203
“Trial by social media”
I dunno. He certainly didn’t help his cause there when he released that creepy vague cringe vid he did about the accusations in his House of Cards character.
Testifying at your own trial is almost always a bad idea, even if it's a social media trial
He did like 3 of those, one per year, consecutively
I'm still surprised how quickly this guy's 30 year career imploded. He went from a household name to basically non-existent in the span of a week. Can't say he didn't bring it upon himself but it's still surprising.
You are still allowed to dislike innocent people. The law is not morality.
He also wasn't found "innocent", but "not guilty".
There's a vast difference between that. Not guilty means that we can't prove he's guilty beyond reasonable doubt, not that we can prove that he's innocent.
It's still very likely he committed crimes, but we can't be sure enough to send him to jail.
Came here to say this! With all we've heard about the man, I'd say he's slam-dunk "not innocent". BUT, he was found not guilty as charged.
People really get up in arms because they don't know the difference. And it's not just some legal shenanigans, it's a real-world thing.
Another example is my sleezebag Congressman, Matt Gaetz. People act like he wasn't prosecuted due to being in Congress, money, whatever. No, he wasn't prosecuted due to lack of evidence and witness testimony.
Is he an innocent man? Fuck no. But that's not enough to lock him up. Given the nature of the case, I wouldn't have prosecuted either. About zero chance of a jury returning a guilty verdict. Pretty sad about it, I really hoped to see that man in orange.
I have never heard about an "innocent" verdict, is that really a thing?
They are just making a point. No such thing, just pointing out that criminal courts don't prove innocence.
load more comments
(1 replies)
You are still allowed to dislike innocent people.
Just a small correction. Being not proven guilty doesn't proves innocence. It just means that the accusation couldn't be proven in court. That's the price we pay for our justice system which tries to keep wrong convictions as small as possible, quite a few guilty people will walk free.
And I think in this case a guilty person walks free.
What's the public sentiment on this verdict going to be? I have not been following the case.
I think he was found not guilty. Anyone that continues to demonize him should probably step up with more information than came out at the trial before they open their mouths again and ruin a man's career.
I'm not sure where the first witch hunt came from, but I'd lay it at the feet of social media platforms like Reddit causing an echo chamber that drove it.
The fact that he was abandoned by the studios and the people he worked with said more about them than it does about him.
A verdict in a court of law is based on what is presented, not on what happened. This is what makes it possible for people to commit a crime, and get away with it (or get framed for something that they didn't do).
This is a question that I do not want you to answer here, but one to ponder:
If your son/nephew/younger was up for a part in a project that was directed by, and starring Kevin Spacey? What weight would you assign to that Not Guilty due to insufficient evidence verdict?
Where does the judge say that evidence was insufficient for a verdict? I missed that part.
Also, are we going to start questioning every verdict as if any accusation was true, even when proved differently in court?
"Where does the judge say that evidence was insufficient for a verdict? I missed that part."
The primary cause of your confusion is your insistence on missing the point.
"Also, are we going to start questioning every verdict as if any accusation was true, even when proved differently in court?"
Again, missing the point. Who is talking about every verdict, besides yourself? This is Kevin Spacey specific.
Do you believe that not getting convicted means that the accused did not do the thing that they are accused of?
Is it your personal belief that Kevin Spacey is completely harmless with respect to sexual predation? Does your confidence extend far enough that you would have no qualms about a young male relative of yours work on a movie with Kevin Spacey?
Reading you comment I searched for the differences between being “not guilty” and being “innocent” and boy I didn’t know enough about the US justice system. I thought a “not guilty” verdict was the same as “the guy didn’t do it”. I stand corrected, though. Thanks for your input.
I'm not sure where you're from. But that principle by no means is limited to the US but pretty much present in every western country.
The whole idea is to prevent false convictions at the cost of guilty people walking free if their guilt can't be proven.
load more comments
(1 replies)
Calling it a social media witchunt is a bit trite. A number of people came forward, detailing a history that spanned years. His claims that they were motivated 'by money' and painting it as 'aspiring actors' when we're talking a group that includes professionals with their own VERY well established careers also reeks of the rear end of the equine.
Yeah, let's not confuse "not guilty" with "not a creepy old man". The bar for the state taking away your rights based on your activity is fairly high -- as it should be -- but not being able to produce sufficient evidence of acts that don't leave a whole lot of physical evidence behind doesn't make the accusations false.
It just makes them not enough.
And, I'm sorry to everyone out there who seem weirdly motivated to want to believe that accusers are overwhelmingly liars, but his hand-waving away of the accusations was not confidence inspiring.
Let's not forget that multiple accusers up and fucking died while waiting for their day in court, also.
