Crime 30 years to life for Danny Masterson

[terrapin]

Yes, yes- you sound like as enlightened as you hope every one thinks you are. Congratulations. In this country though, its supposed to be that you're innocent until prove guilty. I hope you get the same courtesy if an accusation is leveled at you or someone close to you and the smarmy army doesn't decide your case for you because they don't like you religion or political affiliation.

You are innocent until proven guilty in this country. It's just that if a left wing person is accused of being guilty many right wingers believe them and if a right-wing person is PROVEN guilty, it's the leftist courts conspiracy!!


The reason I know it's BS on here is because it's always divided between partisan lines. And the people on the right seem to know better than the judge, the jury and all the evidence that was presented in court..... every time.

I don't see how anybody coming from the outside looking in could see that as a credible stance or approach that the right wing takes on this kind of thing.... It's obviously totally biased.

Many right wing men also seem to think that because sometimes women lie all women are lying...

I didn't name any names so if that's not you don't feel accused. But let's not pretend there's not a lot of that going around on sherfront.

The rest of your post is just slander so I won't reply to it.

 

[terrapin]

#Believeallwomen goes further than celebs. College kids were getting jammed up in that shit for having one night stands after a party or bar run or whatever, and the lucky ones needed irrefutable video evidence to clear them...unlike the women who needed a mere allegation to condemn them.

This whole dynamic is dumb. If you believe you were raped, go to the police immediately. The whole "It's so very hard for victims to come forward", isn't without merit, but it should not be a catch all rationale to believe all accusers, no matter what. That's just a green light to burn anyone you ever came into contact with.

As for this guy, he doesn't seem like a boy scout, and if I were a betting man, I'd say he probably crossed a line or two, but to give him 30 years over he said/she said, is a bit much. Nobody can ever know for sure. I'd like a system where if you bring charges like these that way past a reasonable time frame, it should not carry life destroying prison terms. If you were reporting an armed robbery from 10 or 20 years ago, with nothing more than your word, you'd be laughed out of the police station, let alone court.

its not he said she said in this case though.... its multiple she's independently coming to authorities and having similar stories which make their stories more credible. its the same with historical documents are verified... if we have enough versions from different sources it is possible to discern truth from falsehood.

also women dont come forward for losts of reasons. i know a woman presently who was probably raped 20 times in her 20's. she drank a lot and hung around in bars and had and saw a LOT of rapes as defined by a girl or woman too drunk to give consent and or passed out. but she is 40 years old and is on a deep meditation path and is slowly coming out of denial and repression about what happened. she just minimized all of it in her own mind. she was once pushed against a wall in a bathroom and raped by a man and she told me her whole body froze and she could not move or speak.... she also just became numb to it after so long.

presently she is just remembering it all and feeling all of those repressed feelings and remembering all of the dozens of things she had pushed away. it will be ten years before its all healed. she had a terrible home life that was repressive and abusive religiously and so had no support at home and just got lost and eaten by the degenerates who do that kind of thing and live that kind of life.

she is not trying to get money from anyone... she is just experiencing ptsd and trauma from all of it finally coming to the surface and thats thanks to finding a deep spiritual path. ive known plenty of women like her. they are not all lying.

this is a good description of how this kind of thing unfolds for many women a few or even many years down the line.... incidentally lots of men saw/knew this kind of thing was happening and NONE of them turned in any of the rapists either.. its a culture in some crowds.

 

[Seano]

You are innocent until proven guilty in this country. It's just that if a left wing person is accused of being guilty many right wingers believe them and if a right-wing person is PROVEN guilty, it's the leftist courts conspiracy!!


The reason I know it's BS on here is because it's always divided between partisan lines. And the people on the right seem to know better than the judge, the jury and all the evidence that was presented in court..... every time.

I don't see how anybody coming from the outside looking in could see that as a credible stance or approach that the right wing takes on this kind of thing.... It's obviously totally biased.

Many right wing men also seem to think that because sometimes women lie all women are lying...

I didn't name any names so if that's not you don't feel accused. But let's not pretend there's not a lot of that going around on sherfront.

The rest of your post is just slander so I won't reply to it.

But its you that slandered people of a certain political stance, then you go on to whine about slander. I bet you never see it in yourself, what you accuse others of that you literally just did yourself. Sex trafficking, rape, etc aren't partisan issues. You can't pretend to be above it all while taking part in it, dope.

