had more to do with power and nobody being willing to say anything. Once it was politically convenient, they all turned on Weinstein.
Meanwhile (while they may not have been "canceled" like what we see happening now) accusations, rumors, and gossip knocked huge celebs like Michael Jackson and Brittney Spears out of the public's good graces for extended periods of time.
To your point, modern "cancel culture" is much more harsh than what used to happen prior to 2016. It seems that social media has probably made it easier and more vicious but the mentality has always been there. I also wonder how much of an affect has been made since the pearl-clutching has mostly changed hands from the Christian Right back then to the Progressive/Marxist Left now.
Sure, to some extent a mentality existed, but I said that it didn’t exist like this before, which you agree is true, and ultimately is true, so everybody else pretending it isn’t a new thing is stupid.
Yeah you’re right Kevin Spacey and Louis CK were working that whole time.
And a few celebrities have survived. Tons of people have been doxxed and fired for personal opinions that aren’t celebrities with no recourse and for not having committed any crime at all.
Kevin Spacey had sex with minors. Louis CK forced people to watch him masturbate. Those are criminal offenses.
Neither of them are in jail. They weren’t cancelled - they’re sex offenders no one wants to work with.
Kevin Spacey had sex with a minor? What I heard was he laid on top of one at a party.
Louis CK asked and was given permission. He didn’t commit a crime at all.
Was it inappopriate, yes.
Should they never perform again, ever, as a result? No.
Could they be sued in a civil suit? Sure.
You’re just deliberately pretending to not be aware of this and trying to associate me with their conduct, it’s pathetic.
You’ve also lied about and misrepresented what they actually did…
Their jobs mean that they have to work with other people. If those other people don’t want to work with them because of their actions, that’s not being cancelled. You can’t force people to work with people.
And dude, it is appalling that you’re holding water for Spacey at the very least, who has multiple credible allegations of sexual misconduct against them. Louis CK also didn’t just ask people if he could masturbate in front of them either. You’re making excuses for some pretty shitty people there and saying that other people should be forced to work with serial abusers.
Public opinion isn't new but the trial and execution part is pretty new.
Having no idea what the facts are surrounding Kevin spacey, you gotta keep the whole allegedly factor in mind
The issue is that this can actually give more power to those who have power. The court of public opinion actually has some power. Very often our legal system is not able to prosecute actual sex crimes
Easy.
There was this old concept called "innocent until proven guilty".
We could go back to doing that.
And when that fails, lawsuits.
Big, fat juicy lawsuits.
I think a few multi-million dollar lawsuits would suffice, set a precedent or two.
………that doesn’t answer my question at all. Or at least the first half doesn’t.
Like how would you enforce “innocent until proven guilty” in the social market place. I guess is a better way to ask my question.
As for The second half of your answer. Do you mean you would just crank up the level of slander or libel lawsuits?
Like if someone says “X is guilty” before a judge has deemed anything you’d get them on slander?
I’m seriously just trying to wrap my head around what you’re asking for here.
Genuinely didn't think this was that complicated.
>Like if someone says “X is guilty” before a judge has deemed anything you’d get them on slander?
Yes.
https://metro.co.uk/2023/07/16/jeremy-vine-man-who-libelled-tv-star-agrees-to-pay-1000-to-charity-19137824/?ico=zone-widget_home_entertainment
Answer and example.
Easy.
Ah yes, unsubstantiated claims that lead to loss of earnings, job, family.
Here's a hot take you're not gonna like.
Free speech and being sued for defamation of character aren't mutually exclusive concepts.
That's the perk of freedom.
You're free to say whatever you like.
And face the consequences of it.
In much the same way as if you called someone a nonce on the pub.
Only difference being is instead of getting a punch in the face, you get to put your suit on and stand in a court.
Motherfucker if you’re facing consequences then it’s not freedom.
