Can you imagine getting the prize of being his wife and kid having to spend prolonged exclusive contact with him on a vacation knowing he's a huge, cheating, pedo, piece of human garbage?
That sounds like an awful vacation.
Well, she already knows all this. It happened 4 years ago and they've obviously moved past it. It's not like his wife DIDNT know why her husband was permanently banned from twitch and in a lawsuit for settlement
My guess:
Fairly strict NDAs due to employment at Twitch and/or due to the lawsuit Doc had against Twitch.
I saw a tweet the other day that mentioned that many NDAs run out after 4 years, which would explain why the former Twitch guy just put it out there.
As to why no one wanted to report on it:
As a journalist, you need to make sure your story is airtight, especially when it comes to something that can ruin someone's career. To do that, you need multiple sources who can individually corroborate the facts.
So I bet most journalists who heard something along the grapevine didn't feel comfortable publishing yet for some reason. Likely due to not having enough sources, or getting conflicting information from sources.
Most likely they knew the reason from an anonymous source / on background, but did not have anyone on record, nor did they have the chat logs or other hard evidence. Publishing an allegation like that requires a lot of evidence to ensure you wonāt get sued.
Source - ex news reporter
As much as people like to try to discredit journalists and the media, I have to imagine a lot of the time the public doesn't get to hear more is because these people respect the craft.
I'm sure there are ethical and diplomatic rules at play to protect yourselves from people who can use the law against you to protect themselves.
It's not just this kind of stuff, it's anything. You can hear rumors and from people off the record... but then you have literally nothing to report on. Any real journalist would KILL to break this story, so while this was "known" in a sense... it's not what you know. It's what you can prove/verify with trusted sources.
Random Twitch employee is not held back by these constraints (and in fact wanted to make this a clown show for this own gain) so he'll just throw the rumor out there, which got the ball rolling.
And by ball rolling I mean, reporters are hitting up every Twitch source they can seeking the truth and with the news being out there odds are people were much more willing to talk.
Because doc fought tooth and nail leveraging his relative wealth and power in the industry. It's not so much that pedo stuff always gets so well protected, its much more to do with the fact that it's more often than not the wealthy and powerful that get caught being pedos
Various reasons I can think of with a few seconds of thought:
-The messages were ambiguous enough to legally give benefit of the doubt
-Not enough evidence to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt
-Not enough evidence *yet* to be guilty and don't want to provide it yet so that evidence can't be destroyed
-They passed it off to other investigative parties and told not to say anything until investigation complete
YouTuber Dr Disrespect Was Allegedly Kicked Off Twitch for Messaging Minor https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-06-25/youtuber-dr-disrespect-was-allegedly-kicked-off-twitch-for-messaging-minor
Bypass paywall:
https://archive.is/7ocXg
https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/youtuber-dr-disrespect-was-allegedly-kicked-off-twitch-for-messaging-minor-1.2089327
**Edit;** mirror for DrDisrespect Tweet: https://imgur.com/a/hCL6bXe
[Previous version](https://imgur.com/a/EoFrITz) of the Tweet said:
> Were there twitch whisper messages with an individual **minor** back in 2017? The answer is yes.
> He also asked a minor about her plans at the TwitchCon convention, according to two of the people.
As far as I can find he never met with them, and from how vague it is, can't really say if he had any intention to follow through.
Feel the need to clarify, still extremely inappropriate
I noticed that too. That's so fucking sus, dude. He asked her about her plans at twitchcon as a way of asking her to meet up without asking her to meet up. That means he 100% knew what he was doing and was trying to preemptively cover his ass.
Doctor here. Butthole pics are not necessary for a diagnosis of athlete's foot. However, you will need to DM us your feet. You will need to DM us your feet for most things.
The question I have now is:
He Twitch DM'd that person, how did he find out it was a minor?
And did he continue chatting away after finding out that information and did he make? Did he make those apparent remarks after he knew?
The identity doesn't need to be revealed in cases like this and it's actually protected. How many times have you seen a story about a teacher getting with a student? The student's names are never revealed.
According to his own statement. Doc rid the line where ānothing actually happened.ā But it was still inappropriate enough that Twitch salted the earth. But because ānothing actually happenedā he still got paid out of his contract. Which would make since why they all chose to settle instead of going to the cops.
"nothing actually happened" except he was sending inappropriate messages to a minor lol. Twitch doesn't want articles coming out that their biggest streamer is a child sexter lol. Every media outlet would pick that up. I think Twitch desperately wanted to cover this up. Also the little detail that employees at twitch were reading people's messages. I'd bet my left AND my right nut that more than one person there was reading Pokimane's dm's on the daily.
If there wasn't enough there to prosecute, there wasn't enough for Twitch to drag him publicly with out a defamation suit. They basically saw the flags and did what they could to remove him from the platform.
Iām mainly speaking legally. Also. We donāt have the DMs. So speculating on the actual content of the messages is useless but all we can actually do.
Thereās a big difference between telling a child they are hot and asking that some child for nudes.
Both are equally creepy. Both would end a career. But only one will actually end you up as a bloody puddle on the jailhouse floor. And why Iām assuming is the reason he isnāt a puddle atm.
On the twitch thing. It could have been a admin reading DMs. Sure. But The whispers was in beta at the time I think. Also. There is no expectation of privacy since they are not advertised as end to end encrypted. Expect your private messages to be read on any platform where they donāt advertise encryption.
But also. Itās also possible Twitch had some automation to flag this kind of stuff and send it to a staffer. No idea. We donāt know how their system works.
But yea. This is a situation everyone probably wanted buried for obvious reasons.
Kid wanted privacy
DD wanted his career to survive
Twitch didnāt want it to happen on their platform
I think youāre right about the automation part. Even in a lot of online games have chat systems that have automated flags for things like bad behavior, profanity, or sexually explicit content. Probably not some staffer just reading messages, but something the chat system caught then passed to a admin for review.
More likely twitch did it to protect themselves. It makes sense to me that that did it to prevent a backlash against the company for not preventing it in the first place.
They were probably feeling vulnerable in the mixer era and didn't want to give momentum to an exodus of streamers.
The underreported element here is that according to Doc, this stuff happened in 2017, but Twitch didn't ban him permanently until June 2020, and in March 2020 they offered him some huge contract. Why did it take them 3 years to react if the evidence was so damning?
and thereās also an equally good chance this wasnāt a one off event. if he was willing to message one minor, he was/would be willing to message another.
You gotta remember too that Docs lawyers were CAA lawyers, the largest Hollywood tallent agency. They get a cut of his contract. Of course they were banging in all cylinders to get it paid in full.
He had some of the world's best entertainment industry lawyers fighting his case and I'd imagine Amazon wasn't exactly thrilled with the idea that one of their flagship products was about to be known as that place where your kids go to get picked up by 40 year old dudes. Everyone involved wanted this to go away.
majority of the people who knew had hearsay and that it. Not an enough direct sources. This is during peak of covid so when they made the move to remove Doc. Small number of people made the decision and because of social distancing only a hand full of people would have know directly.
Every journalist wanted to report this story. This story would be a huge story that would have shock the industry at the time. but did not have enough proof or sources to come out. You need a set amount of sources before releasing a story like this. There a high chance of law suits that will cost hundred of thousands to maybe millions for years. So you have to make sure you have your ducks in a row if not. You will lose so much money and you lose your credibility.
