Harvey Weinstein scandal (Mod warning in op.)

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Hammer89 wrote: »

You're spot on but that's putting the cart way before the horse. We don't know about his profile, his money, his connections or whether he abused his position of power to subtly blackmail women for his sexual gains, do we? Only after we know these things can we gauge the Weinstein comparison and decide whether the 'IrishWeinstein' hashtag is valid. For me, it's completely stupid at the moment.

What she's alleging is similar to Weinstein's behaviour and happened in Ireland. What she's alleging is far far far more visible by making the comparison to Weinstein. I'd be a big believer in if it works, it's not stupid.

This thing of being more annoyed by the hashtag people choose to use to speak about sexual abuses than by the abuses themselves is stupid though.

Hammer89

Sabrina Future Burger wrote: »

What she's alleging is similar to Weinstein's behaviour and happened in Ireland. What she's alleging is far far far more visible by making the comparison to Weinstein. I'd be a big believer in if it works, it's not stupid.

This thing of being more annoyed by the hashtag people choose to use to speak about sexual abuses than by the abuses themselves is stupid though.

The alleged behaviour is similar but it's not only the behaviour which determines whether he's in the Weinstein bracket: It's the profile, the level of corruption involved, the horrendous abuse of power, the frequency, the amount of victims, the length of time his behaviour has gone unexposed. That's the crux of it.

Weinstein is a different level of scumbag and I can't see a well-known Irish figure being in that level, ticking all the same boxes as HW does.

pq0n1ct4ve8zf5

Hammer89 wrote: »

The alleged behaviour is similar but it's not only the behaviour which determines whether he's in the Weinstein bracket: It's the profile, the level of corruption involved, the horrendous abuse of power, the frequency, the amount of victims, the length of time his behaviour has gone unexposed. That's the crux of it.

Weinstein is a different level of scumbag and I can't see a well-known Irish figure being in that level, ticking all the same boxes as HW does.

Who died and made you boss of cruxes?

And it's a hashtag. On twitter. It's not written beside this man's face in a dictionary, it's not a news outlet reporting on him being charged. Which do you think will be more visible, #IrishWeinstein or #AllegedSerialHarasserInTheIrishMedia?

Twitter is an inherently reductive platform but it can be hugely useful for things like this.

strandroad

Hammer89 wrote: »

The alleged behaviour is similar but it's not only the behaviour which determines whether he's in the Weinstein bracket: It's the profile, the level of corruption involved, the horrendous abuse of power, the frequency, the amount of victims, the length of time his behaviour has gone unexposed. That's the crux of it.

Weinstein is a different level of scumbag and I can't see a well-known Irish figure being in that level, ticking all the same boxes as HW does.

Tweet at her to change it to #IrishMiniWeinstein if it helps you?
Is this really what you're taking away from her tweets?

strandroad

Billy86 wrote: »

So a male Irish celebrity/public figure who is both on Twitter and would have to be at least in their sixties...

Here's another thing unfolding:

https://twitter.com/gracedyas/status/923999107051655169

I’ve been thinking about Michael Colgan a lot lately. Michael ran The Gate theatre until recently.
...
After the Dublin Theatre Festival launch last year, the crowd retired to The Oak Bar on Dame St. Where I met Michael.
...
He started looking me up and down. He said “Have you lost weight?” I said “Yeah, I lost weight for my wedding. I just got married”. He said “You’ve lost so much weight, I’d almost have sex with you” I was taken aback, but not surprised. I said “Michael! You can’t say that to me!” He replied “What! I didn’t say I would **** you. You haven’t lost that much weight”.
...
I felt he was wrong to say that to me, and I felt I was wrong to let him. I started to think about confronting him. I bided my time. He was sitting too close to me. I asked my friend Jason Byrne to join us. I didn’t feel safe with Michael. I wanted a witness if I was going to confront him.
...
The conversation moved on to Waking The Feminists. Michael called someone a misogynist. I took my chance. I said “Michael, you can’t call him a misogynist. You are the biggest misogynist in Irish Theatre. All I need to say Michael, is to repeat what you said to me at the bar there 5 minutes ago, when you stated that you would have had sex with me, had I lost more weight. That is not appropriate Michael. It’s not an appropriate thing for a man in his sixties, a cultural leader, to say to a young female director at a professional occasion…” He said “Well Grace, as my mother always said, you won’t get very far in life if you can’t take a joke.” I said “That joke is not appropriate Michael.” My friend Jason asked “So hang on Michael, are you admitting that you said that?” He said “Yes I said it, but it was a joke.” I repeated that it was not appropriate.