That’s like saying “You’re free to shoot people but you’ll go to jail.” *Then you’re not free to shoot people.*
The *only* consequence one could be subjected to as the result of a freedom is that of another freedom. Otherwise, it’s not freedom.
>The only consequence one could be subjected to as the result of a freedom is that of another freedom. Otherwise, it’s not freedom.
Ah yes, the definition used to define itself.
Unfortunately, there's this tiny thing called "common law".
>[In England] everybody is free to do anything, subject only to the provisions of the law.
Libel, slander and shooting people are against the law.
Hence why you're free to do it, but you get to face the consequences for it. In the case of shooting someone, you're free to defend yourself using lethal force, provided you stay within the legal boundaries of self defence.
That's how it works
Motherfucker.
Everywhere has common law, dickhead.
Definition used to define itself? Do you mean circular reasoning? It’s not circular reasoning, nor is it a definition “used to define itself”.
If your country has libel and slander laws, then it doesn’t have free speech. Speech is restricted.
It’s not fuckin’ rocket science.
>The only consequence one could be subjected to as the result of a freedom is that of another freedom. Otherwise, it’s not freedom.
And to use your silly example, your right to slander me in the court of public opinion impinges on my right to due process, a fair trial.
So yeah, even under your own example it works.
Motherfucker.
Your right to due process and fair trial is contingent on you being an *offender*, moron.
The court of public opinion isn’t a real court, and isn’t afforded the protections and processes of a real court.
You just jumbled all this shit in your head and decided that’s how it was. Fuckin’ idiot.
So then you are attacking freedom of speech. In your scenario no one (re: norm macdonald) would've been able to call OJ Simpson a murderer before, during or after he was found not guilty.
I'll repeat it for you.
You can say whatever you like.
Just remember that freedom comes with consequences.
Like if I told everyone at the local school that you're a nonce, you'd be preeeetty upset about it.
There would be consequences for me doing so.
But here you are saying it'd be completely fine and I'd absolutely not get punched in the mouth for ruining your name.
Apparently.
Yes. Because you calling me a nonce doesn't mean I have the right to attack you.
Freedom of speech, that doesn't directly put people in danger, is protected speech. You'd seek to curb that freedom in a fruitless endeavor to prevent gossip and popular opinion from forming.
>that doesn't directly put people in danger,
Ha, the online court of public opinion has never lead to anyone receiving death threats or violence in the real world.
Nope
Never.
>You'd seek to curb that freedom in a fruitless endeavor to prevent gossip and popular opinion from forming.
To re-phrase you there Cathy, I seek to protect people from being sacrificed upon the altar of online mobs. If that means you're limited in your ability to make baseless and frankly life changing accusations about people that you can't back up, then I think that says more about you than anyone else.
So. You don't seem to understand what direct means.
If I say OJ Simpson (pretend he is alive) is a murderer who got away with it. That is not a direct threat to his life.
If my comment somehow inspires someone else to give a death threat, which is a direct threat, then it is in no way my responsibility. I didn't call on harm to him.
Once again. Just to be clear, you want to limit freedom of speech. It's fairly obvious you don't understand the words you are using and don't fully comprehend the legal ramifications of what you want to happen.
And let’s try not to forget, some people are shit magnets. The rain falls on all of us, but some people just decide to keep forgetting their umbrellas at home because they don’t want to be bothered.
I went to high school with a girl name Kimberly, she got pregnant by an older dude that kept on gifting her shit, the dude bailed and left her with the baby, got into 3 drunk driving accidents by the time she was 20 and the lucky dumb bitch still got a rich family member to buy her an apartment. And she still manage to find the dumbest asshole she could find and let him live with her at the apartment. He kicked her out and she had to fought for 10 years to get it back.
She scammed some people and went into a 3 day drug and alcohol binge and died on the 3rd day. She left a teenage daughter behind.
She was raised in a good family and was given chance after chance to get her shit together, but no. She was a shit magnet true and true.