 

[terrapin]

But its you that slandered people of a certain political stance, then you go on to whine about slander. I bet you never see it in yourself, what you accuse others of that you literally just did yourself. Sex trafficking, rape, etc aren't partisan issues. You can't pretend to be above it all while taking part in it, dope.

im sorry i generalized. i did make it sound like it was all right leaning people. it isn't.... i sincerely apologize. i have gone back and edited that out. its only a certain group of right wing people who seem to be blind on this issue.

this is a partisan issue for many on the right though and its just terrible to witness. you should be able to call that out as easily as i can call out the intellectual dishonestly and willful blindness of the left when it comes to debating honestly the issues with the trans movement. its hypocritical and willfully blind even and children are paying a permanent cost because of it along with all kinds of other harms to society and especially women....

@Seano i also want you to know that i was speaking hypercritically and irresponsibly when i made that joke at the rights expense. i dont think all people on the right share any particular negative characteristic and should not have jested in such a way. im glad you pointed it out to me man!!

 

[HereticBD]

presently she is just remembering it all and feeling all of those repressed feelings and remembering all of the dozens of things she had pushed away.

I'm not saying she's not legit, but here's the rub. You're saying she was a drinker. How solid is her memory years after the fact, let alone in the moment? Solid enough for a friend? Sure. You're obviously gonna support her. How solid is it supposed to be for a jury? If I'm on a jury, I'm just supposed to believe this admitted drinker that everything is legit? She also sounds depressed. Depressed people find reasons to blame their depression on others, real or imagined all the time. I'm supposed to just believe her because she's all sad or some shit?

This is not how the law should work. It shouldn't be based on mere emotional compassion for a victim, with little to no actual evidence of their claims. If that's the case, it leaves the system open for manipulation by bad actors. Even you can't be sure of her claims, as you preface it with "probably". That's not good enough to lock someone up for the rest of their life, IMO. There shouldn't be any question, if you're gonna condemn someone like that. Certainly not claims that are decades old.

 

[terrapin]

I'm not saying she's not legit, but here's the rub. You're saying she was a drinker. How solid is her memory years after the fact, let alone in the moment? Solid enough for a friend? Sure. You're obviously gonna support her. How solid is it supposed to be for a jury? If I'm on a jury, I'm just supposed to believe this admitted drinker that everything is legit? She also sounds depressed. Depressed people find reasons to blame their depression on others, real or imagined all the time. I'm supposed to just believe her because she's all sad or some shit?

This is not how the law should work. It shouldn't be based on mere emotional compassion for a victim, with little to no actual evidence of their claims. If that's the case, it leaves the system open for manipulation by bad actors. Even you can't be sure of her claims, as you preface it with "probably". That's not good enough to lock someone up for the rest of their life, IMO. There shouldn't be any question, if you're gonna condemn someone like that. Certainly not claims that are decades old

I'm not saying she's not legit, but here's the rub. You're saying she was a drinker. How solid is her memory years after the fact, let alone in the moment? Solid enough for a friend? Sure. You're obviously gonna support her. How solid is it supposed to be for a jury? If I'm on a jury, I'm just supposed to believe this admitted drinker that everything is legit? She also sounds depressed. Depressed people find reasons to blame their depression on others, real or imagined all the time. I'm supposed to just believe her because she's all sad or some shit?

This is not how the law should work. It shouldn't be based on mere emotional compassion for a victim, with little to no actual evidence of their claims. If that's the case, it leaves the system open for manipulation by bad actors. Even you can't be sure of her claims, as you preface it with "probably". That's not good enough to lock someone up for the rest of their life, IMO. There shouldn't be any question, if you're gonna condemn someone like that. Certainly not claims that are decades old.

She doesn't consider any foggy memories as reliable at all. That's pretty much just a basic standard practice in any kind of spiritual work that we or any responsible group does.

But she has extremely clear memories too that are not foggy and never have been. These aren't memories that she couldn't recall 10 years ago... These are memories she didn't recall 10 years ago and there's a big difference between those two things man.... Could not recall, suggests a repression so deep it's completely gone from the memory. Didn't recall implies a suppression that only keeps that memory from surfacing fully consciously and comes up once in a while anyway through the years but it's just sort of brushed aside.

And as far as your criticism of the justice system well I agree completely. I think the contradiction between our justice system and what we require for proof on any other topic is ridiculous.... Just look at the hacks that come in the name of science in certain threads requiring absolute proof of everything even though they don't require that kind of proof anywhere else in their lives ever... Even in the justice system even in scientific theory!!!