Before I could finish talking Michael was up on his feet, roaring at me. He turned on a coin. He was now saying he never said any such thing. I gave as good as I got. He called me a liar. “I hate you, I hate you, I hate you. I never want to breathe the same air as you” he said. My friend Doireann asked him to calm down. “She’s a pig, she’s a pig, I’d never ever, ever want to have sex with her” he said. He was very angry. He screamed and shouted more. “I wouldn’t say that about that woman she’s a big woman I would never say that about a big woman.” Even in his denial, he was managing to insult me and shame me further. His defense? Of course I didn’t sexually harass her! I mean come on look at her. She’s fat.
...
I didn’t reply. I was spurred on by my moment of ‘calling him out’. I felt I was doing the right thing, like a good feminist. I wanted to complain to his board. I wanted to write an article like this. But more senior arts professionals told me not to, they warned me, he could ruin your life. Could this really be true? I didn’t want to find out. My peers bought me gin and tonics and asked if I was ok. Older women didn’t need to ask, they knew how I felt. They all had their Michael Colgan story. They shared them with me that night.

https://twitter.com/PlayFairIre/status/924043267011780609

https://twitter.com/lianbell/status/924190537539780608

Hammer89

strandroad wrote: »

Tweet at her to change it to #IrishMiniWeinstein if it helps you?
Is this really what you're taking away from her tweets?

Or she could just, like, not mention Weinstein's name at all? We regularly bash the newspapers in Ireland for the exact same type of sensationalism. That's what it is.

RabbleRouser2k

strandroad wrote: »

Here's another (or the same?) thing unfolding:

https://twitter.com/gracedyas/status/923999107051655169



https://twitter.com/PlayFairIre/status/924043267011780609

https://twitter.com/lianbell/status/924190537539780608

The last tweet there is a bit too ambiguous for my liking-it's from behind the bar, the person grabbing an actress buttocks could be her boyfriend/ husband.
Not discounting it happened-just from behind the bar, one can assume a lot of things.

Mr.Wemmick

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

The last tweet there is a bit too ambiguous for my liking-it's from behind the bar, the person grabbing an actress buttocks could be her boyfriend/ husband.
Not discounting it happened-just from behind the bar, one can assume a lot of things.

I worked in a theatre bar years back and as staff you know all the actors/performers, who they're with etc. They are in the bar night after night end of the show, and you know them as they're often allowed to get seconds/ last drink to make up for the fact that they're in much later than the audience.

If a boyfriend or husband grabbed his girlfriend/wife, you would barely notice as being together, they are relaxed with each other. However, from behind the bar if you see someone being grabbed who immediately is not comfortable and becomes embarrassed, you notice. You notice a lot.. and you know who the disgusting creeps are because their behaviour remains the same, night after night.

Outlaw Pete

Annabelle Scorria (who played one of Tony's girlfriends in the Sopranos) says Harvey raped her also.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jam8WMxi3rk

RabbleRouser2k

An interesting note by a journo on twitter-informing people that we don't have a first amendment like the US. If you name them on twitter, even if telling the whole truth, you could be sued. And as others note, you out them on twitter, it then makes it impossible to bring a case.

https://twitter.com/MarkPaulTimes/status/924359033498284032

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Interesting reading that and particularly that Rose donated the $100,000 to an abused shelter. Absolutely puts the settlement in a different context and one wonders why she herself didn't make that known before now given that she has taken criticism, both online and in articles, for having done so.