Kinda hard to provide testimony that could have been compelling for the court when a number of key witnesses don't survive the trial.
Multiple sources i've read indicate that Spacey seems to believe he can climb right back on top of the A-list again now this court case is over.
Even the career is not important, whole life is ruined. Just imagine family and friends all ar least asking about it and some leaving you.
While I agree there should be severe and swift punishment for sexual offences, there should be some punishment for false accusations. I know that sometimes is just not prooved and sometimes it is in legally gray area, so not automatic, but if it can be prooven that someone was intentional lying - then there should be consequences.
but if it can be prooven that someone was intentional lying - then there should be consequences.
this is already the case today. thank you for playing.
While I agree there should be severe and swift punishment for sexual offences, there should be some punishment for false accusations. I know that sometimes is just not prooved and sometimes it is in legally gray area, so not automatic, but if it can be prooven that someone was intentional lying - then there should be consequences.
But we actually have pretty clearly defined legal systems for slander, libel and defamation?
Unfortunately, in most cases, there's no real-world way to punish false accusation. The bar of proof for that sort of thing is, and should be, extraordinarily high. You pretty much have to have a confession.
Also, charging false accusers has a chilling effect on victims. Think how manipulative abusers are. "See what happened to that chick on the news? Go ahead, call the cops. You got nothin' you dumb bitch, 'cept maybe a future in a concrete and steel cage. Here's the phone, I'll dial for you."
load more comments
(1 replies)
While I agree there should be severe and swift punishment for sexual offences, there should be some punishment for false accusations.
What are you talking about? There are punishment for false accusations. But that of course has the very same legal requirements of proven beyong reasonable doubt as any other accusation.
And no, just because someone is not proven guilty doesn't mean that the accusation is false. It literally just means that, the court couldn't prove the accusation and so couldn't punish the accused.
It was around the qanon situation
And after Weinstein
Edit: just read the harassment stuff on Wikipedia.
I'm not sure if this trial tells anything about the whole truth with all that going on
load more comments
(3 replies)
But nobody waited for the verdict, they canceled him to the end of the galaxy and the internet told me he was guilty. Would an "Oops, sorry" be enough until the next stampede?
While he wasn't found guilty for these specific accusations, they were not the worst ones, and proving these cases from decades ago is pretty much impossible.
Court outcomes never clear someone of accusations that were not included in the court case and generally favor the defense. Spacey has so many accusers over such a long time period that the odds of him attracting that many false accusations is zero. There was both no reason to wait and no reason to think that being found not guilty is a free pass.
Is Cosby redeemed because a judge through out his conviction?
While I admit that I don't know the intricacies of Spacey's case and all of his accusers, yes, if we can't 100% be sure that he is guilty, I would abstain from canceling just because it's trendy now. I know, rage baiting is the most effective tool these days.
There are monsters out there that take advantage of people in lower positions but there are also people that are innocent but because somebody is either jealous or wants to cause havoc, they get "canceled" for life.
I guess I am more cynical when it comes to things like this because I know a case(good friend) where a guy's life was practically destroyed by a vengeful ex-girlfriend/co-worker.
I guess if you can't see the difference between 30 accusers over decades and one accuser, then the situations might look comparable.
Who was ever canceled over a single, non-credible, accusation?
There's no such thing as "being cancelled." It's called facing the social repercussions for your actions, and it's literally always been a thing, even long before people whined about it. If people don't want to associate with Spacey or engage with his works because they think he's a creepy old rapist, that's their right, and nobody is required to change their minds even after he gets cleared in a court of law.
I understand your personal experience forms the basis of your opinion but the fact is it only happened once to your friend, whereas Spacey has (and continues to) face multiple accusations from multiple people from multiple nations. That is not just a one-off.
Is Cosby redeemed because a judge through out his conviction?
This asks a question that I think is valid, but is fraught with emotion and history. Should it not mean that Cosby is redeemed if the charges are thrown out? It is extremely difficult to prove cases from decades ago, but does that mean that someone should face social consequences for charges that haven't been proven in a court of law? Statistics say that most sexual assaults go unreported. Which is why there is a good and understandable push to believe people who report. But experiencing consequences based only on those reports also doesn't seem to be the best.
I'm not too invested in this so I could be wrong but wasn't there a news story just recently that like 3 people set to testify against him died mysteriously or something?
Will be interesting to see if his career rebounds after this or what.
No chance, he's tainted goods. Maybe with the right social media spin, after a LONG time, he could come back.
Really sucks, loved his acting. Just watched American Beauty the other night and was able to see the actor and not the sins. But still, tell me Spacey is in a new movie, and guess what's top of mind?
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
203 points (100.0% liked)
News
23297 readers
3335 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS