Celebrity Allegations, #MeToo etc

I hope he rot in jail for this. i'm sure there are a lot of powerful people like him that did or are doing the same in Hollywood but not getting the justice they deserve.

The only thing bothering me in the story, is that some of the women, didn't talk about it because they were afraid for their careers, and that's extremly selfish for me as it meant he didn't face justice before and abused other women afterwards. only Rose Mcgowan did and she should be applauded as she didn't think about herself only.

The US is really a pathetic country re women treatement. even more so as it allows itself to judge other countries regarding this point.
 
Just seen James Corden's pretty rubbish jokes about HW really think it's unnecessary given how widespread this is becoming.

That said, I think Rose McGowan's reaction is quite frankly embarrassing. Going on about how CBS should donate or they're promoting a, "rape culture".

I understand rape is such a deplorable, horrendous, dignity-destroying crime that it can leave victims feeling such hatred and anger, but all of her responses on Twitter are so crass, so undignified that it could well result in public opinion turning on her.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
So would the authorities act if an official complaint is made by one of the women on a his word against theirs basis?
Click to expand...

They would absolutely investigate. They would interview witnesses, gather evidence, build a case, and place it before the DA. The DA decides whether to prosecute, based on the strength of the case.

Seeing this all happened a while ago, chances of trial happening are minute, unless there is a smoking gun (video evidence for example), or very strong circumstantial evidence.
 
Jericholyte2 said:
Just seen James Corden's pretty rubbish jokes about HW really think it's unnecessary given how widespread this is becoming.

That said, I think Rose McGowan's reaction is quite frankly embarrassing. Going on about how CBS should donate or they're promoting a, "rape culture".

I understand rape is such a deplorable, horrendous, dignity-destroying crime that it can leave victims feeling such hatred and anger, but all of her responses on Twitter are so crass, so undignified that it could well result in public opinion turning on her.
Click to expand...

I understand the feeling, basically we hit a stage of 'come on now, too much' even when we really shouldn't but like you said about rape, the feelings of hatred and anger are justified so she's entitled to this because it's utterly undignified.
 
adexkola said:
They would absolutely investigate. They would interview witnesses, gather evidence, build a case, and place it before the DA. The DA decides whether to prosecute, based on the strength of the case.

Seeing this all happened a while ago, chances of trial happening are minute, unless there is a smoking gun (video evidence for example), or very strong circumstantial evidence.
Click to expand...

With the historical sex abuse cases in the UK recently they got convictions based on the consistency of testimony from different sources, pertaining to sexual habits and descriptions of genitalia etc, is that unlikely to happen over there?
 
matherto said:
I understand the feeling, basically we hit a stage of 'come on now, too much' even when we really shouldn't but like you said about rape, the feelings of hatred and anger are justified so she's entitled to this because it's utterly undignified.
Click to expand...

I would also question why she's using things like #ROSEARMY, surely if this was purely about getting justice there are better / more appropriate labels to use than a self-serving hashtag like that.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
With the historical sex abuse cases in the UK recently they got convictions based on the consistency of testimony from different sources, pertaining to sexual habits and descriptions of genitalia etc, is that unlikely to happen over there?
Click to expand...

Do you have any examples? Just curious to see if UK legal vehicles used for those cases have ant equivalents in the US.
 
Classical Mechanic said:
The American legal system seems different though. I take it America wouldn’t extradite him to the UK if the police wanted to prosecute him for the alleged crimes committed here?
Click to expand...

How so? Isn't a woman's testimony enough for a conviction or does it need physical evidence too? I'm aware of the statute of limitations
 
WackyWengerWorld said:
How so? Isn't a woman's testimony enough for a conviction or does it need physical evidence too? I'm aware of the statute of limitations
Click to expand...

Not if he denied it. It would be her word against his, which obv. is not enough.
 
Buchan said:
Look at her hands when Weinstein is brought up. She's evidently uneasy speaking about him.

P.S. Gwyneth Paltrow comes across as such a sweetheart.
Click to expand...
20 years ago maybe. She comes across as a lunatic these days.
 
Javi said:
Not if he denied it. It would be her word against his, which obv. is not enough.
Click to expand...

It is the key evidence in most rape cases though. I mean physical evidence, such as sperm and physical tearing are only circumstancial. The only clear evidence is testimony in rape cases and how credible either witness is.

Now the only American cases I'm familiar with are Tyson and Stephen Avery (Making a Murderer). And Tyson's had vaginal tearing and sperm, alongside testimony. While Avery's only had a identity parade when he got wrongfully convicted.
 