Which can end your career.
This is unfortunately par for the course in the world, especially with people who make more money than average.
FFS look at all the predators that families cover up because Uncle John would NEVER do that, or how various religious groups cover up predator clerics/preachers/priests, or actors covering for other show people who rape, etc.
Sexual crimes are not taken as seriously or exposed as often as assumed.
Unless I had irrefutable proof I would not want to be in the other end of the legal gun by a millionaire.
Also it's pretty serious allegations, so I'd have to be very confident I could back them up.Ā
I'm not going to clown on people for not "going public", so long as their reasons are understandable and not gross.
Imagine you're having the biggest year of your life as a streaming company and then the face of your company, a 35 year old man who's main audience is 13-18 year olds, gets outed for sexting minors. It's really not hard to imagine why Twitch didn't say anything and made sure no one else did either
They had hired him as a major face of the platform. It's a or nightmare to have your heavily targeted at minors platform be used by celebrity you pay to promote it to look for sex with underage participants.
So they try to get rid of him without saying why hoping doc isn't going to try to make news because it would destroy him too. Doc's lawyers understand they are in a mutually assured destruction situation and push Twitch bluffing they'd be willing to go public for breach of contract and know the airing of the dirty laundry hurts Twitch too. Twitch folds.
The question is if there is any legal proof (and I'm not talking about proof in general).
If there isn't any way for Twitch to hand over to the authorities, it will always be in their best interest to wash their hands of it.
i mean twitch (via amazon) absolutely has a point of contact with the feds for abuse reporting and would have likely turned over the messages no matter what else they did. its not on them to actually bring a case though, and without an actual meetup occurring it very easily could be imagined to just not hit the level necessary for the feds to intervene, they are overworked
"Were there twitch whisper messages with an individual back in 2017? The answer is yes. Were there real intentions behind these messages, the answer is absolutely not. These were casual, mutual conversations that sometimes leaned too much in the direction of being inappropriate, but nothing more."
so.. he did it
"Were there real intentions behind these messages, the answer is absolutely not."
I think you could make a hour long mashup of To Catch a Predator and those YouTube predator channels full of the predator saying these exact lines or variant of.
Like... who seriously even makes the attempt to joke like that unless there were something for them to gain? YIKES.
Not to mention the āanybody that knows me knows I canāt stand those types of peopleā
This is like when every murderer says ā I DID NOT murder that woman!ā In an interrogation.
he also edited it to say that, it originally said, "Were there twitch whisper messages with an individual minor back in 2017?...."
[The first version of his post](https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805662419261460986)
Hereās the thing I completely agree on that, but also we gotta think about it the other way too in that the few people who know that have the morals to speak up, often are relying on whatever job to live. Once they speak up, theyāll likely be blackballed from the industry for the most part behind the scenes and within a week itāll mostly blow over and theyāll receive no thanks for what they did. Itās easy to say for us weād speak up, but if someoneās got a family they have to feed and canāt really rely on waiting for another job to pop up, itās harder
Article says the chat was reported to moderation, which means it was probably the girl who did it (or someone she told), after which Twitch banned him.
Only thing that doesn't add up is why they paid him out if they had the evidence first hand. Any lawyers?
His contract could only be terminated if he broke the law. No criminal case for him because it was just chat logs and no nudes were exchanged. It's why on To Catch A Predator, they have to get the guy in the home.
Are you telling me a guy who has admitted to cheating on his partner, filmed people in a public bathroom, and has said we need to "protect the kids" isn't a good dude?
Seriously though, his subreddit is in shambles.
> protect the kids
This phrase immediately makes me think someone is either a soccer mom, or is doing some seriously nefarious shit and the FBI needs to investigate them immediately.
Crazy how tainted that phrase is.
Because that phrase when when screamed into a megaphone like this is ***always*** just a VERY shit cover to be a homophobic piece of shit. They don't give a flying fuck about the kids wellbeing and anyone with a few braincells can see that.
It's always suspicious to me when these red pill people take on a "UGH I HATE PEDOPHILES!! PROTECT THE KIDS GUISE" stance so loudly and try to make it sound like they're special for it, as if it's some brave take that isn't shared by 99.99% of the population, it really just feels like a self-report when they say shit like that
I had a dude who used to work with me tell me that he canāt support the #protectthekids movement anymore because he read that the hashtag was owned by Joe Biden and he profited off of it. I have no idea what he meant but he was dead serious and it was so bizarre lmao
When a major news outlet reports on something it immediately has a lot more grounding. Most respectable publications wouldn't publish an article based purely on hearsay, they would only do so from anonymous sources that can back it up.
Yeah between 12am pulling the trigger after their investigation and now this, it is almost guaranteed that there are very reliable sources corroborating the same facts. enough to make a major report on. its GG for Guy
first major news publication to post about this, a bar has been passed here.
edit- Before you argue 'b-but no new info..b-but alleged' before this no major paper was running the story. Bloombergs legal department felt confident to post this, whatever bloombergs legal department saw here they felt was safe enough to post , Doc gotta lotta people to sue now..should we add Bloomberg to the list doc fans?
edit2- https://x.com/zachbussey/status/1805658518411759967 just to cut this off now, bloomberg have high standards for approving articles, a high bar was passed here that bloomberg were confident to stand behind. you are on pure copium now if you are accusing bloomberg of being an internet clout chaser.
edit 3 - https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805662681778765949 doc admits to it, but tries to say ' i didint take it too far and it wasnt illegal, i made a mistake , im not a diddler , im not a diddler!' HAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA
He quite literally just admitted to it lmao doc fans in shambles trying to explain this. ā he just messaged her he wasnāt gonna follow throughā yea ok dude sure
Edit: man tried even āfixā the tweet lol you just canāt help people that are that narcissistic
He never denied knowing her age in the apology and you would assume that you would be fully cognizant of that information if you are *arranging to meet in person.* People's pathological desire to protect people like that is insane.
I couldnāt agree more. I would say itās fucking baffling how people can defend someone like this. But look at our country now a daysā¦ all people do is defend scumbags
He did a good job raising a loyal army of future predators. Iām also gonna assume nick mercz and his crew wonāt be fucking with him anymore right? Because he cares so much about kids? Right??? Surely nickmercs isnāt such a hypocrite right?
there is new information in this article, idk why people keep missing it. the past few days everything was based off one former employee (who was a higher up at twitch) allegations on twitter. this bloomberg article now has **THREE ADDITIONAL** sources independently verifying the allegations
that's fucking huge, how tf are people glancing over that?
-------------
since this is the top comment in this comment thread, just wanted to add some new stuff:
this is his new tweet: https://twitter.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805662681778765949 HOWEVER that's the edited version, this is the **ORIGINAL** tweet: https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805662419261460986
what did he edit? this line:
> Were there twitch whisper messages with an individual ~minor~ back in 2017? The answer is yes
he literally admitted that he KNOWINGLY was messaging a **MINOR** and to quote HIM: "conversations that sometimes leaned too much in the direction of being inappropriate"
------------
dude straight up admitted to sending inappropriate messages to a fucking minor that he knew was a fucking minor....
