Me Too much

[JohnRoberts]

I have speculated about the guilty until proven innocent paradigm shift caused by trial of public opinion amped up by social media harpies.

Here is an interesting case with Alan M. Dershowitz being accused of sexual misconduct.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/alan-dershowitz-rips-metoo-claims-against-him-a-gang-of-arsonists-are-torching-my-reputation

I read his editorial in WSJ and he is inviting the FBI to investigate his accusers claims against him to effectively catch them in federal perjury charges for lying to investigators when their testimony contradicts his.  Crazy that he has to invite a felony investigation upon himself to hopefully clear his name and reputation. 

If Dershowitz has to go to such extreme lengths, what about us mere mortals?  Luckily for me I don't have anything worth suing me for, but this is out of control...

JR 

 

[boji]

Imo, it's a pyrrhic victory to destroy a person for some bad thing they did decades ago. My version of a best-case victory would be to have that person come to me of their own accord and ask for forgiveness. A second-best victory would be if they don't think they did wrong, then try to forgive them despite them not having the sensitivity to see what they did and let them know, face to face,  they are forgiven. How else to get on and be ok in the world? Holding out for punishment is a terrible place to be that requires carrying around some black-hole mass in your chest until justice arrives, where under sentencing, the depth of the perpetrators pain can finally be measured against your own.

My understanding is self-healing 101 starts with forgiveness, not crowdsourcing justice.  Granted if someone committed murder of a family member I would be singing a different tune, probably.

 

[boji]

Btw, I wasn't ignoring your point JR that you think he might be innocent.  I just think the #metoo movment in general isn't doing as much to help women as we think. I don't think money can fix the pain of being raped. Nor knowing the perp is now in some jail cell, rotting away.  Again, I might think differently were I the victim.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Btw, I wasn't ignoring your point JR that you think he might be innocent.  I just think the #metoo movment in general isn't doing as much to help women as we think. I don't think money can fix the pain of being raped. Nor knowing the perp is now in some jail cell, rotting away.  Again, I might think differently were I the victim.

Not sure you got my point (guilty until proved innocent).

I am convinced that he is absolutely innocent***  but the damage to his reputation lingers (even you think he may be guilty). After he disproved the first accusations a second even less credible accuser surfaced. In the court of public opinion that looks like a pattern (where there's smoke there is fire), if anything its a pattern of character assassination.

I am not a huge fan of Dershowitz, but he appears to be honest and a straight shooter...

Why in the world would he invite a felony investigation upon himself?  He can't prove the negative in the court of public opinion, but maybe he can prove that his accuser is lying about him to FBI investigators.

Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein deserve all the punishment they get for truly deplorable behavior (that was tolerated by way too many people who knew and looked the other way for years, decades). The ugly unintended consequence of the recent #MeToo movement is that high profile individuals can become scalps to collect for somebody's trophy case, guilty or not.

Dershowitz makes a strong argument that he is innocent and being targeted for financial reward. The facts should matter.

JR

*** Sorry I tried to link to his WSJ editorial that I read last week, but it is behind a paywall

 

[Phrazemaster]

The only fair way around these shenanigans is to prevent publication of accusations such as these until after they've been through a court system. I guess that would violate free speech, so it's a conundrum. But people should not be allowed to make accusations in the press and then have someone's reputation destroyed - as you said JR there is always the lingering doubt and it ruins a person. What a great way to create an atmosphere of McCarthy-ism, or Salem Witch Hunt. This social media and instant communication has gone too far, and perhaps there should be protection somehow for these kinds of things.

 

[boji]

Strange times. The internet certainly has raised the signal, as well as the noise.

 

[hodad]

Forgive me if I feel little sympathy for a man who defended a billionaire who was a serial pedophile and essentially running a prostitution ring with high school girls, some of whom were underage.

It's tough to be accused of something you didn't do.  Ask Hillary Clinton.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Forgive me if I feel little sympathy for a man who defended a billionaire who was a serial pedophile and essentially running a prostitution ring with high school girls, some of whom were underage.

It's tough to be accused of something you didn't do.  Ask Hillary Clinton.

I don't like him either (or her), but this is about the larger picture of people being found guilty until proved innocent by courts of public opinion and not even having reputations restored after being exonerated.

Feel sympathy for the innocents injured this way, that cannot get editorials published in major publications or afford their own lawyers and investigators. It is a simple abuse of power, granted by popular modern trends in social media and easily abused by some with bad intent.

Yes the first amendment protects free speech, and even worse for high profile public figures that require pretty high standards for demonstrating personal injury.  This is just the easy obvious example not the true larger risk of harm to the general public.