And personal bias gets in the way often, which is why they vet jurors as thoroughly as possible for biases that they know statistically lead to bad results.

But I think your just saying there is no perfect system. And you're right, there isn't one and yet we have to do our best and trudge along or else people would either always be found guilty or always be found innocent....


Where I see bias on sherdog in profound ways is either the system people, the Democrats who love systems and institutions, are siding too often with the establishment because that's who they identify with or the republicans often siding against because that's who they identify against. This example only goes for rape allegations. It goes different ways for different subjects.

But on the topic of rape, it just seems to me that many Republicans are way more likely to side with the man than the woman in general... and in any given case they could be right but there is certainly an obvious bias that I see there.


I see the same bias with left leaning people being unable to analyze data on the transgender issue or even to have an intelligent discussion on it. And since we know so many people on here, we know that many of them are quite intelligent and yet they seem unable in any way to be willing to think clearly about the issue because of an emotional bias against the right and to be honest, some true bigotry that they see on the right in some people.

Trans activists have capitalized on that amount of bigotry that is there and paint the whole opposition as bigoted. They have lied and exaggerated and straw manned and slandered all in an attempt not to have to discuss the ideas and they have used that bigotry that they find on the right to paint a broad brush on everyone.

But intelligent people on the left should easily see through that and yet we don't see very much of that on here ever. That's because of bias. They are biased to listen to experts even when experts are wrong like in Travistock in europe. And they are biased against the bigotry on the right to an extreme that keeps them from thinking clearly or even thinking deeply about the issue at all.

Edit.
When I said she hs probably been raped 20 times, it's just because I don't remember what she said. Not because I don't believe her. I'm 100% certain that she was raped and that she's not making anything up because she follows standard good practice by denying any foggy memories at all.

 

[Hog-train]

There was overwhelming evidence? I’ve asked repeatedly for the full story.

There's so much to go over. There were plenty of eyewitnesses from back then as well as Scientology records and reports from when the accuser confronted Masterson.

Jane Doe #2 had 4 witnesses that testified she told them in 2004 what Masterson did.

This video explains all the evidence. Chapter 3 and 4 deals with the evidence and verdict. There's a lot more than just 3 women telling stories from 20 years ago.

 

[Madmick]

Although I'm open to be corrected, that's not what I read.

I read Jane Doe #1, later identified as Christina Brixler, reported to higher ups about rape and then subsequently reported to the cops in 2004.

Jane Doe #3 said she reported to a Scientology executive in 2003 and then Scientology ethics officer Miranda Scoggins. She was supposedly put into an ethics program as a result.

I'm not falling for any trap by just glancing at a headline. You're just making an assumption that I am.

You're barking up the wrong tree. I evaluate cases based on evidence and am not swayed by biased headlines. I treat all cases individually and do not go by politics at all. Or what any media source with a political bent says at face value.

For example, I knew the Columbia mattress girl was a lying piece of shit. Because I go by evidence, not what mainstream media tells me. I knew Jonathan Majors got railroaded. I knew Amber heard was a lying piece of shit years before the trial. I knew Marilyn Manson got completely fucked. Kobe Bryant was a blatant money grab. And so was Trevor Bauer. I'm well aware how men, especially famous ones, can be railroaded with just allegations.

But in this case, I think he did it.

Seems you have pre-determined bias actually.

And as I said, there are two women. As I pointed out, Jane Doe #3, the other woman who claimed she reported to Scientology higher-ups back in 2003, with her claim about an ethics program, didn't relay this claim until the present day. Nowhere did I see this claim of formal church admonishment substantiated. Only the first woman, the one who reported it to the cops, made it somewhat contemporaneous to the crime prior to the pitchforks being raised against Masterson on the back of Remini's trending documentary.

I addressed all of this in the other thread.

 

[Hog-train]

And as I said, there are two women. As I pointed out, Jane Doe #3, the other woman who claimed she reported to Scientology higher-ups back in 2003, with her claim about an ethics program, didn't relay this claim until the present day. Nowhere did I see this claim of formal church admonishment substantiated. Only the first woman, the one who reported it to the cops, made it somewhat contemporaneous to the crime prior to the pitchforks being raised against Masterson on the back of Remini's trending documentary.

I addressed all of this in the other thread.