A few things though:

But yet this 2016 tweet would suggest a different narrative altogether:

https://twitter.com/rosemcgowan/status/786723576275664896

There's also a few other notes to the story that he doesn't include-again, to change the narrative. Casting McGowan might have been a big slap in the face to Harvey...but a bigger slap would have been a hit film.
But the film bombed. Rodriguez is a cheap filmmaker(always had small budgets-cos he does so much himself), it wasn't a huge loss to Miramax. But for everyone else, it was a career killer (Josh Brolin, Bruce Willis, and Kurt Russell were the only ones who survived, unscathed-but they were the most high profile in that film).
McGowan's image, at the time was of the 'homewrecker'-Rodriguez left his wife and 5 kids to be with her. And there was a lot of focus on their image. (It takes two to tango, btw-RR is as responsible as Rose).

Well, the film comes out-it bombs. There were questions about how it was promoted as well. (People watched Death Proof, and left the cinema-they didn't know Planet Terror was afterwards, and the movies were a double bill). And since Rose was the face of Planet Terror-she was attached to the bomb.
A proposed Red Sonya movie with her in the lead didn't happen-Rodriguez planned it with a 75 million budget. She had a supporting role in a Conan remake/ reboot (with Jason Mamoa) which cost 90 million-and that flopped. Rodriguez and her split up sometime around then.
And then she was involved in a car accident, which meant facial reconstruction...and that was all she wrote.

RabbleRouser2k

I have to add she's being called out on twitter for being irresponsible-Ciara Kelly I mean.

Shurimgreat

Billy86 wrote: »

So a male Irish celebrity/public figure who is both on Twitter and would have to be at least in their sixties...

She should just go to the gardai. Otherwise she is putting a question mark over every male celebrity in their 60s which isn't fair. I hate when people do that, make insinuations without naming names or providing evidence.

If there is a rapist out there people deserve to know who it is.

Hammer89

Eamon Dunphy farted on me in a pub 16 years ago #MeToo #IrishWeinstein #SpeakUp

brooke 2

Wibbs wrote: »

Y'know the way America has class action suits where(as I understand it) a group of individuals can come together as one legal entity and sue a company or individual. If the authorities are dragging their heels for whatever reason, could a group of women(and women and men witnesses) come together and sue him and the company?

The only women I can think of that have gone to the authorities are the English lass Anthony and the Italian model? Though said model got the repellent bastard on tape with the help of the NYPD and the bastard got the investigation stopped and "coincidently" the DA involved got a nice little cash injection into their political campaign. Coincidently. Heads should roll over that, but won't. I suspect that this story goes even deeper and with many more heads that could be in the firing line and the outpouring of tutting by some is in the hope that people have short memories and it'll blow over. Money talks and in American society it positively fcuking screams. In Hollywood that's all there is and more so than ever. The "art" is the thin crust on top of a toilet filled with excrement. Poke through it and the stench comes out.


It seems crazy to me that this guy is in the open now with literally dozens of women accusing him and with detail and contemporary witnesses and yet the authorities seem to be doing little. I suspect whatever hope there is to charge this bastard it'll come from outside the US, which hopefully shames authorities within the US into actually doing something.

The Italian model went to the police. They listened to her. Gave her a wire to wear when she went back to Weinstein the following night. Yet, even
though the DA, Cyrus Vance Jr., heard this, he was 'given a donation' by one of Weinstein's handlers and did not prosecute. And people wonder and cry:
'Why did they not go to the police?' THIS is what happens when the person who rapes you is rich and powerful! :mad:

RabbleRouser2k

Shurimgreat wrote: »

She should just go to the gardai. Otherwise she is putting a question mark over every male celebrity in their 60s which isn't fair. I hate when people do that, make insinuations without naming names or providing evidence.