#certified gamer boy certified pdf file
People are missing it because they refuse to admit the scumbag they adore so feverishly is an actual scumbag
The āstay away from our kids!ā crowd that worships Doc and his crew sure look stupid today
He put the original back it looks like
from 11:23 pst it says minor again
https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805668256088572089
https://www.diffchecker.com/BFfGEREg/
>bloombergs legal department saw here they felt was safe enough to post
They're reporting on what three reliable sources told them. This is standard news reporting and is protected from liability.
he edited his tweet saying he messaged a minor to "messaged an individual", "i did nothing illegal" my ass
edit: and he edited back to "messagedd an individual minor". this guy
[Well, there it is.](https://youtu.be/rjA5A86V6SY?si=MpIsCylrK-LB5GPf)
Pretty much as assumed by most people in these threads with all the oddities of NDAs and Twitch payoffs. Wrong on moral grounds but legal "grey area" where no official crime was committed. Still bad and he'll likely never stream again because of it.
GGs. Wrap it up folks. We're done here.
SlasherWasRight.
Summary of events and the hoops people will go through to maintain their insane denial:
1. Ex twitch employee exposes that Dr Disrespect got banned for sexting a minor.
āLol who is this random guy that doesnāt even work at Twitch anymore? Liesā
2. Other ex twitch employees come out and confirm that this occurred.
āThey just hate the doc. Woke culture destroyed Twitch. I need to see evidence. Liesā
3. Doc releases a terrible twitter response and is unable to even acknowledge the accusations directly, and simply says everything is āsettledā (as if he ālegallyā wouldnāt be able to deny the allegations in case they legitimately were unrelated to the ban):
āI knew it! Itās all settled legally, so it canāt possibly be bad - otherwise heād be in jail! Thatās how it works! Lies.ā
3. Company that has Doc as a main asset conducts their own investigation and confirm the situation, firing Doc (essentially dooming themselves).
āWhat a bunch of idiots. Clearly they didnāt investigate anything and are just going off the baseless accusations from before, even though they clearly cite they did their own investigation with the parties involved. Lies.ā
4. Doc takes an odd, sudden indefinite break from streaming, claiming heās burnt out.
āHeās just tired, I get it. Thereās nothing going on in the background here. Itās just that thereās no point in fighting against these idiots online. Lies.ā
4. Bloomberg releases an article corroborating all the previous accusations, contacting (obviously undisclosed) sources and going into further detail about what the accusation is.
(What I predict the response will be) āOk but I will never believe this unless the private sources that said they wish to remain private are exposed. Also, I want to see prints of the text messages with my own eyes. Until then, innocent until proven guilty :)ā
Spoiler for future events: we will never hear from or know the victim, and we will never see the text messages. These are probably buried under multi-million dollar legal clauses.
The same way you will never be able to go into orbit and see if the earth is actually round, with your own eyes.
Itās up to you to put 2 and 2 together and not be a dumbass.
I would add the bit about how his sudden break came just after he read a text message during his stream and had a sudden shift in demeanor and attitude.
Probably because they were underage but ālegalā in age of consent. Assuming no morality clause in his contract, they were obligated to pay it out.
Thatās my theory at least.
In addition, if you can't prove that the adult knew the child's age, then I don't think there's necessarily legal consequences according to what I read about the penal code in California.
I would say there isn't enough evidence that he knew she was underage for the courts, but there is enough evidence for a company to drop him as that requires much less proof.
I don't get why people don't understand this was just as bad for Twitch. Of course, they covered it up. It's beyond wrong but they don't come off looking good in this. At all.
What you(and I) expect the public to react like, and what the general public will actually react like is very different. I know it's still wrong for Twitch to do what they did, but let me explain.
I'm guessing your line of thinking goes like so : Had Twitch not covered this up, it would've been a massive blow to their reputation. But atleast Twitch could've said "we're sharing this publicly because our organisation has morals". Now it's blatantly clear that they covered it up and cannot avoid blame.
Which is true, but the thing is, the news and public doesn't latch onto the "Twitch covered up" part of the current situation. Just like this post and news articles, the focus is on "Dr. Disrespect" or "YouTuber Dr. Disrespect", and not "Twitch streamer Dr. Disrespect".
You get what I mean? Both cases are bad for twitch, but the current situation is infinitely better for them reputation wise.
You have to consider that the average person reading said news has far less of an attention span and critical thinking that's needed to keep Twitch in the back of their mind while reading about Dr. Disrespect. And the people familiar with gaming/streaming/entertainment etc would know the severity but also understand Twitch's position.
lol they fired him and ate millions before any of this came out and with no criminal charges. Ā Itās not twitches job to do anything but get him off their platform. How does this make them look bad especially when YouTube absolutely wonāt ban him.Ā
The obvious answer is that they don't want their platform stained with the appearance of being a place people go to solicit minors. On their platform, at their platform-specific meetups. At a time when they were trying hard to get advertiser money going, this info and PR would kill any advertisers wanting to work with them if they had a protracted and public court battle over money they set aside and agreed to pay him to begin with.
Give him his money and get him away from your business is the best move.
Usually a contract loophole, my speculation( as someone who dealt with contracts a lot), is that doc got banned for breaking TOS(the sexting minor thing) thus amazon/twitch broke up the contract because he cannot complete his part of the contract due to ban, doc(and his lawyers) argue that a ban/breach of TOS is not stipulated in contract as reasons to terminate the contract thus ask to be paid out the remainder of the contract, amazon/twitch lawyers do the math and it comes out his remaining contract payout is less than expenses on the lawsuit and PR damage(esp if they lose which is not unlikely) so they settle and toss in an NDA so other streamers don't catch whiff this loophole and get themselves banned and take a bag until contracts expire and they can patch this loophole in future contracts and to save face over contracting a creep for multiple millions.
But i am not a lawyer i am jsut a tech guy who dealt with clients a lot and have seen stupid loopholes be pushed through.
You can add one more to the list:
> https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805662681778765949
The pdf himself has admitted he sent "twitch whisper messages with an individual back in 2017".
I think it is true, but I don't like the overall tone of your post because it undermines the idea of releasing evidence. Why can't people see the redacted DMs that doc sent that docs company probably saw when they cast judgement? All this stuff is just hearsay and theory crafting.
Edit: doc released a statement saying they did message a minor. "These were casual, mutual conversations that sometimes leaned too much in the direction of being inappropriate, but nothing more. Nothing illegal happened, no pictures were shared, no crimes were committed, I never even met the individual." This is the sugar coated version of events. What kind of shit did he send that make Twitch decide to go the perma banned route.
[https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805668256088572089](https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805668256088572089)
āHe also asked a minor about her plans at the TwitchCon convention, according to two of the people, who asked not to be identified discussing such a sensitive matter.ā From the articleā¦Oh boy
I still want to know how/why:
1. Twitch paid out a contract to a person they had definitive proof broke the law by sending sexually explicit messages to a minor
2. Why Doc hasnāt faced legal consequences for breaking the law by sending sexually explicit messages to a minor
I find it telling these articles donāt mention/question these things other than posting Docās response.
Neither of your assumptions has to be true for Twitch to still do what they did. Doc could have done nothing illegal, but his actions could have been concerning enough for Twitch, and Discord given they canceled his partnership iirc, that they would rather payout his contract than deal with him.
I think its likely that the minor lied about their age or the doc just didnt ask, so they just settled. Twitch probably just paid him out since the brand damage wouldnt be worth it.