What do you mean by didn't relay this claim until present day? She reported to higher ups in 2003. Then she was suppressed by Scientology how they typically do.

Of course, Scientology is going to lie about it. And Scientology is the one who is claiming this all stems from Leah Remini. Why the hell would I believe anything Scientology says.

And 4 people testified at the trial that Jane Doe #2 had told them in 2003 that Masterson raped her.

 

[Madmick]

What do you mean by didn't relay this claim until present day? She reported to higher ups in 2003. Then she was suppressed by Scientology how they typically do.

Of course, Scientology is going to lie about it. And Scientology is the one who is claiming this all stems from Leah Remini. Why the hell would I believe anything Scientology says.

And 4 people testified at the trial that Jane Doe #2 had told them in 2003 that Masterson raped her.

That's the one who claimed she only went to his house to pick up keys for a friend, but then she stayed to drink wine, got into a jacuzzi with him, where they made out, went to the shower with him, where they got naked, then went to bed with him, where she later alleged rape. The people who were at the house party testified that at no point during the evening did she indicate distress, or a lack of consent. She later told stories to friends about their sexual encounter that explicitly did NOT indicate rape. She admitted this when she sold it as her attempt to "recontextualize" the encounter to make it seem more romantic.

Also:

Jane Doe #2 testified that she never reported Masterson to the Church of Scientology, because she knew it would not be well received.

 

[Hog-train]

That's the one who claimed she only went to his house to pick up keys for a friend, but then she stayed to drink wine, got into a jacuzzi with him, where they made out, went to the shower with him, where they got naked, then went to bed with him, where she later alleged rape. The people who were at the house party testified that at no point during the evening did she indicate distress, or a lack of consent. She later told stories to friends about their sexual encounter that explicitly did NOT indicate rape. She admitted this when she sold it as her attempt to "recontextualize" the encounter to make it seem more romantic.

Where are you getting this info?

I'm reading a completely different interpretation of the same events.

The one who went to pick up the keys was Jane Doe #1. When she went there, Masterson gave her a "sweet-tasting, red-colored drink in a tumbler." But eventually Masterson started pulling her toward the jacuzzi, warning "15 seconds!"—as in, that's how long you have to get ready before you have to go in, clothed or not. This sounds like a common case of GHB dosing in drinks.

Jane Doe #1 recalled him throwing her in while she was still wearing her pants and shirt. Thirty or 40 minutes after she had the red drink she started to feel woozy, and was having trouble staying upright, she said. "I wasn't able to balance myself well and [Luke] leans in and helps me get out," Jen said. "I just looked at him and said, 'Something's wrong."

Then Masterson took her upstairs and made her throw up in the toilet by putting his fingers in her throat. She didn't know how much time passed, she said, before she heard Masterson say that all the vomit was "f--king disgusting" and he "dragged" her into the shower. "I remember him pulling me up by my underarms," Jen continued, "handing me soap."

"'Grab the f--king soap,'" he told her, per her recollection, but she couldn't. "He grabbed my hair," she continued, "and pulled me up because I kept trying to sit back down...I don't remember soaping myself." She mainly remembered being slumped on the floor of the shower, then the water turning off, after which, she said, "I guess I went unconscious or something, I don't remember."

Masterson then carried her to the bed and she passed out there. She woke up to him penetrating her.

Jane Doe #1 reported this to Scientology higher ups and later in an April 2004 meeting, between Jane and Masterson was arranged in order for him to hear about the rape from Jane's perspective and "confront" what he had done. However, Masterson repeatedly interrupted the story to make jokes, angering the Scientology officials present into cutting the meeting short.

During this time, Jane Doe #1 had told several people about this rape including Lisa Marie Pressley. Pressley was going to testify at the trial that this did indeed happen, but she passed away before the trial. However, she was on the witness list.

On June 6, 2004, Jane went to the police station alone and filed a report. The police station was flooded with affidavits from Scientologists vouching for Masterson and claiming that Jane had called the rape "the best sex she ever had." In July, Jane was told that unless more victims came forward the investigation was closed.

LMAO - that sounds cartoonishly fake.

All the people at the house who gave written affidavits to the police in 2004 are fucking Scientologists. This type of shit is standard operating procedure for Scientologists. Why are you taking their word at face value?

Let me see your source for all this info because I'm seeing something completely different.

 

[Madmick]

Where are you getting this info?

I'm reading a completely different interpretation of the same events.