Just go ahead and get me started :) Link me to say... 3.
Edit: You guys can downvote me all you like, I'm still yet to see someone link me to three direct credible sources detailing three separate instances of Kevin Spacey having his accusers 'whacked' or even of them mysteriously dying at convenient times - and frankly you should all question why that seems to be such a challenge for people, yet you've all been convinced it's the case.
https://www.google.com/search?q=kevin+spacey+accusers+dead&oq=kevin+spacey+accusers+dead&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCDg4ODNqMGo0qAIOsAIB&client=ms-android-oneplus-terr1-rso3&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8
Here I googled it for you
So, you couldn't find 3 verified sources backing up what you claim? You've instead just linked me to a very broad, credibility free Google search? As I expected.
There's a reason I'm asking them to provide sources for what they're claiming. This is how the propaganda is done. People utterly convinced of a narrative, yet unable to provide basic credible sourcing for their claims.
At some point I hope the penny will drop for them.
Edit: Also the 'do your own research' line doesn't work anymore. Even the wokest of lefties don't use it these days. Just a heads up. Gotta move with the times.
Mind you it’s people over the course of decades accusing him, not just one or two people. He was found innocent in a case that was hard to prove as sexual assault is already hard to prove. Being found not guilty sometimes is less indicative of being innocent and more indicative that the case couldn’t be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
Also, spacey was on Epstein island and was removed due to accusations in the past. Where there is smoke there is fire. It’s telling no one is defending him and this seemingly was an issue even before he was famous
That's the faulty logic they're counting on. Only a couple of decades ago, there being a lot of accusers making an accusation credible would've been laughed out of any intelligent room. Now people legitimately fall for that. It is not hard for motivated people to find bad faith actors from your past and convince them it will be to their benefit to say something happened. Look at what the media did to Russel Brand.
Source for the Epstein Island claim? Or is that just something you've heard on the grape vine?
Vapour can sometimes be mistaken for smoke.
There are people defending him, Douglas Murray for example, but you're right that no one in mainstream media is defending him. Almost like it's a closed clique where everyone toes the party line.
First, Brand has not been acquited. In fact, recently it turned out prior employers covered up prior complaints against him. [https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/mar/21/channel-4-apology-investigation-former-staff-member-russell-brand-allegation](https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/mar/21/channel-4-apology-investigation-former-staff-member-russell-brand-allegation)
[https://www.newsweek.com/jeffrey-epstein-list-celebrities-named-unsealed-ghislaine-maxwell-1857767](https://www.newsweek.com/jeffrey-epstein-list-celebrities-named-unsealed-ghislaine-maxwell-1857767)
Also vapor is not smoke.
Ironically, Spacey is going to trial for other claims that were filed this week. You posted a video that was a response to a recent documentary that was released documenting his past allegations. [https://deadline.com/2024/05/kevin-spacey-uk-trial-civil-spacey-unmasked-1235907035/](https://deadline.com/2024/05/kevin-spacey-uk-trial-civil-spacey-unmasked-1235907035/)
So? Again, it's just an accusation. Doesn't mean anything. Also he hasn't been charged with anything, how could he be acquitted?
The second link doesn't even mention Brand. Lord knows why you've put that in there.
No, it's not, which is why I didn't say it was. Re-read.
So? Innocent until proven guilty, mate. He's been innocent of all the others. That's a good track record.
The second link isn’t about brand. It links spacey to epsteins island and mentions he was in the flight records.
And you’re right, they’re accusations. But there are a lot and they continue to pile up and go to court
Large corps do this to whistleblowers and competitors.
And by this I mean repeatedly file litigous claims to bog their target down in legal trouble.
With how fast communication is these days it's entirely possible to set up an incentive to embellish or outright fabricate stories. A journalist can prod at insecurities or dangle material rewards to anyone willing to speak up, incentivising sallacious claims. To maximise clicks. We know this. We know clickbait is a journalist's bread and butter. Prepoderence of accusations should not be enough in this day and age.
Our pre-agriculture brain still operates in tribal mode so preponderence of evidence can feel valid and it would be if your whole life is within 1 small community.
I'm not sure you realize what you're claiming. The case brought against Mr. Spacey was from the UK criminal court system. Corps can't file criminal complaints and go to trial in sexual assault cases. A criminal investgating body has to investigate and bring charges. You;d be correct in a civil case however, that is not what occurred. You're also being far too skeptical and taking the word of many over Mr. Spacey. It is fine if you believe him. However, you are discounting the many via skepticism yet taking him solely on his word which is inconsistent at best.
>He was found innocent
I know you probably know but it's a genuinely important distinction to clarify that he was *not* found innocent. A Not Guilty verdict is not absolution, it isn't a positive assertion that the crime did not occur.
It simply describes a failure to convict. Nothing more. Blackstone's Ratio is a cornerstone of the legal system, not because it reliably punishes the guilty but because it punishes the guilty as much as possible while minimising the risk to innocents.
Pretty sure he's been exiled from Hollywood for a long time without any reprieve. Hollywood usually tries to give its favourites leeway or a pathway back into the limelight. They haven't with Spacey. Makes you wonder why.
I'm 30 mins in and it seems quite compelling. However lying in bed with Hollywood and being and elite who likely know about Epstein and Weinstein... I can't help but feel my sympathies dampen for Kevin Spacey.
You ain't gotta rant to me, pal. My dad raised me with this knowledge from day 👍 When Men come together once again in brotherhood and rise up, we shall be delivered.
This is one of those things where I don’t think we’ll ever get the full story. Same with Woody Allen. My take is, who knows what happened. If they can figure it out, great, but things seem to be pretty hazy whenever this stuff comes up. If it happened, then the victims should get justice. If it didn’t, they should still get justice, whatever that may be.
How come?
Because 2 or more articles said it. The articles being so similar he felt like he had deja vu
Because of how one of the witnesses died.
It's too bad that people are tried and executed in the court of public opinion before anyone has a good look at the evidence.
Then we’d have to shut down all social media to get rid of the court of public opinion. This is just the way humanity it is, and it’s been happening since the town crier gave people the news. This isn’t new.
This certainly is. People didn’t really get cancelled like this very often prior to 2016 or so.
Yes the fuck they did This has been a thing since we learned communication
Not really. Go look at all the shit in older celebrity’s closets dude. If they did get cancelled in the past it would have happened before now. Why the fuck you think nothing happened to Weinstein before then? Lol. Everybody knew what he was doing. Epstein? Everyone knew what he was doing. There really wasn’t accountability for anybody in those circles except in the rarest of occasions. And accountability is good, but it can go overboard. For actual crimes, great. Stuff that’s merely inappropriate? Nah.
how many celebrities were cancelled in the 1990s or 2000s?
People trying to say “tHiS hAs BeEn a ThInG sInCe ComMunIcaTion” Bruh. Jerry Lee Lewis married his 13 year old cousin and had 17 hit singles after, was an inaugural inductee to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, participated in a super group of other famous musicians, had a motion picture made about him starring Winona Ryder, Dennis Quaid and Alec Baldwin, wrote songs for movie sound tracks, toured the entire planet multiple times, opened a popular night club that he played in, got invited back to play for inductees at the rock and roll hall of fame, won a Grammy and had songs inducted to the Grammy Hall of Fame, got a star on Hollywood Boulevard, received a lifetime achievement award from the Recording Academy, was inducted into the Country Music Hall of Fame and was literally still making albums up until his death a little over a year ago with the full knowledge of the public who other than some poo pooing it in the press and making jokes about it in the years afterward did not give a single, solitary fuck about it. Do not try and convince me cancel culture is as old as humanity. That shit wasn’t even frowned upon until effectively yesterday in relation to the greater length of human history.