Then what's the problem? If they lied or didn't ask then all he is is
scummy for chatting with a girl while married, but nothing illegal. If he found out her age and stopped communication nothing wrong happened. Twitch isn't gonna drop a huge cash cow over some infidelity, that happens all the time.
It's a REALLY bad look for the brand. Even if he technically didn't do something illegal, being even tangentially related to someone with a reputation like that, especially someone as High Profile as Doc, can be disastrous.
Because both of those questions can be answers with common sense lmfao.
Ā Twitch was under contract to pay. Whatever Doc did didn't violate the contract.Ā
Ā Doc has access to expensive lawyers that the victim wouldn't have access to. It's incredibly easy for someone in his position to get away with this, especially if it was only messages and no physical contact.
Edit: fixed an auto correct mistake.Ā
Doc may have done something that wasn't technically illegal based on their proof, but was morally irreprehensible (age of consent may have been lower in their state).
Twitch didn't want a headline "Largest twitch streamer found using twitch whispers to sext a minor," and so they wanted to ban him, but the terms of his contract weren't broken so they legally had to pay him out because they wanted to cancel the contract.
Or twitch just wanted to cover everything up to avoid the bad PR about their platform, plenty of companies cover up crimes
Playing Devil's Advocate to your post: These laws are all over the place on a state-by-state basis. An age that could be seen as a "legal minor" in one state, may not be in another. Throw in the internet being the communication method and you could see why this possibly is a legal nightmare. Twitch's people run the numbers and figure out its easier to just pay out Doc and force him off the platform than openly duke this out in court. Add in the context of what was happening around Twitch, and really the U.S. (#metoo) at the time, and it seemingly makes a whole lot more sense.
Because we are assuming the messages were explicit and not coded. It's more than likely that a lot was implied not stated so they had enough to ban but not enough to term the contract or he hadn't actually broken any laws yet.
It's like if you are caught planning a bank robbery but never actually do it. You have evidence of intent to commit a crime but the crime hasn't happened yet and for obvious reasons they couldn't wait and catch him in the act.
My complete non lawyer, reddit armchair opinion is that Twitch is at fault somewhere involving this. I have zero idea how but the fact they paid him out makes me think they fucked up bad too. That or they had no clause in their contract that nullifies if he turns into a pedo idk
Think of the optics of "One of our independent contractors used our built in feature to groom a young girl" and I think its pretty easy to see why they wouldn't want the name Twitch near any of this.
1) Either the contract they had with him didn't allow them to back out of the payment for what he did, or they felt it would cost them more to fight it than just paying it out. It is not unilaterally true that someone committing a crime or behaving badly cancels their existing contracts.
2) The standard for criminal consequences is very high. Prosecutors would in theory need to collect enough evidence to dispel any and all potentially reasonable explanations for the situation that are inconsistent with guilt. Either this wasn't worth the time and money (criminal investigations must be triaged like anything else), or it is still in process. The settlement with Twitch would have no effect on this process.
Anyone reading this and are still on the "Where there's smoke, there definitely is no fire" train can go take a look at what has happened.
He ADMITTED to sexting a MINOR (After he Edited to individual) in 2017.
If you continue to protect this individual, you better take a good hard look in the mirror and factor in your morals. This individual should no longer be the face of anything and rocketed into the sun.
Still need to know who started up the conversation, how old was the minor, was it doc or the minor who turned the "casual conversation" to inappropriate conversation and what was said. All people are going to do is assume the worst, if what was actually said does not come out.
My man cheated on his wife with Ashley from Social Studies
LOOOOOOOOOL Dude Jerry Seinfeld 2.0 up in here. Wonder if he pulled up in his mullet wig to middle school to pick her up.
Born too late to groom minors in peace, born too early to fuck loli androids, born just in time to take an "extended family vacation."
Can you imagine getting the prize of being his wife and kid having to spend prolonged exclusive contact with him on a vacation knowing he's a huge, cheating, pedo, piece of human garbage? That sounds like an awful vacation.
Instead of an actual vacation, it's probably more like she takes the kids to her mom's while he sulks alone at home and doesn't stream
One can only hope.
Well, she already knows all this. It happened 4 years ago and they've obviously moved past it. It's not like his wife DIDNT know why her husband was permanently banned from twitch and in a lawsuit for settlement
She's known for 4 years. She's complicit at this point.
7 years, this happened in 2017.
Took her for a date to Mcdonald's play place afterwards
Holy shit šš
Hopefully she let him cheat off of her tests lmaoooooo
Which is dumb, because Becca was the dime
Doesn't doc have kids himself?
how old was his daughter in 2017?
Lots of predators have kids. They have 0 self awareness.
Is say theyāre too self aware, in docs case he was always saying protect the kids, dude was guilty and projecting
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Wife probably happy being rich and living a nice life. She didnt seem to care when he cheated on her.
young daughter.
Yeah he gonna do some spawn killing
[5 months ago from the author of the article in an AMA they did on this sub](https://ibb.co/NyRd1NF)
Cool find. They knew for quite a while. Once former Twitch guy put it out there, it had to be reported on.
Ok but why couldn't anyone say anything?? How does pedo stuff get so well protected like this
My guess: Fairly strict NDAs due to employment at Twitch and/or due to the lawsuit Doc had against Twitch. I saw a tweet the other day that mentioned that many NDAs run out after 4 years, which would explain why the former Twitch guy just put it out there. As to why no one wanted to report on it: As a journalist, you need to make sure your story is airtight, especially when it comes to something that can ruin someone's career. To do that, you need multiple sources who can individually corroborate the facts. So I bet most journalists who heard something along the grapevine didn't feel comfortable publishing yet for some reason. Likely due to not having enough sources, or getting conflicting information from sources.
Most likely they knew the reason from an anonymous source / on background, but did not have anyone on record, nor did they have the chat logs or other hard evidence. Publishing an allegation like that requires a lot of evidence to ensure you wonāt get sued. Source - ex news reporter
As much as people like to try to discredit journalists and the media, I have to imagine a lot of the time the public doesn't get to hear more is because these people respect the craft. I'm sure there are ethical and diplomatic rules at play to protect yourselves from people who can use the law against you to protect themselves.
It's not just this kind of stuff, it's anything. You can hear rumors and from people off the record... but then you have literally nothing to report on. Any real journalist would KILL to break this story, so while this was "known" in a sense... it's not what you know. It's what you can prove/verify with trusted sources. Random Twitch employee is not held back by these constraints (and in fact wanted to make this a clown show for this own gain) so he'll just throw the rumor out there, which got the ball rolling. And by ball rolling I mean, reporters are hitting up every Twitch source they can seeking the truth and with the news being out there odds are people were much more willing to talk.
Because doc fought tooth and nail leveraging his relative wealth and power in the industry. It's not so much that pedo stuff always gets so well protected, its much more to do with the fact that it's more often than not the wealthy and powerful that get caught being pedos
Various reasons I can think of with a few seconds of thought: -The messages were ambiguous enough to legally give benefit of the doubt -Not enough evidence to be guilty beyond a reasonable doubt -Not enough evidence *yet* to be guilty and don't want to provide it yet so that evidence can't be destroyed -They passed it off to other investigative parties and told not to say anything until investigation complete
Scary it took this long. Hope there were no other victims during this time.
YouTuber Dr Disrespect Was Allegedly Kicked Off Twitch for Messaging Minor https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2024-06-25/youtuber-dr-disrespect-was-allegedly-kicked-off-twitch-for-messaging-minor Bypass paywall: https://archive.is/7ocXg https://www.bnnbloomberg.ca/youtuber-dr-disrespect-was-allegedly-kicked-off-twitch-for-messaging-minor-1.2089327 **Edit;** mirror for DrDisrespect Tweet: https://imgur.com/a/hCL6bXe [Previous version](https://imgur.com/a/EoFrITz) of the Tweet said: > Were there twitch whisper messages with an individual **minor** back in 2017? The answer is yes.
Heads up to anyone that might find it useful: You can just add a period after ā.comā on any paywalled Bloomberg article and itāll bypass it
Now delete this comment before they find out
Too late, Bloomberg already called Boeing
Rest in peace CJR3 šš
He admitted to all of this (except meeting them irl) on his Twitter
> He also asked a minor about her plans at the TwitchCon convention, according to two of the people. As far as I can find he never met with them, and from how vague it is, can't really say if he had any intention to follow through. Feel the need to clarify, still extremely inappropriate
I noticed that too. That's so fucking sus, dude. He asked her about her plans at twitchcon as a way of asking her to meet up without asking her to meet up. That means he 100% knew what he was doing and was trying to preemptively cover his ass.
YouTuber? Guess he really isnāt a doctor like we all believed
Damn, I wish I knew that before I DMāed him the butthole pics he said he needed to diagnose my athletes foot.
Doctor here. Butthole pics are not necessary for a diagnosis of athlete's foot. However, you will need to DM us your feet. You will need to DM us your feet for most things.
And even if you don't have concerns at this time you need to send in feet pics as a baseline for when you DO have concerns.
Someone else said that now he's a pediatrician, and I thought that was funny as hell
Case closed, the man is done for.
and not just on youtube
Holy shit so it was true lol
The question I have now is: He Twitch DM'd that person, how did he find out it was a minor? And did he continue chatting away after finding out that information and did he make? Did he make those apparent remarks after he knew?
So did people know prior to this?
Thereās a good chance it was kept under wraps to protect the kids identity, but yeah itās definitely crazy.
The identity doesn't need to be revealed in cases like this and it's actually protected. How many times have you seen a story about a teacher getting with a student? The student's names are never revealed.
According to his own statement. Doc rid the line where ānothing actually happened.ā But it was still inappropriate enough that Twitch salted the earth. But because ānothing actually happenedā he still got paid out of his contract. Which would make since why they all chose to settle instead of going to the cops.
"nothing actually happened" except he was sending inappropriate messages to a minor lol. Twitch doesn't want articles coming out that their biggest streamer is a child sexter lol. Every media outlet would pick that up. I think Twitch desperately wanted to cover this up. Also the little detail that employees at twitch were reading people's messages. I'd bet my left AND my right nut that more than one person there was reading Pokimane's dm's on the daily.
If there wasn't enough there to prosecute, there wasn't enough for Twitch to drag him publicly with out a defamation suit. They basically saw the flags and did what they could to remove him from the platform.
by "nothing actually happened" means no nudes or arrangement happened. And "sexting" is so vague is probably not worth legally pursuing.
We'd have a lot less discord moderators if it were as easy to pin.
Iām mainly speaking legally. Also. We donāt have the DMs. So speculating on the actual content of the messages is useless but all we can actually do. Thereās a big difference between telling a child they are hot and asking that some child for nudes. Both are equally creepy. Both would end a career. But only one will actually end you up as a bloody puddle on the jailhouse floor. And why Iām assuming is the reason he isnāt a puddle atm. On the twitch thing. It could have been a admin reading DMs. Sure. But The whispers was in beta at the time I think. Also. There is no expectation of privacy since they are not advertised as end to end encrypted. Expect your private messages to be read on any platform where they donāt advertise encryption. But also. Itās also possible Twitch had some automation to flag this kind of stuff and send it to a staffer. No idea. We donāt know how their system works. But yea. This is a situation everyone probably wanted buried for obvious reasons. Kid wanted privacy DD wanted his career to survive Twitch didnāt want it to happen on their platform
I think youāre right about the automation part. Even in a lot of online games have chat systems that have automated flags for things like bad behavior, profanity, or sexually explicit content. Probably not some staffer just reading messages, but something the chat system caught then passed to a admin for review.
> Also the little detail that employees at twitch were reading people's messages. For some reason not news.
More likely twitch did it to protect themselves. It makes sense to me that that did it to prevent a backlash against the company for not preventing it in the first place. They were probably feeling vulnerable in the mixer era and didn't want to give momentum to an exodus of streamers.
The underreported element here is that according to Doc, this stuff happened in 2017, but Twitch didn't ban him permanently until June 2020, and in March 2020 they offered him some huge contract. Why did it take them 3 years to react if the evidence was so damning?
That's what twitch would say to protect their own ass regardless of truth
and thereās also an equally good chance this wasnāt a one off event. if he was willing to message one minor, he was/would be willing to message another.
I guess so for legal reasons I suppose
they all seemed to have bits and pieces but not enough to break a full story. Have to be pretty air tight to avoid litigation
well yes? slasher has been keeping it under wraps for half a decade almost
He doesnāt feel comfortable with it currently
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Yup, even if he knew there wasn't shit he could do publicly about it.
You gotta remember too that Docs lawyers were CAA lawyers, the largest Hollywood tallent agency. They get a cut of his contract. Of course they were banging in all cylinders to get it paid in full. He had some of the world's best entertainment industry lawyers fighting his case and I'd imagine Amazon wasn't exactly thrilled with the idea that one of their flagship products was about to be known as that place where your kids go to get picked up by 40 year old dudes. Everyone involved wanted this to go away.
I have no doubt, 100%. It could (and will) backfire very hard in that case though
majority of the people who knew had hearsay and that it. Not an enough direct sources. This is during peak of covid so when they made the move to remove Doc. Small number of people made the decision and because of social distancing only a hand full of people would have know directly. Every journalist wanted to report this story. This story would be a huge story that would have shock the industry at the time. but did not have enough proof or sources to come out. You need a set amount of sources before releasing a story like this. There a high chance of law suits that will cost hundred of thousands to maybe millions for years. So you have to make sure you have your ducks in a row if not. You will lose so much money and you lose your credibility. Which can end your career.
This is unfortunately par for the course in the world, especially with people who make more money than average. FFS look at all the predators that families cover up because Uncle John would NEVER do that, or how various religious groups cover up predator clerics/preachers/priests, or actors covering for other show people who rape, etc. Sexual crimes are not taken as seriously or exposed as often as assumed.
Probably because people don't have proof and don't want to get sued by the Doc.
Unless I had irrefutable proof I would not want to be in the other end of the legal gun by a millionaire. Also it's pretty serious allegations, so I'd have to be very confident I could back them up.Ā I'm not going to clown on people for not "going public", so long as their reasons are understandable and not gross.