The one who went to pick up the keys was Jane Doe #1. When she went there, Masterson gave her a "sweet-tasting, red-colored drink in a tumbler." But eventually Masterson started pulling her toward the jacuzzi, warning "15 seconds!"—as in, that's how long you have to get ready before you have to go in, clothed or not.

Jane Doe #1 recalled him throwing her in while she was still wearing her pants and shirt. Thirty or 40 minutes after she had the red drink she started to feel woozy, and was having trouble staying upright, she said. "I wasn't able to balance myself well and [Luke] leans in and helps me get out," Jen said. "I just looked at him and said, 'Something's wrong."

Then Masterson took her upstairs and made her throw up in the toilet by putting his fingers in her throat. She didn't know how much time passed, she said, before she heard Masterson say that all the vomit was "f--king disgusting" and he "dragged" her into the shower. "I remember him pulling me up by my underarms," Jen continued, "handing me soap."

"'Grab the f--king soap,'" he told her, per her recollection, but she couldn't. "He grabbed my hair," she continued, "and pulled me up because I kept trying to sit back down...I don't remember soaping myself." She mainly remembered being slumped on the floor of the shower, then the water turning off, after which, she said, "I guess I went unconscious or something, I don't remember."

Masterson then carried her to the bed and she passed out there. She woke up to him penetrating her.

Jane Doe #1 reported this to Scientology higher ups and later in an April 2004 meeting, between Jane and Masterson was arranged in order for him to hear about the rape from Jane's perspective and "confront" what he had done. However, Masterson repeatedly interrupted the story to make jokes, angering the Scientology officials present into cutting the meeting short.

During this time, Jane Doe #1 had told several people about this rape including Lisa Marie Pressley. Pressley was going to testify at the trial that this did indeed happen, but she passed away before the trial. However, she was on the witness list.

On June 6, 2004, Jane went to the police station alone and filed a report. The police station was flooded with affidavits from Scientologists vouching for Masterson and claiming that Jane had called the rape "the best sex she ever had." In July, Jane was told that unless more victims came forward the investigation was closed.

LMAO - that sounds cartoonishly fake.

All the people at the house who gave written affidavits to the police in 2004 are fucking Scientologists. This type of shit is standard operating procedure for Scientologists. Why are you taking their word at face value?

Let me see your source for all this info because I'm seeing something completely different.

It's linked in that post.

Per the keys pickup, I got #2 and #1 mixed up (both were in the jacuzzi at some point). Because when I went over these accounts in the press the media sometimes referred to them as the "third accuser" when that wasn't Jane Doe #3-- who was his girlfriend. Which means #1 was the one who went over to his house with the explicit expectation she would have sex:

On Thursday, the third accuser spoke, alleging that Masterson demanded that she come over to his home one night and later raped her, according to the AP. When he told her to take her clothes off, she said she listened because "I didn't want any violence to take place, I didn't want things to escalate. I was giggling, trying to say, 'No, I don't want to.'"

The AP reported that she said she listened to what he asked of her that night partly because of his position of authority he held based on the high level he had reached in the Church of Scientology...

“You went over to Danny Masterson’s house knowing full well you would be taking your clothes off, right?” Thomas Mesereau asked.

“No,” she said firmly.

Mesereau had just played a recording where the woman had told police Masterson had texted her to come to his house, take her clothes off and get into his hot tub on a night late in 2003.

Those Scientologists were the only eyewitnesses to their behavior together the night of (I don't know why you used that term to describe people who were given a rape account only after she'd first relayed the "romanticized" account).

 

[Hog-train]

Those Scientologists were the only eyewitnesses to their behavior together the night of (I don't know why you used that term to describe people who were given a rape account only after she'd first relayed the "romanticized" account).

Because I have zero trust in any statements Scientologists make.

 

[Phisher]

It's been reported that Danny Masterson was moved from maximum security at Corcoran state prison to a minimum security men's colony that houses low risk inmates with mental issues and elderly inmates.

'That '70s Show' actor Danny Masterson transferred out of maximum security prison

Danny Masterson is no longer staying in the maximum security prison in California that once housed Charles Manson.

www.usatoday.com

All of the prison channels on YouTube are claiming that it's because he got attacked by two dudes from an Aryan Brotherhood offshoot gang called the "BBC."

I don't know how to process any of this besides laughing.

DANNY MASTERSON GOT SMASHED BY 2 BBC’S

www.youtube.com