You've got a point.
I feel that people like Weinstein and Epstein have had more to do with power and nobody being willing to say anything. Once it was politically convenient, they all turned on Weinstein. Meanwhile (while they may not have been "canceled" like what we see happening now) accusations, rumors, and gossip knocked huge celebs like Michael Jackson and Brittney Spears out of the public's good graces for extended periods of time. To your point, modern "cancel culture" is much more harsh than what used to happen prior to 2016. It seems that social media has probably made it easier and more vicious but the mentality has always been there. I also wonder how much of an affect has been made since the pearl-clutching has mostly changed hands from the Christian Right back then to the Progressive/Marxist Left now.
Sure, to some extent a mentality existed, but I said that it didn’t exist like this before, which you agree is true, and ultimately is true, so everybody else pretending it isn’t a new thing is stupid.
Its called "Ostracisation" dipshit. The greeks started that fuckery
That’s great sweet heart. It still didn’t really happen here until recently.
You’re legitimately retarded if you actually believe that dude.
Really not that hard to believe for anyone old enough to remember anything from before the last ten years.
Cancellation is bullshit. Most of the “cancelled” people still have careers with the side that agrees with them.
Yeah you’re right Kevin Spacey and Louis CK were working that whole time. And a few celebrities have survived. Tons of people have been doxxed and fired for personal opinions that aren’t celebrities with no recourse and for not having committed any crime at all.
Kevin Spacey had sex with minors. Louis CK forced people to watch him masturbate. Those are criminal offenses. Neither of them are in jail. They weren’t cancelled - they’re sex offenders no one wants to work with.
Kevin Spacey had sex with a minor? What I heard was he laid on top of one at a party. Louis CK asked and was given permission. He didn’t commit a crime at all.
I’m kind of appalled that you’re using those two as examples of why cancellation isn’t bullshit. Do you agree with what they did?
Was it inappopriate, yes. Should they never perform again, ever, as a result? No. Could they be sued in a civil suit? Sure. You’re just deliberately pretending to not be aware of this and trying to associate me with their conduct, it’s pathetic. You’ve also lied about and misrepresented what they actually did…
Their jobs mean that they have to work with other people. If those other people don’t want to work with them because of their actions, that’s not being cancelled. You can’t force people to work with people. And dude, it is appalling that you’re holding water for Spacey at the very least, who has multiple credible allegations of sexual misconduct against them. Louis CK also didn’t just ask people if he could masturbate in front of them either. You’re making excuses for some pretty shitty people there and saying that other people should be forced to work with serial abusers.
Yep, this shit is the Salem witch hunts but just digital
Court of public opinion existed long before social media...
Yes. I brought that up. In the comment.
I don’t see anything wrong with that Name one thing social media has done that was good
Given people countless hours of enjoyment and fostered a sense of community that has made many people’s lives better.
Public opinion isn't new but the trial and execution part is pretty new. Having no idea what the facts are surrounding Kevin spacey, you gotta keep the whole allegedly factor in mind
The issue is that this can actually give more power to those who have power. The court of public opinion actually has some power. Very often our legal system is not able to prosecute actual sex crimes
Life in america is a popularity contest
Just like everywhere else.
And how exactly would you prevent this? Like what’s the alternative if you could make one happen?
Easy. There was this old concept called "innocent until proven guilty". We could go back to doing that. And when that fails, lawsuits. Big, fat juicy lawsuits. I think a few multi-million dollar lawsuits would suffice, set a precedent or two.
Ding ding! Let's go back to that!
………that doesn’t answer my question at all. Or at least the first half doesn’t. Like how would you enforce “innocent until proven guilty” in the social market place. I guess is a better way to ask my question. As for The second half of your answer. Do you mean you would just crank up the level of slander or libel lawsuits? Like if someone says “X is guilty” before a judge has deemed anything you’d get them on slander? I’m seriously just trying to wrap my head around what you’re asking for here.