I have to admit i have not read that much about this case. Did any of the women try to contact the authorities earlier? Did Weinstein somehow put pressure on them to keep quiet? This kind of domino effect is understandable, but with the amount of women that has come forward it's quite clear he should have been behind bars a long time ago. Like with Cosby, a lot of women suffered under him because it took such a long time to get it into the light

Hope both of them rot in jail for the rest of their lives
 
Scarecrow said:
20 years ago maybe. She comes across as a lunatic these days.
Click to expand...

Yeah, sweetheart my ass. She is on the immediate face of it, but between the 'you can hurt water's feelings' and dangerous jade vagina eggs she's not quite right.
Also this quote "I am who I am. I can't pretend to be somebody who earns $25,000 a year"
 
Genuine question - is what he's done actually rape, in the eyes of the law?

Not that it changes what he's done, but it obviously changes if anything can be done.
 
WackyWengerWorld said:
It is the key evidence in most rape cases though. I mean physical evidence, such as sperm and physical tearing are only circumstancial. The only clear evidence is testimony in rape cases and how credible either witness is.

Now the only American cases I'm familiar with are Tyson and Stephen Avery (Making a Murderer). And Tyson's had vaginal tearing and sperm, alongside testimony. While Avery's only had a identity parade when he got wrongfully convicted.
Click to expand...

Well there you have the issue with rape allegations. Theoretically there are other forms of evidence possible, such as video, audio, other witnesses etc. but that is rarely the case. With Weinstein it will certainely help that there is a whole group of people that have experienced things that point in that direction.
 
VeevaVee said:
Genuine question - is what he's done actually rape, in the eyes of the law?

Not that it changes what he's done, but it obviously changes if anything can be done.
Click to expand...

Not the things he is admitting but you assume that rape allegations involved forced penetration or something similar. Given the level of his scumbaggery it isn't much of stretch to think he went slightly further on occasion when pissed or the victim was a bit more terrified than usual. Assuming the allegations of rape are in jurisdictions where the statute of limitations hasn't expired he is going down as the entire world thinks he is a raping/sexually assaulting scumbag.
 
WackyWengerWorld said:
It is the key evidence in most rape cases though. I mean physical evidence, such as sperm and physical tearing are only circumstancial. The only clear evidence is testimony in rape cases and how credible either witness is.

Now the only American cases I'm familiar with are Tyson and Stephen Avery (Making a Murderer). And Tyson's had vaginal tearing and sperm, alongside testimony. While Avery's only had a identity parade when he got wrongfully convicted.
Click to expand...

Weinstein will have the best legal team money can buy. Getting a conviction will need a very strong case from the prosecution.
 
I am very pleased to read that Harvey Weinstein has been exposed and sacked before he had a chance to remake Ian Fleming’s Goldfinger. His casting of Goldfinger’s personal pilot Pussy Galore could have held up the production for months on end.
Click to expand...
 
Classical Mechanic said:
A brief overview from the BBC.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-36055744

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27192600

Notes

https://www.judiciary.gov.uk/wp-con...ntencing-remarks-hhj-leonard-r-v-clifford.pdf
Click to expand...

Cheers.

I am surprised he got convicted on so many counts. There is no doubt that Clifford's behavior was extremely predatory, but looking at the pdf, the only smoking gun is the letter found by his bedstand, sent by a victim, and multiple women confirming the size of his penis. You would think there's enough room in there for a competent defense attorney to introduce reasonable doubt. But it is possible that not all evidence presented is public knowledge.

Regarding Weinstein, even if 100 women accuse him of sexual harrassment/assault, he'll be put on trial for one charge at a time. And saying, "he's accused of raping 99 other women" isn't admissible in court. He'll be judged on the evidence pertaining to that victim alone. And if even one had video evidence, or multiple witnesses corroborating the story, or a facilitator who decided to come out and testify, he would have been put away by now.
 
To our American legal experts! Will his American actions probably go the way of a plea bargain or is HW's vehement denial mean this is likely to go to full trial?

I would imagine any UK legal procedings would wait if US started criminal proceredings?

Will the likelihood of a trial in USA depend on the statute of limitations for the likely offences and do these statutes apply equally across the states or do some have different periods?
 
ThierryHenry said:
In what way?
Click to expand...
I know it was a typo in the end but she is the lead actress in Polanski's next film. Obviously there should be huge sympathy for what happened to her but it pisses off me of that these people choose to work with him and should be condemned for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.