If there is a rapist out there people deserve to know who it is.

True-and on twitter, people are noting how as a GP she should report it, but she also can claim she's a 'journalist' and thus she is not required to divulge her source.

Tbqh, it's incredibly irresponsible of her to divulge such information on a public forum-she's left herself open to legal trouble, especially if someone comes forward and states 'you implied it was me'-and the problem that arises is that she has now thrown doubt onto the actual guilty party.
Twitter does love to bring out the vigilantes, but what this further proves is that botox kills brain cells.

nervous_twitch

strandroad wrote: »

Billy86 wrote: »

So a male Irish celebrity/public figure who is both on Twitter and would have to be at least in their sixties...

Here's another thing unfolding:

https://twitter.com/gracedyas/status/923999107051655169

I’ve been thinking about Michael Colgan a lot lately.  Michael ran The Gate theatre until recently.
...
After the Dublin Theatre Festival launch last year, the crowd retired to The Oak Bar on Dame St. Where I met Michael.
...
He started looking me up and down. He said “Have you lost weight?” I said “Yeah, I lost weight for my wedding. I just got married”. He said “You’ve lost so much weight, I’d almost have sex with you” I was taken aback, but not surprised. I said “Michael! You can’t say that to me!” He replied “What! I didn’t say I would **** you. You haven’t lost that much weight”.
...
I felt he was wrong to say that to me, and I felt I was wrong to let him. I started to think about confronting him. I bided my time. He was sitting too close to me. I asked my friend Jason Byrne to join us. I didn’t feel safe with Michael. I wanted a witness if I was going to confront him.
...
The conversation moved on to Waking The Feminists. Michael called someone a misogynist. I took my chance. I said “Michael, you can’t call him a misogynist. You are the biggest misogynist in Irish Theatre. All I need to say Michael, is to repeat what you said to me at the bar there 5 minutes ago, when you stated that you would have had sex with me, had I lost more weight. That is not appropriate Michael. It’s not an appropriate thing for a man in his sixties, a cultural leader, to say to a young female director at a professional occasion…”  He said “Well Grace, as my mother always said, you won’t get very far in life if you can’t take a joke.” I said “That joke is not appropriate Michael.” My friend Jason asked “So hang on Michael, are you admitting that you said that?” He said “Yes I said it, but it was a joke.” I repeated that it was not appropriate.

Before I could finish talking Michael was up on his feet, roaring at me. He turned on a coin. He was now saying he never said any such thing. I gave as good as I got. He called me a liar. “I hate you, I hate you, I hate you. I never want to breathe the same air as you” he said. My friend Doireann asked him to calm down. “She’s a pig, she’s a pig, I’d never ever, ever want to have sex with her” he said. He was very angry. He screamed and shouted more. “I wouldn’t say that about that woman she’s a big woman I would never say that about a big woman.” Even in his denial, he was managing to insult me and shame me further. His defense? Of course I didn’t sexually harass her! I mean come on look at her. She’s fat.
...
I didn’t reply. I was spurred on by my moment of ‘calling him out’. I felt I was doing the right thing, like a good feminist. I wanted to complain to his board. I wanted to write an article like this. But more senior arts professionals told me not to, they warned me, he could ruin your life. Could this really be true? I didn’t want to find out. My peers bought me gin and tonics and asked if I was ok. Older women didn’t need to ask, they knew how I felt. They all had their Michael Colgan story. They shared them with me that night.

https://twitter.com/PlayFairIre/status/924043267011780609

s]]


https://twitter.com/lianbell/status/924190537539780608

Such lamentable bull****. Feminists don't even know what they are anymore.

RabbleRouser2k

Hammer89 wrote: »

Eamon Dunphy farted on me in a pub 16 years ago #MeToo #IrishWeinstein #SpeakUp

Let me guess-you can still smell it?