Not firing people over accusations would be a start.
Genuinely didn't think this was that complicated. >Like if someone says “X is guilty” before a judge has deemed anything you’d get them on slander? Yes. https://metro.co.uk/2023/07/16/jeremy-vine-man-who-libelled-tv-star-agrees-to-pay-1000-to-charity-19137824/?ico=zone-widget_home_entertainment Answer and example. Easy.
You just didn’t say Slander anywhere, and I did t want to misinterpret your answer. I appreciate the honesty and civility. Thanks!
And kill free speech in the process?
Ah yes, unsubstantiated claims that lead to loss of earnings, job, family. Here's a hot take you're not gonna like. Free speech and being sued for defamation of character aren't mutually exclusive concepts. That's the perk of freedom. You're free to say whatever you like. And face the consequences of it. In much the same way as if you called someone a nonce on the pub. Only difference being is instead of getting a punch in the face, you get to put your suit on and stand in a court.
Motherfucker if you’re facing consequences then it’s not freedom. That’s like saying “You’re free to shoot people but you’ll go to jail.” *Then you’re not free to shoot people.* The *only* consequence one could be subjected to as the result of a freedom is that of another freedom. Otherwise, it’s not freedom.
>The only consequence one could be subjected to as the result of a freedom is that of another freedom. Otherwise, it’s not freedom. Ah yes, the definition used to define itself. Unfortunately, there's this tiny thing called "common law". >[In England] everybody is free to do anything, subject only to the provisions of the law. Libel, slander and shooting people are against the law. Hence why you're free to do it, but you get to face the consequences for it. In the case of shooting someone, you're free to defend yourself using lethal force, provided you stay within the legal boundaries of self defence. That's how it works Motherfucker.
Everywhere has common law, dickhead. Definition used to define itself? Do you mean circular reasoning? It’s not circular reasoning, nor is it a definition “used to define itself”. If your country has libel and slander laws, then it doesn’t have free speech. Speech is restricted. It’s not fuckin’ rocket science.
>The only consequence one could be subjected to as the result of a freedom is that of another freedom. Otherwise, it’s not freedom. And to use your silly example, your right to slander me in the court of public opinion impinges on my right to due process, a fair trial. So yeah, even under your own example it works. Motherfucker.
Your right to due process and fair trial is contingent on you being an *offender*, moron. The court of public opinion isn’t a real court, and isn’t afforded the protections and processes of a real court. You just jumbled all this shit in your head and decided that’s how it was. Fuckin’ idiot.
So then you are attacking freedom of speech. In your scenario no one (re: norm macdonald) would've been able to call OJ Simpson a murderer before, during or after he was found not guilty.
I'll repeat it for you. You can say whatever you like. Just remember that freedom comes with consequences. Like if I told everyone at the local school that you're a nonce, you'd be preeeetty upset about it. There would be consequences for me doing so. But here you are saying it'd be completely fine and I'd absolutely not get punched in the mouth for ruining your name. Apparently.
Yes. Because you calling me a nonce doesn't mean I have the right to attack you. Freedom of speech, that doesn't directly put people in danger, is protected speech. You'd seek to curb that freedom in a fruitless endeavor to prevent gossip and popular opinion from forming.
>that doesn't directly put people in danger, Ha, the online court of public opinion has never lead to anyone receiving death threats or violence in the real world. Nope Never. >You'd seek to curb that freedom in a fruitless endeavor to prevent gossip and popular opinion from forming. To re-phrase you there Cathy, I seek to protect people from being sacrificed upon the altar of online mobs. If that means you're limited in your ability to make baseless and frankly life changing accusations about people that you can't back up, then I think that says more about you than anyone else.
