How can you prove rape from 20-30 years ago? - Danny Masterson Discussion

Yet they did. Sometimes people are careless in what they say, sometimes a witness is convincing.

reply

What proof? All I heard was just women making claims with zero evidence.

reply

You would be surprised. Many times the cops are pretty good with catching someone who's lying.

I will admit it's a lot harder to convict without physical evidence, but not impossible.

reply

[–] JFZ (1459) 9 months ago

But that's what the testimony was. There was no other evidence. Just women admitting the sex was consensual then changing their mind. There was nothing from police, or was there?

reply

[–] Bucky (216) 9 months ago

I didn't follow this particular case. I was reffering to things in general.

reply

[–] JFZ (1459) 9 months ago

Oh, so you're only hear to muddle the waters of this case...great job Buck.

reply

[–] Bucky (216) 9 months ago

The dude was convicted.....

reply

[–] JFZ (1459) 9 months ago

Yes, and we're asking based on what facts, and you have none. Just speculation that dont relate to this case. Not helpful, quite the opposite.

reply

[–] Ranb (7944) 9 months ago

When did the women admit the sex was consensual? You were there? Got them on tape? You were at the trial?

reply

[–] tom8 (3005) 9 months ago

lying?
about something that happened over 20 years ago?

what are you talking about.......would like it if police came asking you questions about what you did 20 years ago.
you really think you would not sound doubtful

reply

[–] Bucky (216) 9 months ago

Not if I was telling the truth.

reply

[–] tom8 (3005) 9 months ago

so you don't think Russel sound truthful in the video he posted?

you can tell he is lying?

reply

[–] Spuds (80) 9 months ago

To begin with you should never talk to the police whether you are innocent or guilty. Reality is if they come asking questions the they are trying to get evidence against you, don't help.

And that is the problem with this type of bullshit. Ask any person where they were on a specific date 20 years ago and you wouldn't find anyone that could tell you with any certainty. Hell in this case the women didn't even know the specific date it supposedly happened. How the hell could anyone mount a defense against something like that.

reply

[–] tom8 (3005) 9 months ago

exactly..... that is why i am asking this "bucky" person here what he/she is talking about

reply

[–] retieredactor (682) 10 months ago

In very few cases technically, usually by DNA.
In this case witnesses and trends, MO, got him in the end. The court believed he woman as they had all the same story to tell.

On a side note:
I don’t know him, never met him, but he was deemed a scumbag around town 20 years ago. He did indeed use his fame for sex and hinting of all the things he could do for the girl’s career if they went with him. Of course, he never delivered. Many used that approach in the past.
If a playboy actor did that now they would be metoo pretty fast.
Now its more ominous talk in rooms by producers and directors and it’s the woman’s job to take the first steps if she wants to be considered for something.
Its hidden now, no cellphons,not in bars or parties as in the past..

reply

[–] tom8 (3005) 10 months ago

"He did indeed use his fame for sex and hinting of all the things he could do for the girl’s career if they went with him"

that is not rape though........these women were just sluts who wanted to get rich.
and then 20 years later sat alone and got bitter.

US justice system is a joke

reply

[–] strntz (11241) 9 months ago

Forgetting this particular case for now (because I haven't seen the transcripts), I agree that a quid pro quo system of putting out sex for a job or advancement is not rape.

At all.

BUT! It is a detestable act (for both really) and should be punished and compensable in a civil court.

A worthy candidate should not be forced to accept the binary choice of either sex or a job, and let's not forget that a worthy candidate may lose a position to another person who is willing to accept the quid pro quo of sex for a job.

But in no case does quid pro quo for a job constitute rape.

reply

[–] liscarkat (17106) 9 months ago

Nobody is forced to accept the binary choice of either sex or a job. You just say "no thanks" and move on. Nobody has to be an actress, and if the only way to get that job is to put out sex, you probably don't have the talent, anyway.

reply

[–] strntz (11241) 9 months ago

Nobody is forced to accept the binary choice of either sex or a job.

Just to clarify, it's not a binary choice between a sex or a job, it's a binary choice between sex to get the job or not get the job.

You just say "no thanks" and move on.

Of course, but in what way is that fair? I assume you've been hired at some point to work. What if your boss told you you either had sex with him or didn't get the job? Sure you can walk away, but in what way is that fair? Even taking the choice to walk away, a qualified person should not be denied because they won't play the game.

Nobody has to be an actress..

True, but because it's an actress in this case we should just shrug and ignore it? What if the choice was between sex and a bank or car loan? Or a choice of sex and college admission?

reply

[–] JFZ (1459) 10 months ago

with testimony like this
https://i.4cdn.org/tv/1694189801701108.png

reply

[–] strntz (11241) 10 months ago

*That* sounds like revisionist interpretation of events. Is there a full transcript somewhere or at least a few more pages of pertinent testimony?

reply

[–] JFZ (1459) 10 months ago

Yeah, you sound like someone in full cope mode.

No. No no! This can't be! Surely there is another source of information that contradicts this! NO! Hurry, the walls are closing in my sheltered view of the way the world works! Help! Find me a source quick! Please snopes! Debunk this!

reply

[–] strntz (11241) 10 months ago

You OK? If you can't afford it, there's plenty of public social services. Good luck.

reply

[–] MarcellusWallace (422) 9 months ago

^^^BEST COMMENT IN HERE.^^^

reply

[–] tom8 (3005) 10 months ago

wow!

reply

[–] raymondoz2007 (2098) 10 months ago

I am tired of 20 year old charges.

reply

[–] Kendricks (2179) 10 months ago

I am tired of life destroying sentences based on 20 year old charges...