BorneTobyWilde

How can someone who clearly is a serial rapist be walking free.

RabbleRouser2k

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

How can someone who clearly is a serial rapist be walking free.

Cos he's a rich serial rapist. Much different to someone like Larry Murphy-in that both are scumbags, but one has hundreds of millions in the bank.

brooke 2

strandroad wrote: »

This should be required reading for anyone who still keeps asking why wouldn't they report him, why would they deal with him afterwards etc. because Annabela Sciorra, Daryl Hannah, Ellen Barkin, Rosie Perez all have stories to explain that:



This retaliation was just for the rape she kept secret.

Also, f*ck George Hook and his enablers. This is what happens when you "accept your part of the blame":

My God! Just read that!! :eek::mad:

Those people who criticise women for not speaking out about their 'long ago' rapes should definitely read that New Yorker article by Ronan Farrow.

Crea

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

True-and on twitter, people are noting how as a GP she should report it, but she also can claim she's a 'journalist' and thus she is not required to divulge her source.

Tbqh, it's incredibly irresponsible of her to divulge such information on a public forum-she's left herself open to legal trouble, especially if someone comes forward and states 'you implied it was me'-and the problem that arises is that she has now thrown doubt onto the actual guilty party.
Twitter does love to bring out the vigilantes, but what this further proves is that botox kills brain cells.

Hearsay has no validity in law

mzungu

Hammer89 wrote: »

Eamon Dunphy farted on me in a pub 16 years ago

A good night out, but not a great night out.

Billy86

Somewhat unrelated, but as Weinstein was based in NY this kind of thing wouldn't be the most helpful:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/new-york-city-brooklyn-rape-police-officers-eddie-martins-richard-halls-a8024541.html

Two New York police officers have been charged with allegedly raping a handcuffed teenage girl in their van.

Officers Eddie Martins and Richard Halls are accused of having sex with the 18-year-old after arresting her in south Brooklyn.

Both men have been indicted on first-degree rape charges after a week-long hearing which culminated with a grand jury vote on Friday, The New York Post reported.

This is far, far from the first time the NYPD have been caught up in issues like this. Not to say they would rape a known actress who came to complain, but it does make you wonder how serious they may take allegations especially against someone as powerful as Weinstein before it became a publicly known issue.

Outlaw Pete

J

brooke 2 wrote: »

The Italian model went to the police. They listened to her. Gave her a wire to wear when she went back to Weinstein the following night. Yet, even
though the DA, Cyrus Vance Jr., heard this, he was bribed by one of Weinstein's handlers and did not prosecute. And people wonder and cry:
'Why did they not go to the police?' THIS is what happens when the person who rapes you is rich and powerful! :mad:

Well, that money Vance received was not a bribe it was a "campaign donation" (are you trying to get Boards sued or something ) and was made months afterwards.

The case would have been laughed out of court also and so it's not at all surprising that they didn't prosecute. To say that girl had poor credibility would be an understatement. She also accepted a large payment from Harvey / the Weinstein Co.

So, no, this is not a good reflection of what would have happened had someone who was genuinely sexually assaulted or raped gone to the police. Intially, perhaps, but how this ended up playing out was more about the actions, both past and recent, of the complainant.

Checkmate19

He is a scumbag. But why has it taken this long. Money etc. He is a pure scumbag but those who didnt speak out and knew are in the loop and are in the frame.

Checkmate19

This **** was known. Like tiger woods **** jimmy saville ****. Its known.

Checkmate19

They are all coming out to protect careers etc. Its pure bollix.

Checkmate19

He was a scumbag but why not out him on the day etc. It was known. They are all have to come out because they knew whats what. Tiger woods scandal. The train is leaving the station. puRE AND UTTTER BOLLIX.

brooke 2

Hammer89 wrote: »

Eamon Dunphy farted on me in a pub 16 years ago #MeToo #IrishWeinstein #SpeakUp

Random!

brooke 2

nervous_twitch wrote: »

Such lamentable bull****. Feminists don't even know what they are anymore.