JR

PS: Sadly the team politics has already weaponized this for political advantage and I expect more of this in 2020 unless we can figure out how to deal with this fairly and equitably. Dershowitz came up with an interesting angle using the lying to federal investigators regulation that put Martha Stewart in jail (along with numerous others), to jack up false accusers. Maybe if we write new law we can fire politicians for lying to us (perhaps give sitting legislators a grace period where first 100 lies are free). 

 

[Matador]

But there is generations of context behind this that shouldn't be ignored.

What about the countless women who did come forward, who were ignored or not believed?  Could that not have fueled the present environment?  For every 'innocent (man) injured this way' there are countless women who were injured and then ignored.

Remember, it took nearly 30+ years for Cosby and Weinstein to be stopped, and people suffered all along the way.

 

[JohnRoberts]

But there is generations of context behind this that shouldn't be ignored.

So do not ignore that...

What about the countless women who did come forward, who were ignored or not believed?  Could that not have fueled the present environment?  For every 'innocent (man) injured this way' there are countless women who were injured and then ignored.

I have commented on aspects of the cultural shift as it happened right here (these days modern social culture is changing at a faster rate than we can comfortably digest).

This is not some zero sum game where it is OK to harm people in the future to balance out some past debt.

Remember, it took nearly 30+ years for Cosby and Weinstein to be stopped, and people suffered all along the way.

The hollywood casting couch was more than 100 years old, male domination over females is even older.

Yes that all sucks, but it does not justify bad behavior now.

JR

 

[Scodiddly]

This is not some zero sum game where it is OK to harm people in the future to balance out some past debt. The hollywood casting couch was more than 100 years old, male domination over females is even older.

Yes that all sucks, but it does not justify bad behavior now.

If nobody is to ever be held accountable for their behavior, then behavior will never change.

 

[Phrazemaster]

If nobody is to ever be held accountable for their behavior, then behavior will never change.

Agreed.

However, on the other side of this...where is the accountability of those who knowingly entered the casting couch for career advancement? They “paid” for their advantages, knowing full well what they were doing.

It doesn’t excuse the person in power for abusing their position - but it also doesn’t absolve the actors who took advantage of it.

There’s wrong-doing on both sides. It’s hard to call the actors victims when they knew what they were doing.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Agreed.

However, on the other side of this...where is the accountability of those who knowingly entered the casting couch for career advancement? They “paid” for their advantages, knowing full well what they were doing.

That seems a somewhat lesser crime while sex has been involved as part of many different levels of quid pro quo exchanges even in established relationships (like marriage).  If we believe consensual sex trade should be legal (it is in many localities) this aspect could be discounted.

It doesn’t excuse the person in power for abusing their position - but it also doesn’t absolve the actors who took advantage of it.

This seems a little like blaming the victims, hopefully more very public prosecutions will give powerful people pause and reduce future occurrences, but this is very old social dynamic, that will be hard to expunge overnight, but worth trying honestly. 

There’s wrong-doing on both sides. It’s hard to call the actors victims when they knew what they were doing.

It is difficult to debate vague hypotheticals but what good alternate options did these "actors" have? Of course it is hard to feel sorry for drop dead pretty women (girls, guys?), but they are still somebody's sibling or child and deserve respect.

We will survive this too, but rapid swings in modern culture can cause unintended  consequences, or at least adjustment pains. I am mainly raising one peripheral issue, how unsubstantiated claims get blind acceptance, and are difficult to remedy once spread across social media. 

JR

 

[Phrazemaster]

That seems a somewhat lesser crime while sex has been involved as part of many different levels of quid pro quo exchanges even in established relationships (like marriage).  If we believe consensual sex trade should be legal (it is in many localities) this aspect could be discounted. This seems a little like blaming the victims, hopefully more very public prosecutions will give powerful people pause and reduce future occurrences, but this is very old social dynamic, that will be hard to expunge overnight, but worth trying honestly.  It is difficult to debate vague hypotheticals but what good alternate options did these "actors" have? Of course it is hard to feel sorry for drop dead pretty women (girls, guys?), but they are still somebody's sibling or child and deserve respect.

We will survive this too, but rapid swings in modern culture can cause unintended  consequences, or at least adjustment pains. I am mainly raising one peripheral issue, how unsubstantiated claims get blind acceptance, and are difficult to remedy once spread across social media. 

JR

Well - nobody forced the actors onto the casting couch. They did not even have to be actors. They chose it all, and anyone aspiring to be one knows this is part of it.