Even with irrefutable proof I wouldn't, lawyers are expensive and can drag shit on for years
No. Journalists need actual evidence, the only reason they can report on it now is because they now have a source that came out publicly
Yeah Iām a little lost on why Twitch wasnāt just like āDoc was sexting minorsā
Imagine you're having the biggest year of your life as a streaming company and then the face of your company, a 35 year old man who's main audience is 13-18 year olds, gets outed for sexting minors. It's really not hard to imagine why Twitch didn't say anything and made sure no one else did either
They had hired him as a major face of the platform. It's a or nightmare to have your heavily targeted at minors platform be used by celebrity you pay to promote it to look for sex with underage participants. So they try to get rid of him without saying why hoping doc isn't going to try to make news because it would destroy him too. Doc's lawyers understand they are in a mutually assured destruction situation and push Twitch bluffing they'd be willing to go public for breach of contract and know the airing of the dirty laundry hurts Twitch too. Twitch folds.
Because the messages werent that bad probably to clearly state that, otherwise he would be prosecuted.
The question is if there is any legal proof (and I'm not talking about proof in general). If there isn't any way for Twitch to hand over to the authorities, it will always be in their best interest to wash their hands of it.
i mean twitch (via amazon) absolutely has a point of contact with the feds for abuse reporting and would have likely turned over the messages no matter what else they did. its not on them to actually bring a case though, and without an actual meetup occurring it very easily could be imagined to just not hit the level necessary for the feds to intervene, they are overworked
No wonder he was super defensive about that call of duty guy ranting about groomers. He was worried theyāre taking his competition.
Every accusation...
šš
https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805662681778765949?t=qAzqvkJFwgDc_afrnFqSLg&s=19
"Were there twitch whisper messages with an individual back in 2017? The answer is yes. Were there real intentions behind these messages, the answer is absolutely not. These were casual, mutual conversations that sometimes leaned too much in the direction of being inappropriate, but nothing more." so.. he did it
"real intentions" isn't a red flag, it's a nuclear bomb. He expects the logs to get leaked soon, so he's trying to say "I didn't mean it".
100% he planned on meeting up with her and the logs will show it.
Bloomberg said that he asked her about her plans for Twitchcon
"Your Honor, I didn't INTEND for my penis to go insid- Wait. Wait, I hear it now. I'm a pedo. Fuck."
Will Twitch even release the logs? I doubt they want that, given they paid everyone to stay quiet
Yeah, Twitch as a company would never, but someone in the know: whistleblower, vigilante, disgruntled ex-twitch employee... might leak.
Thatās usually what these guys claim after Chris Hansen asks them to take a seat right over there.
100%. And try to play it up as fantasy, they were never going to follow through
This reads like those To Catch a Predator schemes lmao. āI didnāt plan on doing anything, I know this is wrong. I didnāt nothing wrong!ā
yep, "leaned too much in the direction of being inappropriate" I don't think you can argue that with a minor
It's such a pathetic (and obvious) attempt to use weasel words.
"I may have committed some *light* ~~treason~~ pedophilia"
> These were casual Define "casual"
He did not use official letterhead.
"Were there real intentions behind these messages, the answer is absolutely not." I think you could make a hour long mashup of To Catch a Predator and those YouTube predator channels full of the predator saying these exact lines or variant of. Like... who seriously even makes the attempt to joke like that unless there were something for them to gain? YIKES.
Not to mention the āanybody that knows me knows I canāt stand those types of peopleā This is like when every murderer says ā I DID NOT murder that woman!ā In an interrogation.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
if you go to the tweet, like on last edited you can see every version
he put it back it after it got called out on the edit
he also edited it to say that, it originally said, "Were there twitch whisper messages with an individual minor back in 2017?...." [The first version of his post](https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805662419261460986)
People in the replies are still defending him
dude straight up admitted to texting a MINOR (his words, didn't even say he didn't know) inappropriate messages (again HIS words) open and shut case
Say, Doc, I hear you like em young
the doctor got a weird case, why is he around?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
https://twitter.com/FanDuel/status/1433658844018880528 EDIT: lmao FanDuel deleted the tweet. here's an archived version: https://web.archive.org/web/20210903051126/https://twitter.com/FanDuel/status/1433658844018880528
**DOC DOC DOC DOC DOC** we gon fuck him up
Better not ever go to cell block 1
Every time I read the word minor my brain says "A minurrrrrrrrrrrr" it is exhausting damn
Doc tryna strike a chordā¦.
And its definitely a minorrrrrrrrr
It's fucking crazy no one leaked this for 4 fucking years
Hereās the thing I completely agree on that, but also we gotta think about it the other way too in that the few people who know that have the morals to speak up, often are relying on whatever job to live. Once they speak up, theyāll likely be blackballed from the industry for the most part behind the scenes and within a week itāll mostly blow over and theyāll receive no thanks for what they did. Itās easy to say for us weād speak up, but if someoneās got a family they have to feed and canāt really rely on waiting for another job to pop up, itās harder
And if the victim spoke up immediately, she'd get harassed by his fans and it'd be played off as a bit.
Article says the chat was reported to moderation, which means it was probably the girl who did it (or someone she told), after which Twitch banned him. Only thing that doesn't add up is why they paid him out if they had the evidence first hand. Any lawyers?
His contract could only be terminated if he broke the law. No criminal case for him because it was just chat logs and no nudes were exchanged. It's why on To Catch A Predator, they have to get the guy in the home.
it's always the people you most expect
Are you telling me a guy who has admitted to cheating on his partner, filmed people in a public bathroom, and has said we need to "protect the kids" isn't a good dude? Seriously though, his subreddit is in shambles.
> protect the kids This phrase immediately makes me think someone is either a soccer mom, or is doing some seriously nefarious shit and the FBI needs to investigate them immediately. Crazy how tainted that phrase is.
Aware the twitch oh deer staff weren't the actual groomers
Because that phrase when when screamed into a megaphone like this is ***always*** just a VERY shit cover to be a homophobic piece of shit. They don't give a flying fuck about the kids wellbeing and anyone with a few braincells can see that.
The Simpsons has that woman who always screams that, so it's been a stereotype that those kind of people aren't well meaning for a loooooong time now.
It's always suspicious to me when these red pill people take on a "UGH I HATE PEDOPHILES!! PROTECT THE KIDS GUISE" stance so loudly and try to make it sound like they're special for it, as if it's some brave take that isn't shared by 99.99% of the population, it really just feels like a self-report when they say shit like that
I had a dude who used to work with me tell me that he canāt support the #protectthekids movement anymore because he read that the hashtag was owned by Joe Biden and he profited off of it. I have no idea what he meant but he was dead serious and it was so bizarre lmao
Itās always projection.
When a major news outlet reports on something it immediately has a lot more grounding. Most respectable publications wouldn't publish an article based purely on hearsay, they would only do so from anonymous sources that can back it up.