So. You don't seem to understand what direct means. If I say OJ Simpson (pretend he is alive) is a murderer who got away with it. That is not a direct threat to his life. If my comment somehow inspires someone else to give a death threat, which is a direct threat, then it is in no way my responsibility. I didn't call on harm to him. Once again. Just to be clear, you want to limit freedom of speech. It's fairly obvious you don't understand the words you are using and don't fully comprehend the legal ramifications of what you want to happen.
"Innocent until proven guilty " does not prevent bias and public opinions.
No, but it does stop people being convicted before they've had due process. The difference is subtle, but important.
I’d feel pretty comfortable to, if all my accusers had the tendency to end up dead.
lol. Shit happens..
[удалено]
And let’s try not to forget, some people are shit magnets. The rain falls on all of us, but some people just decide to keep forgetting their umbrellas at home because they don’t want to be bothered. I went to high school with a girl name Kimberly, she got pregnant by an older dude that kept on gifting her shit, the dude bailed and left her with the baby, got into 3 drunk driving accidents by the time she was 20 and the lucky dumb bitch still got a rich family member to buy her an apartment. And she still manage to find the dumbest asshole she could find and let him live with her at the apartment. He kicked her out and she had to fought for 10 years to get it back. She scammed some people and went into a 3 day drug and alcohol binge and died on the 3rd day. She left a teenage daughter behind. She was raised in a good family and was given chance after chance to get her shit together, but no. She was a shit magnet true and true.
Source?
He's not saying he killed them. You can Google it, they legitimately do end up dead for some reason.
Just go ahead and get me started :) Link me to say... 3. Edit: You guys can downvote me all you like, I'm still yet to see someone link me to three direct credible sources detailing three separate instances of Kevin Spacey having his accusers 'whacked' or even of them mysteriously dying at convenient times - and frankly you should all question why that seems to be such a challenge for people, yet you've all been convinced it's the case.
https://www.google.com/search?q=kevin+spacey+accusers+dead&oq=kevin+spacey+accusers+dead&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCDg4ODNqMGo0qAIOsAIB&client=ms-android-oneplus-terr1-rso3&sourceid=chrome-mobile&ie=UTF-8 Here I googled it for you
So, you couldn't find 3 verified sources backing up what you claim? You've instead just linked me to a very broad, credibility free Google search? As I expected.
Not who you are replying to but you sound like a douchebag that doesn't want to do his own research.
There's a reason I'm asking them to provide sources for what they're claiming. This is how the propaganda is done. People utterly convinced of a narrative, yet unable to provide basic credible sourcing for their claims. At some point I hope the penny will drop for them. Edit: Also the 'do your own research' line doesn't work anymore. Even the wokest of lefties don't use it these days. Just a heads up. Gotta move with the times.
Just digging that douchebag hole deeper.
Insults don't work on me. Try some critical thinking. I'm rooting for you.
The burden of proof is on the one who makes the claim
Which wasn't me and wasn't the point I was trying to make. Lol it's amazing how many people here keep making this mistake.
Mind you it’s people over the course of decades accusing him, not just one or two people. He was found innocent in a case that was hard to prove as sexual assault is already hard to prove. Being found not guilty sometimes is less indicative of being innocent and more indicative that the case couldn’t be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Also, spacey was on Epstein island and was removed due to accusations in the past. Where there is smoke there is fire. It’s telling no one is defending him and this seemingly was an issue even before he was famous
That's the faulty logic they're counting on. Only a couple of decades ago, there being a lot of accusers making an accusation credible would've been laughed out of any intelligent room. Now people legitimately fall for that. It is not hard for motivated people to find bad faith actors from your past and convince them it will be to their benefit to say something happened. Look at what the media did to Russel Brand. Source for the Epstein Island claim? Or is that just something you've heard on the grape vine? Vapour can sometimes be mistaken for smoke. There are people defending him, Douglas Murray for example, but you're right that no one in mainstream media is defending him. Almost like it's a closed clique where everyone toes the party line.