I am not saying it’s OK. I’m just saying the actors took advantage too.

But it’s corruption for sure.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Well - nobody forced the actors onto the casting couch. They did not even have to be actors. They chose it all, and anyone aspiring to be one knows this is part of it.

I am about finished going down this rabbit hole, but some reportedly were physically raped, or roofied and then raped.

We can question the judgement of taking meetings alone with powerful movie executives or movies stars and/or celebrities, but again what was their alternative?

I am not saying it’s OK. I’m just saying the actors took advantage too.

The ones who actively worked the casting couch quid pro quo for personal gain are not the poster boys (girls) for the #METOO movement and remain pretty much out of the scrum. Some a little dishonestly rewrite their personal history of active participation to jump onto the victim bandwagon, that is now so fashionable.

But it’s corruption for sure.

"Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely."(Lord Acton).

All good points but again I am talking about all too easy acceptance and spread of false accusations because the pendulum has swung so far to one side. 

JR

 

[Phrazemaster]

I am about finished going down this rabbit hole, but some reportedly were physically raped, or roofied and then raped.

Yes, drugging and raping are a different matter altogether.

All good points but again I am talking about all too easy acceptance and spread of false accusations because the pendulum has swung so far to one side. 

JR

Yes - I totally agree. It’s easy to destroy a reputation with baseless  accusations. The court of public opinion is “guilty until proven innocent - and then still never quite exonerated even if proven innocent.”

The rub lies in this: what if the accusers are telling the truth? It’s a can of worms with no easy answers.

I still maintain that these issues should go through the courts before anyone is allowed to say anything publicly,

Mike

 

[JohnRoberts]

Yes, drugging and raping are a different matter altogether.
Yes - I totally agree. It’s easy to destroy a reputation with baseless  accusations. The court of public opinion is “guilty until proven innocent - and then still never quite exonerated even if proven innocent.”

The rub lies in this: what if the accusers are telling the truth? It’s a can of worms with no easy answers.

I still maintain that these issues should go through the courts before anyone is allowed to say anything publicly,

Mike

Along the lines of innocent unless proved guilty, how about Jessie Smollet being released without charges?

The prosecutors appeared to have a pile of evidence they presented to grand jury for indictments. 

Interesting times..

JR

 

[dmp]

Interestingly, Dershowitz never mentions the name Jeffery Epstein in his WSJ Op-ed.
Dershowitz not only defended Epstein but was friends and traveled with him on his private plane for years before Epstein's trial (nicknamed the Lolita Express).
Look into the sentencing deal of Epstein and it stinks.  Not only were the case docs buried, but in Epstein's deal, unindicted co-conspirators were given immunity. Sound a little fishy? 

Look up the flight logs to Epstein's plane and all the times Dershowitz traveled with him from the late '90s on. And with young girls on the flight logs.  Why should the wealthy and well connected not face justice, or at least investigations?  Why blanket immunity for unindicted co-conspirators? Something needs to happen, if the US legal system is going to fail because of political corruption. We are seeing the appointment of unqualified, corrupt judges all through the justice system.  That's the problem with letting it go through the courts.

 

[Phrazemaster]

Along the lines of innocent unless proved guilty, how about Jessie Smollet being released without charges?

The prosecutors appeared to have a pile of evidence they presented to grand jury for indictments. 

Interesting times..

JR

I just wonder what the coverup is here...a bribe? A gag order? A threat because he knew something? Someone is protecting him here obviously...but why?

 

[JohnRoberts]

I just wonder what the coverup is here...a bribe? A gag order? A threat because he knew something? Someone is protecting him here obviously...but why?

It appears that the rules are different for celebrity elites. 

Reportedly Michele Obama's chief of staff called the prosecutor on his behalf. This may be relatively innocent in terms of Chicago politics.

Also reportedly the family wanted the investigation handled by FBI instead of the Chicago police, that do not have a great reputation these days with the black community. The family should be more careful about what they wish for since Jessie reportedly committed some federal crimes too (something about mailing a white powder to where he worked, etc).

A FBI investigation is probably already/still going on, they don't talk about investigation in process. With celebrities they either choose to make a very public example of them (like Martha Stewart), or give them a friendly pass.... I suspect being Obama friends carries more weight in Chicago than DC these days.

The mayor another old friend fo the Obamas is talking about sending a bill to Smollett for the very expensive investigation into the apparently faux hate crime. Police resources better spent on reducing actual violent crime***.

JR

**** I have been critical of Chicago for years. Now for the second year in a row the murder rate is down... Keep up the good work Chicago.