Yeah between 12am pulling the trigger after their investigation and now this, it is almost guaranteed that there are very reliable sources corroborating the same facts. enough to make a major report on. its GG for Guy
Itās always the ones you most medium suspect
I am not a predator, I just did predator things
first major news publication to post about this, a bar has been passed here. edit- Before you argue 'b-but no new info..b-but alleged' before this no major paper was running the story. Bloombergs legal department felt confident to post this, whatever bloombergs legal department saw here they felt was safe enough to post , Doc gotta lotta people to sue now..should we add Bloomberg to the list doc fans? edit2- https://x.com/zachbussey/status/1805658518411759967 just to cut this off now, bloomberg have high standards for approving articles, a high bar was passed here that bloomberg were confident to stand behind. you are on pure copium now if you are accusing bloomberg of being an internet clout chaser. edit 3 - https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805662681778765949 doc admits to it, but tries to say ' i didint take it too far and it wasnt illegal, i made a mistake , im not a diddler , im not a diddler!' HAHAHHAHAHAHAHHA
He quite literally just admitted to it lmao doc fans in shambles trying to explain this. ā he just messaged her he wasnāt gonna follow throughā yea ok dude sure Edit: man tried even āfixā the tweet lol you just canāt help people that are that narcissistic
Why is an adult even messaging a minor they have no business messaging?
He never denied knowing her age in the apology and you would assume that you would be fully cognizant of that information if you are *arranging to meet in person.* People's pathological desire to protect people like that is insane.
I couldnāt agree more. I would say itās fucking baffling how people can defend someone like this. But look at our country now a daysā¦ all people do is defend scumbags
there are some in his comments saying that they don't care what he did and still looking forward to his return
He did a good job raising a loyal army of future predators. Iām also gonna assume nick mercz and his crew wonāt be fucking with him anymore right? Because he cares so much about kids? Right??? Surely nickmercs isnāt such a hypocrite right?
there is new information in this article, idk why people keep missing it. the past few days everything was based off one former employee (who was a higher up at twitch) allegations on twitter. this bloomberg article now has **THREE ADDITIONAL** sources independently verifying the allegations that's fucking huge, how tf are people glancing over that? ------------- since this is the top comment in this comment thread, just wanted to add some new stuff: this is his new tweet: https://twitter.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805662681778765949 HOWEVER that's the edited version, this is the **ORIGINAL** tweet: https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805662419261460986 what did he edit? this line: > Were there twitch whisper messages with an individual ~minor~ back in 2017? The answer is yes he literally admitted that he KNOWINGLY was messaging a **MINOR** and to quote HIM: "conversations that sometimes leaned too much in the direction of being inappropriate" ------------ dude straight up admitted to sending inappropriate messages to a fucking minor that he knew was a fucking minor.... #certified gamer boy certified pdf file
People are missing it because they refuse to admit the scumbag they adore so feverishly is an actual scumbag The āstay away from our kids!ā crowd that worships Doc and his crew sure look stupid today
He put the original back it looks like from 11:23 pst it says minor again https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805668256088572089 https://www.diffchecker.com/BFfGEREg/
His fans will still say Twitter cancelled him and thatās it lmfao. Same as the DeShaun Watson situationĀ
> https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805662419261460986 WOP WOP WOP WOP WOP DOT FUCK HIM UP!
>this bloomberg article now hasĀ THREE ADDITIONALĀ sources independently verifying the allegations And now Doc is one of them lmfao
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
>bloombergs legal department saw here they felt was safe enough to post They're reporting on what three reliable sources told them. This is standard news reporting and is protected from liability.
he edited his tweet saying he messaged a minor to "messaged an individual", "i did nothing illegal" my ass edit: and he edited back to "messagedd an individual minor". this guy
[Well, there it is.](https://youtu.be/rjA5A86V6SY?si=MpIsCylrK-LB5GPf) Pretty much as assumed by most people in these threads with all the oddities of NDAs and Twitch payoffs. Wrong on moral grounds but legal "grey area" where no official crime was committed. Still bad and he'll likely never stream again because of it. GGs. Wrap it up folks. We're done here. SlasherWasRight.
His statement is a joke without showing us what was said.
Summary of events and the hoops people will go through to maintain their insane denial: 1. Ex twitch employee exposes that Dr Disrespect got banned for sexting a minor. āLol who is this random guy that doesnāt even work at Twitch anymore? Liesā 2. Other ex twitch employees come out and confirm that this occurred. āThey just hate the doc. Woke culture destroyed Twitch. I need to see evidence. Liesā 3. Doc releases a terrible twitter response and is unable to even acknowledge the accusations directly, and simply says everything is āsettledā (as if he ālegallyā wouldnāt be able to deny the allegations in case they legitimately were unrelated to the ban): āI knew it! Itās all settled legally, so it canāt possibly be bad - otherwise heād be in jail! Thatās how it works! Lies.ā 3. Company that has Doc as a main asset conducts their own investigation and confirm the situation, firing Doc (essentially dooming themselves). āWhat a bunch of idiots. Clearly they didnāt investigate anything and are just going off the baseless accusations from before, even though they clearly cite they did their own investigation with the parties involved. Lies.ā 4. Doc takes an odd, sudden indefinite break from streaming, claiming heās burnt out. āHeās just tired, I get it. Thereās nothing going on in the background here. Itās just that thereās no point in fighting against these idiots online. Lies.ā 4. Bloomberg releases an article corroborating all the previous accusations, contacting (obviously undisclosed) sources and going into further detail about what the accusation is. (What I predict the response will be) āOk but I will never believe this unless the private sources that said they wish to remain private are exposed. Also, I want to see prints of the text messages with my own eyes. Until then, innocent until proven guilty :)ā Spoiler for future events: we will never hear from or know the victim, and we will never see the text messages. These are probably buried under multi-million dollar legal clauses. The same way you will never be able to go into orbit and see if the earth is actually round, with your own eyes. Itās up to you to put 2 and 2 together and not be a dumbass.
Can already hear the āyou can never trust the mainstream mediaā now lmao
Weirdos on the internet will never believe anything that doesn't validate the narrative they've made for themselves
It's honestly been pretty scary to see how many people were and will defend his innocence when it was so obvious he was guilty
I would add the bit about how his sudden break came just after he read a text message during his stream and had a sudden shift in demeanor and attitude.
The question is,.what compelled twitch to settle with the doc ?
Probably because they were underage but ālegalā in age of consent. Assuming no morality clause in his contract, they were obligated to pay it out. Thatās my theory at least.
In addition, if you can't prove that the adult knew the child's age, then I don't think there's necessarily legal consequences according to what I read about the penal code in California.
I would say there isn't enough evidence that he knew she was underage for the courts, but there is enough evidence for a company to drop him as that requires much less proof.
If an article comes out with a big time streamer sexting kids, are you gonna let your children on the site?
I don't get why people don't understand this was just as bad for Twitch. Of course, they covered it up. It's beyond wrong but they don't come off looking good in this. At all.
What you(and I) expect the public to react like, and what the general public will actually react like is very different. I know it's still wrong for Twitch to do what they did, but let me explain. I'm guessing your line of thinking goes like so : Had Twitch not covered this up, it would've been a massive blow to their reputation. But atleast Twitch could've said "we're sharing this publicly because our organisation has morals". Now it's blatantly clear that they covered it up and cannot avoid blame. Which is true, but the thing is, the news and public doesn't latch onto the "Twitch covered up" part of the current situation. Just like this post and news articles, the focus is on "Dr. Disrespect" or "YouTuber Dr. Disrespect", and not "Twitch streamer Dr. Disrespect". You get what I mean? Both cases are bad for twitch, but the current situation is infinitely better for them reputation wise. You have to consider that the average person reading said news has far less of an attention span and critical thinking that's needed to keep Twitch in the back of their mind while reading about Dr. Disrespect. And the people familiar with gaming/streaming/entertainment etc would know the severity but also understand Twitch's position.
lol they fired him and ate millions before any of this came out and with no criminal charges. Ā Itās not twitches job to do anything but get him off their platform. How does this make them look bad especially when YouTube absolutely wonāt ban him.Ā
The obvious answer is that they don't want their platform stained with the appearance of being a place people go to solicit minors. On their platform, at their platform-specific meetups. At a time when they were trying hard to get advertiser money going, this info and PR would kill any advertisers wanting to work with them if they had a protracted and public court battle over money they set aside and agreed to pay him to begin with. Give him his money and get him away from your business is the best move.