Should he be guilty indeed, he can rot in Hell for all I care, but the last years considered, I am extremely skeptical when it comes to rape accusations as we have seen multiple cases where no rape happened.

On top, it has become a somewhat common and acceptable thing to conflate "rape" with "regret".
Women can be extremely vengeful, spiteful and vicious. It's how they express violence, since they lack the physical abilities to do so. It is weird - yet obvious - how so many cases from decades ago suddenly come to surface, and only a total fool would blindly believe them. Think back on the disastrous #believeallwomen bullshit campaign and how many false positives were behind this tagline alone...

There's a reason why, for example, Keanu Reeves barely ever even touches female fans, let alone would be alone with them for just a second. He knows it's dangerous out there and many cunts just wait for their chance to drop some accusations to cash in.

If we learned anything from the Depp vs. Heard case, it is what lengths some hateful and mentally ill women are willing to go to destroy someone. My personal favorite next to the Raspberry-worthy "My dog stepped on a bee!" line, was her pausing while drying her "tears" with a tissue so the press can get nice pictures of it... what fucking more do you need to see what's actually going on here?

And it's not just rape. Think of Jussie Smollet and his shity "muh racism!" stunt. Why is this bittch not in prison!? He made it all up and no consequences whatsoever.

reply

[–] BKB (7211) 10 months ago

Then you need to vote the current Administration out cause this is now a 2 Tier Justice System we're dealing with where "You're Guilty until proven innocent" instead of the other way around

reply

[–] Kendricks (2179) 10 months ago

Yeah no shit.

reply

[–] Wuchak (8292) 9 months ago

But how do you "vote the current Administration out" when LIEberals brazenly commit voting fraud... and get away with it (at least for now)?

reply

[–] Lord Rake (4047) 9 months ago

Was the trial televised? It would be nice to see/hear the evidence instead of taking the opinions of 12 left wing zombies. These are the people who believe cnn and vote for more defecation in the street.

reply

[–] Kendricks (2179) 9 months ago

Not a public trial, at least not on TV unfortunately. Which again makes you wonder... should not every trial be public? For transparency of the justice system alone...

Like you said, the people on the bench were more likely than not 12 Biden supporters who go along with the modern idea of "regret = rape".

Again, if he really did rape anyone... fuck him. Lock him up.
But too often today people get punished for being "scumbags". That's not against the law.
Morals and laws do not always agree...

And those who complain about people being skeptical... maybe ask yourself why some people are skeptical and do not trust the justice system, let alone a jury system, in modern day America.

reply

[–] Lord Rake (4047) 9 months ago

Yep, when it is televised we see how fcking braindead the jury of our peers are, we also get an idea of what parts of the country to completely avoid.

reply

[–] footlegger (1462) 9 months ago

IMHO, all scumbags should be shot on sight. There are too many of them and they are ruining the lives of everyone around them.

reply

[–] Kendricks (2179) 9 months ago

Sure, let's just murder people for not meeting your subjective idea of whatever a "scumbag" is.
That being said, good thing your honest opinion does not matter...

reply

[–] Spuds (80) 9 months ago

I think the poster girl for vindictive cunts is Amber Heard that only got caught and shown as the liat she was because of the recording where she admitted to attacking Depp and the telling him no one would believe him.

reply

[–] Burgershmurger (1306) 10 months ago

You think a jury or a judge cares about evidence? Especially in politically motivated trials, all that matters is your party affiliation.

reply

[–] BKB (7211) 10 months ago

Interestingly enough, I caught an episode of "That 90's Show" on Youtube and after 1 season and heading into the 2nd season(surprisingly) there is no mention of Hyde or what happened to him, while the others have made glorified cameos

reply

[–] Ant1238 (856) 10 months ago

Lol that’s not “interestingly enough,” he’s been on trial for rape! Not a coincidence.

reply

[–] BKB (7211) 10 months ago

He was a prominent character on the show and at the very least, they should've made up something, anything as to where his character went, Jail, the military, ANYTHING, but to just ignore it like he never existed is stupid

reply

[–] DoctorThirteen (11530) 10 months ago

Even if they'd said he'd just mysteriously 'dropped off the grid', which wouldn't really be a stretch for Hyde!

reply

[–] queefqueen (49) 9 months ago

But we live in clown world. Women can change their minds about their past regrettable but fully consensual decisions, like drunk banging a dude from That 70s Show for instance, decades later and completely ruin men's lives while avoiding all of the consequences. We also just make stuff up sometimes, because believe all women lol.

Source: me, a woman

reply

[–] Kowalski (63625) 9 months ago

BULLSHIT FOLLOWED BY A LIE...GOOD POST.

reply

[–] JFZ (1459) 9 months ago

Not believing her is worse than rape.

reply

[–] tom8 (3005) 9 months ago

So if i was to accuse you of something...... i should be believed as well?

reply

[–] Kowalski (63625) 9 months ago

IF YOU ACCUSE ME OF SOMETHING...WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE CALLED A LIAR AND BULLIED?

reply

[–] Padeen (6459) 9 months ago

A jury of his peers, presented with testimony and evidence, found him guilty. That's how trials work.

reply