What I found most intriguing about that article was how 'untouchable' he was perceived to have been, with all his connections to judges, newspaper editors
and other powerful people. Even if she had been raped, which she was not, the 'advice' given to her would have been the same. :mad:

brooke 2

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

J

Well, that money Vance received was not a bribe it was a "campaign donation" (are you trying to get Boards sued or something ) and was made months afterwards.

The case would have been laughed out of court also and so it's not at all surprising that they didn't prosecute. To say that girl had poor credibility would be an understatement. She also accepted a large payment from Harvey / the Weinstein Co.

So, no, this is not a good reflection of what would have happened had someone who was genuinely sexually assaulted or raped gone to the police. Intially, perhaps, but how this ended up playing out was more about the actions, both past and recent, of the complainant.

Right. It was a 'campaign donation'!

RabbleRouser2k

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5027757/Coronation-Street-Bruno-Langley-sacked-assault-claim.html

A Corrie actor's been fired for allegations of sexual assault.

And a second model has come forward claiming David Blaine raped her.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5028027/David-Blaine-face-police-investigation.html

retro:electro

It doesn't sit right with me that someone can lose their job on the basis of an allegation alone. I'm not talking about Harvey, we all know the score there. But yer man from Corrie above. An allegation of sexual assault against him and job done and dusted without even any due process?

RabbleRouser2k

Separate post as I'm wondering if people are overreacting, or what. Adam Sandler puts hand on actress knee, then puts hand on other actress knee-thus now he's accused of many things.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5027717/Twitter-slams-Adam-Sandler-touches-Claire-Foy-s-knee.html

Outlaw Pete

Anyone serious about that knee touching being inappropriate needs to get a life.

Sure Gwyneth Paltrow once cupped Lee Mack's balls on there.

RabbleRouser2k

anna080 wrote: »

It doesn't sit right with me that someone can lose their job on the basis of an allegation alone. I'm not talking about Harvey, we all know the score there. But yer man from Corrie above. An allegation of sexual assault against him and job done and dusted without even any due process?

We have to wonder-was it just 'one' time tho? It might have happened before, leading to an apology and/ or compensation.

Corrie's been very strict-to say the least-when it comes to rape. Chris Fountain was fired when it was discovered he had an alter ego that rapped about rape. He 'joked' about it-which is less serious than the allegations against Tonioli.

retro:electro

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

We have to wonder-was it just 'one' time tho? It might have happened before, leading to an apology and/ or compensation.

Corrie's been very strict-to say the least-when it comes to rape. Chris Fountain was fired when it was discovered he had an alter ego that rapped about rape. He 'joked' about it-which is less serious than the allegations against Tonioli.

But the actors who play Kevin and Ken were only ever suspended from production while their cases were ongoing. Michael's (Kevin's) accusations in particular were quite harrowing.
Sourcing the Daily Mail but sure..

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2278929/Michael-Le-Vell-Coronation-Streets-Kevin-Webster-charged-19-child-sex-offences-including-rape.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2317606/Bill-Roache-arrested-Coronation-Streets-Ken-Barlow-charged-rape-15-year-old-girl-1967.html

They are both back in the show now after acquittal- but Bruno gets the sack based (from what I've read) on a single allegation? That doesn't seem fair to me.

Outlaw Pete

anna080 wrote: »

...but Bruno gets the sack based (from what I've read) on an allegation that has yet to have police involvement? That doesn't seem fair to me.

Same happened with John Leslie. No police involvement. Don't think he has worked in TV since.

RabbleRouser2k

anna080 wrote: »

But the actors who play Kevin and Ken were only suspended from production while their cases were ongoing. Michael's (Kevin's) accusations in particular were quite harrowing.
Sourcing the Daily Mail but sure..