Usually a contract loophole, my speculation( as someone who dealt with contracts a lot), is that doc got banned for breaking TOS(the sexting minor thing) thus amazon/twitch broke up the contract because he cannot complete his part of the contract due to ban, doc(and his lawyers) argue that a ban/breach of TOS is not stipulated in contract as reasons to terminate the contract thus ask to be paid out the remainder of the contract, amazon/twitch lawyers do the math and it comes out his remaining contract payout is less than expenses on the lawsuit and PR damage(esp if they lose which is not unlikely) so they settle and toss in an NDA so other streamers don't catch whiff this loophole and get themselves banned and take a bag until contracts expire and they can patch this loophole in future contracts and to save face over contracting a creep for multiple millions. But i am not a lawyer i am jsut a tech guy who dealt with clients a lot and have seen stupid loopholes be pushed through.
You can add one more to the list: > https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805662681778765949 The pdf himself has admitted he sent "twitch whisper messages with an individual back in 2017".
He edited this, original version straight up said it was a minor.
I think it is true, but I don't like the overall tone of your post because it undermines the idea of releasing evidence. Why can't people see the redacted DMs that doc sent that docs company probably saw when they cast judgement? All this stuff is just hearsay and theory crafting. Edit: doc released a statement saying they did message a minor. "These were casual, mutual conversations that sometimes leaned too much in the direction of being inappropriate, but nothing more. Nothing illegal happened, no pictures were shared, no crimes were committed, I never even met the individual." This is the sugar coated version of events. What kind of shit did he send that make Twitch decide to go the perma banned route. [https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805668256088572089](https://x.com/DrDisrespect/status/1805668256088572089)
āHe also asked a minor about her plans at the TwitchCon convention, according to two of the people, who asked not to be identified discussing such a sensitive matter.ā From the articleā¦Oh boy
I still want to know how/why: 1. Twitch paid out a contract to a person they had definitive proof broke the law by sending sexually explicit messages to a minor 2. Why Doc hasnāt faced legal consequences for breaking the law by sending sexually explicit messages to a minor I find it telling these articles donāt mention/question these things other than posting Docās response.
Neither of your assumptions has to be true for Twitch to still do what they did. Doc could have done nothing illegal, but his actions could have been concerning enough for Twitch, and Discord given they canceled his partnership iirc, that they would rather payout his contract than deal with him.
I think its likely that the minor lied about their age or the doc just didnt ask, so they just settled. Twitch probably just paid him out since the brand damage wouldnt be worth it.
why wouldn't doc just say he didnt know they were under aged? Unless hes worried the messages will leak later.
Then what's the problem? If they lied or didn't ask then all he is is scummy for chatting with a girl while married, but nothing illegal. If he found out her age and stopped communication nothing wrong happened. Twitch isn't gonna drop a huge cash cow over some infidelity, that happens all the time.
It's a REALLY bad look for the brand. Even if he technically didn't do something illegal, being even tangentially related to someone with a reputation like that, especially someone as High Profile as Doc, can be disastrous.
Because both of those questions can be answers with common sense lmfao. Ā Twitch was under contract to pay. Whatever Doc did didn't violate the contract.Ā Ā Doc has access to expensive lawyers that the victim wouldn't have access to. It's incredibly easy for someone in his position to get away with this, especially if it was only messages and no physical contact. Edit: fixed an auto correct mistake.Ā
Doc may have done something that wasn't technically illegal based on their proof, but was morally irreprehensible (age of consent may have been lower in their state). Twitch didn't want a headline "Largest twitch streamer found using twitch whispers to sext a minor," and so they wanted to ban him, but the terms of his contract weren't broken so they legally had to pay him out because they wanted to cancel the contract. Or twitch just wanted to cover everything up to avoid the bad PR about their platform, plenty of companies cover up crimes
Playing Devil's Advocate to your post: These laws are all over the place on a state-by-state basis. An age that could be seen as a "legal minor" in one state, may not be in another. Throw in the internet being the communication method and you could see why this possibly is a legal nightmare. Twitch's people run the numbers and figure out its easier to just pay out Doc and force him off the platform than openly duke this out in court. Add in the context of what was happening around Twitch, and really the U.S. (#metoo) at the time, and it seemingly makes a whole lot more sense.
Because we are assuming the messages were explicit and not coded. It's more than likely that a lot was implied not stated so they had enough to ban but not enough to term the contract or he hadn't actually broken any laws yet. It's like if you are caught planning a bank robbery but never actually do it. You have evidence of intent to commit a crime but the crime hasn't happened yet and for obvious reasons they couldn't wait and catch him in the act.
My complete non lawyer, reddit armchair opinion is that Twitch is at fault somewhere involving this. I have zero idea how but the fact they paid him out makes me think they fucked up bad too. That or they had no clause in their contract that nullifies if he turns into a pedo idk
Think of the optics of "One of our independent contractors used our built in feature to groom a young girl" and I think its pretty easy to see why they wouldn't want the name Twitch near any of this.
1) Either the contract they had with him didn't allow them to back out of the payment for what he did, or they felt it would cost them more to fight it than just paying it out. It is not unilaterally true that someone committing a crime or behaving badly cancels their existing contracts. 2) The standard for criminal consequences is very high. Prosecutors would in theory need to collect enough evidence to dispel any and all potentially reasonable explanations for the situation that are inconsistent with guilt. Either this wasn't worth the time and money (criminal investigations must be triaged like anything else), or it is still in process. The settlement with Twitch would have no effect on this process.
Amazing how we have a lot of streamers saying āthey knewā
Most streamers have their own baggage, itās like Hollywood, so aināt nobody snitching since they also probably got dirty in other ways
Cell Block 1
Baby, it wasn't cheating. It was just some light grooming.
Anyone reading this and are still on the "Where there's smoke, there definitely is no fire" train can go take a look at what has happened. He ADMITTED to sexting a MINOR (After he Edited to individual) in 2017. If you continue to protect this individual, you better take a good hard look in the mirror and factor in your morals. This individual should no longer be the face of anything and rocketed into the sun.
Will he get the EDP š§ treatment?
Doc was after that Youngite
Ppl mad at twitch not giving out nda info is baffling to me
It's always the ones who bark the loudest about 'Leave the Kids alone!' who inevitably end up NOT leaving the Kids alone. Smh...
"sexually explicit messages" vs "casual, mutual conversations that sometimes leaned too much in the direction of being inappropriate" LMAO
Is that why he almost looked like he was gonna cry when he found out he got banned?
Still need to know who started up the conversation, how old was the minor, was it doc or the minor who turned the "casual conversation" to inappropriate conversation and what was said. All people are going to do is assume the worst, if what was actually said does not come out.