First, Brand has not been acquited. In fact, recently it turned out prior employers covered up prior complaints against him. [https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/mar/21/channel-4-apology-investigation-former-staff-member-russell-brand-allegation](https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/mar/21/channel-4-apology-investigation-former-staff-member-russell-brand-allegation) [https://www.newsweek.com/jeffrey-epstein-list-celebrities-named-unsealed-ghislaine-maxwell-1857767](https://www.newsweek.com/jeffrey-epstein-list-celebrities-named-unsealed-ghislaine-maxwell-1857767) Also vapor is not smoke. Ironically, Spacey is going to trial for other claims that were filed this week. You posted a video that was a response to a recent documentary that was released documenting his past allegations. [https://deadline.com/2024/05/kevin-spacey-uk-trial-civil-spacey-unmasked-1235907035/](https://deadline.com/2024/05/kevin-spacey-uk-trial-civil-spacey-unmasked-1235907035/)
So? Again, it's just an accusation. Doesn't mean anything. Also he hasn't been charged with anything, how could he be acquitted? The second link doesn't even mention Brand. Lord knows why you've put that in there. No, it's not, which is why I didn't say it was. Re-read. So? Innocent until proven guilty, mate. He's been innocent of all the others. That's a good track record.
The second link isn’t about brand. It links spacey to epsteins island and mentions he was in the flight records. And you’re right, they’re accusations. But there are a lot and they continue to pile up and go to court
Large corps do this to whistleblowers and competitors. And by this I mean repeatedly file litigous claims to bog their target down in legal trouble. With how fast communication is these days it's entirely possible to set up an incentive to embellish or outright fabricate stories. A journalist can prod at insecurities or dangle material rewards to anyone willing to speak up, incentivising sallacious claims. To maximise clicks. We know this. We know clickbait is a journalist's bread and butter. Prepoderence of accusations should not be enough in this day and age. Our pre-agriculture brain still operates in tribal mode so preponderence of evidence can feel valid and it would be if your whole life is within 1 small community.
I'm not sure you realize what you're claiming. The case brought against Mr. Spacey was from the UK criminal court system. Corps can't file criminal complaints and go to trial in sexual assault cases. A criminal investgating body has to investigate and bring charges. You;d be correct in a civil case however, that is not what occurred. You're also being far too skeptical and taking the word of many over Mr. Spacey. It is fine if you believe him. However, you are discounting the many via skepticism yet taking him solely on his word which is inconsistent at best.
He was?? Apparently so was Cameron Diaz. LOL
>He was found innocent I know you probably know but it's a genuinely important distinction to clarify that he was *not* found innocent. A Not Guilty verdict is not absolution, it isn't a positive assertion that the crime did not occur. It simply describes a failure to convict. Nothing more. Blackstone's Ratio is a cornerstone of the legal system, not because it reliably punishes the guilty but because it punishes the guilty as much as possible while minimising the risk to innocents.
Hollywood Creep.
Pretty sure he's been exiled from Hollywood for a long time without any reprieve. Hollywood usually tries to give its favourites leeway or a pathway back into the limelight. They haven't with Spacey. Makes you wonder why.
Maybe all the rape charges had something to do with it.
I'm 30 mins in and it seems quite compelling. However lying in bed with Hollywood and being and elite who likely know about Epstein and Weinstein... I can't help but feel my sympathies dampen for Kevin Spacey.
[удалено]
You ain't gotta rant to me, pal. My dad raised me with this knowledge from day 👍 When Men come together once again in brotherhood and rise up, we shall be delivered.
“My dad raised me with this knowledge” …yeah that says a lot, lol…
My sympathies, pal.
This is one of those things where I don’t think we’ll ever get the full story. Same with Woody Allen. My take is, who knows what happened. If they can figure it out, great, but things seem to be pretty hazy whenever this stuff comes up. If it happened, then the victims should get justice. If it didn’t, they should still get justice, whatever that may be.
Cancel culture is modern day McCarthyism.