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2278929/Michael-Le-Vell-Coronation-Streets-Kevin-Webster-charged-19-child-sex-offences-including-rape.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2317606/Bill-Roache-arrested-Coronation-Streets-Ken-Barlow-charged-rape-15-year-old-girl-1967.html

They are both back in the show now after acquittal- but Bruno gets the sack based (from what I've read) on an allegation that has yet to have police involvement? That doesn't seem fair to me.

Oh it's completely unfair-I agree. A suspension without pay would have been more fitting, whilst the allegation was investigated. But there is this sort of 'climate' of suspicion atm-even a hint of an allegation gets you fired.
But that he took his firing so relatively easy...that's what made me suspicious.

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Same happened with John Leslie. No police involvement. Don't think he has worked in TV since.

Au contraire-there was a very, very complex and long investigation, with police involved, a court case-it went to either a trial, or the British equivalent of 'historical' trial. (I don't know the correct name). He was vindicated, but by then his name had been dragged through the mud, he'd been accused of all sorts, and it also was the beginning of the end of Ulrika Jonsson's career. (She wrote about a rape in her book, a presenter accidentally named Leslie on a TV show, based on bad information, and it all kicked off-none of Leslie's exes came forward to say anything good about him either-literally let him hang out to dry). Well, she was sorta seen as the woman who ruined his life-she could have come forward and said 'it wasn't him'-instead, she had a book to sell...
She got a few tv gigs afterwards-the UK version of the Bachelor, where she ran off with him, and married him-then divorced him a year or two later. But the stain of dragging Leslie through the mud...it never left her.
And it never left Leslie-mud sticks, and he was ruined. I think he works in property now.

Outlaw Pete

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Au contraire-there was a very, very complex and long investigation, with police involved, a court case-it went to either a trial, or the British equivalent of 'historical' trial. (I don't know the correct name). He was vindicated, but by then..........

Yes, but all of that happened AFTER he was sacked. John was sacked by ITV the same week the allegations began circulating.

Leslie, 37, was sacked as the presenter of ITV1's This Morning programme earlier today following a week of damaging tabloid reports about his private life.

He has so far kept silent but manager John Noel said tonight that his client had gone to police "of his own initiative".

ITV bosses said they decided to terminate Leslie's contract after almost a week of bewildering silence from the presenter, who was given an unscheduled break from the show last Thursday to deal with "personal matters.

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2002/oct/30/broadcasting

padser

anna080 wrote: »

But the actors who play Kevin and Ken were only ever suspended from production while their cases were ongoing. Michael's (Kevin's) accusations in particular were quite harrowing.
Sourcing the Daily Mail but sure..

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2278929/Michael-Le-Vell-Coronation-Streets-Kevin-Webster-charged-19-child-sex-offences-including-rape.html

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2317606/Bill-Roache-arrested-Coronation-Streets-Ken-Barlow-charged-rape-15-year-old-girl-1967.html

They are both back in the show now after acquittal- but Bruno gets the sack based (from what I've read) on an allegation that has yet to have police involvement? That doesn't seem fair to me.

It doesn't seem fair to you, because it's not.

We have moved into a place where unproven allegations regularly cost men (it's always men) their jobs either permanently or temporarily pending an investigation.

While there are some situations where it's necessary (e.g. a teacher) in most cases (e.g. a t.v. show) it's not.

It's wrong - and just because the it's in response to another wrong (sexual assault) doesn't make it suddenly right.

People are entitled to be proven guilty before being punished.

Wibbs

anna080 wrote: »

It doesn't sit right with me that someone can lose their job on the basis of an allegation alone. I'm not talking about Harvey, we all know the score there. But yer man from Corrie above. An allegation of sexual assault against him and job done and dusted without even any due process?

It's very unfair and worrying with it. On the one hand we have Weinstein who has an avalanche of accusations with a fair bit of corroboration on top and likely background police investigations walking about in "therapy", yet a single uncorroborated accusation has some other guy fired?

padser

padser wrote: »

People are entitled to be proven guilty before being punished.

Ah no, that's not right at all.

People are, however, entitled to be investigated before being punished, so the employer can conduct it's own disciplinary hearing if it happened in the work place. Alternatively, a contract may provide for a suspension with pay in certain instances.

retro:electro

Wibbs wrote: »

It's very unfair and worrying with it. On the one hand we have Weinstein who has an avalanche of accusations with a fair bit of corroboration on top and likely background police investigations walking about in "therapy", yet a single uncorroborated accusation has some other guy fired?

It's just so wrong. Imagine if I rocked into your work tomorrow and accused you, or your brother or your father of something- and on the basis of that allegation alone you/they got the sack! It's just so fcuked up. It's the complete opposite of the premise of our justice system.
What is the point in even having courts of law if a single accusation alone can consequentially lose you your livelihood.
It's really worrying.

pjohnson

In this new modern world any mention of "rape" may aswell be a instant death sentence for the accused.

IF they are guilty then they deserve it but if they are innocent they still have the same fate. Its not rocket science to realise not 100% of all claims are 100% true. Yet certain people insist they are always true and should never ever be investigated/questioned. Bizzare but suits an agenda I guess.

retro:electro

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

Separate post as I'm wondering if people are overreacting, or what. Adam Sandler puts hand on actress knee, then puts hand on other actress knee-thus now he's accused of many things.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-5027717/Twitter-slams-Adam-Sandler-touches-Claire-Foy-s-knee.html

Oh my god. So now harmless human contact is considered shameful? People have completely lost the run of themselves. Stop the world and let me off please!

Mr.Wemmick

anna080 wrote: »

Oh my god. So now harmless human contact is considered shameful? People have completely lost the run of themselves. Stop the world and let me off please!

It's the pendulum swing of reaction. Very soon it will all be seen nonsense and we can throw the rapes and assaults out the window and forget them, along with the casual knee touch.

There is no doubt, a man, who is not a husband/ boyfriend, should not casually touch anyone's knee like that. It is really creepy, very inappropriate and causes embarrassment and stress.. harmless contact would be if you touch someone's hand or shoulder/arm in a normal situation/context e.g to get their attention - appropriate and very normal.

retro:electro

Mr.Wemmick wrote: »

It's the pendulum swing of reaction. Very soon it will all be seen nonsense and we can throw the rapes and assaults out the window and forget them, along with the casual knee touch.

There is no doubt, a man, who is not a husband/ boyfriend, should not casually touch anyone's knee like that. It is really creepy, very inappropriate and causes embarrassment and stress.. harmless contact would be if you touch someone's hand or shoulder/arm in a normal situation/context e.g to get their attention - appropriate and very normal.

Did you watch the clip? He did it first as he was referring to her, and then there was an awkward moment where he playfully did it again because he moved his hand just as she was about to jokingly rest hers on his.
A total non event.
But I guess if you were looking to be outraged it's prime fodder.

Mr.Wemmick

anna080 wrote: »

Did you watch the clip? He did it first as he was referring to her, and then there was an awkward moment where he playfully did it again because he moved his hand just as she was about to jokingly rest hers on his.
A total non event.
But I guess if you were looking to be outraged it's prime fodder.

I am not talking about that particular incident, but any casual knee touch which is not wanted, unexpected and inappropriate is not acceptable at all.

At the end of the day, no one knows Sandler and Foy relationship, they could be shagging each other brains out, so that clip is not a measurement of anything.

But I guess it's fodder for someone to be outraged at the perceived outrage of that clip.

BorneTobyWilde

Sandler was talking about his mother and put his hand on her knee, she then went to put her hand on his hand, but he moved it before she could, so he moved it back so she could put her hand on his. It was a comfort moment, not him being over powering and arrogant.