WOW the number of people in this thread immediately jumping to the accusers being “false” and deserving jail. Because no actual sexual predator ever got away with it in court…
(Sex crimes are extraordinarily difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt because the actions are taken in private without a lot of physical evidence. Which sexual predators rely on to get away with their crimes, by the way.)
Perhaps we should review the sheer volume of young men from all over the US & UK reporting that Spacey was at best inappropriate with them. One of the youngest being 14 years old:
https://people.com/tv/kevin-spacey-controversy-timeline/
And just in case some of us need a refresher course, the rate of false rape accusations is low:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21164210/
And the rate of sexual assault is high:
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/sexualviolence/fastfact.html
Indeed. In a thread a couple of days back on a different (though related) subject I was accused of being a rape apologist because I was insistent on the presumption of innocence and the beyond-reasonable-doubt standards that need to be overcome when accusations like this are slung. But it works the same in the other direction too - we can’t assume that an accuser is guilty of fraud or libel or filing false reports or whatever just because they failed to prove their case.
It would not be good for justice if these situations ended up being “now that the accusation has been made someone is going to go to jail, either the accused or the accuser.” The Thunderdome is not a good model to emulate.
accused of being a rape apologist because I was insistent on the presumption of innocence
Good thing to insist on, but be prudent. Keep in mind that, at least on reddit, there’s a tendency for every thread about rape to become a thread about false accusations. I wasn’t there, but in general, sometimes people object not to the presumption of innocence but to people bringing it up.
Yeah this whole thing isn’t simple. Even if he’s cleared of charges, these allegations are old and that makes them hard to prove or disprove.
Further, the quantity is concerning. Maybe he’s just prolifically sexual but my gut can’t really get passed how many accusations there are over such a long span of time. Even if innocent, still creepy is my opinion.
In general, any multimillionaire that gets off of a serious charge doesn’t mean they’re innocent.
It just another example of having ridiculous amounts of money in our legal system means it’s really hard to be hel accountable.
Hell, trump got off of beating and raping his wife, because of an old ass New York law that said a husband can’t rape his wife under any circumstance.
In general, any multimillionaire that gets off of a serious charge doesn’t mean they’re innocent.
Don’t forget the flip-side of that - the prisons are full of poor people who do not deserve to be there. It’s almost as if the system was designed to be like this…
Also, being a multimillionaire puts a target on your back. I’ll never forget the story about a man who already had a couple of million winning a huge lottery and how lawsuits, among other ever worse things, destroyed his life.
Because Ari Behn was just a clout chaser looking for a quick buck.
the quantity is concerningAnd also not admissible in a criminal court. That’s part of the problem. If you look at the big picture, it’s obvious he did it, but it’s not as easy to prove it in criminal court.
Even if it were all legally fine, something is wrong if that many people are coming forward.
Is it really obvious that he did something, or is it obvious that he’s another gay man being attacked for daring to publicly admit that he’s gay? Sure there’s a lot of allegations, but many of them were dropped by the accusers, and as the article points out there was a huge rush of “me too” allegations brought out against many people at the same time because it was the trending get-rich-quick scheme. Even in Spacey’s case, why did most of these allegations not come out until he admitted he was gay?
IMHO if Spacey is actually guilty of these crimes, he’s going to be blackballed by all the studios and won’t ever be seen on the screen again. Although the courts didn’t prove him guilty, the studios know who is doing what, and in today’s market any further allegations will cost them money.
Even in Spacey’s case, why did most of these allegations not come out until he admitted he was gay?
I think it went the other way around, didn’t it? At least the first accusations came out, and he used the occasion to say “I didn’t do that! But now that I’m talking about this stuff, by the way I’m gay.”
It wasn’t a great look, because it came across that he tried to deflect the accusations by coming out as gay.
True enough, and he caught hell for the timing of that announcement. There’s also the issue of there just being such a different culture of what’s “acceptable” in Hollywood. I think it’s great that it finally came to light and those activities were at least tempered somewhat, but I also remember reading a lot of claims a decade ago and just thinking to myself that this is something you’re claiming ‘everyone’ in Hollywood is doing, but you chose to specifically target this one actor? The “me too” train was real, and a lot of people were going after big name actors, so I got burnt out on the whole thing and just stopped paying any attention to it.
Yet suggest Pee-wee Herman is creepy and you get downvoted. Even though without question he was caught with illegal material.
A depressing number of victims of child sexual assault commit suicide, and thus their testimony cannot be used by the prosecution. For example, in Australia, the case of George Pell.
Removed by mod
I refuse to believe you’re actually this stupid. There’s a universe of difference between “it didn’t happen” and “it couldn’t be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in court” and you know there is.
Unless you really think OJ didn’t murder his wife either
I refuse to believe you’re actually this stupid. You’re throwing these statements as if you have first hand experience of knowing these things happened. Like were you there in person when Spacey was assaulting these people or were you a witness when OJ killed his wife? You don’t wanna believe the witnesses, you don’t wanna believe the jury, you don’t don’t wanna believe in the legal systems (cops/courts and whatever have you). But you believe in some people accusing someone of something. EVEN if they cleared themselves of these accusations.
Are you actually this ignorant to not know that all people are all not down to earth and sometimes people can and do crazy shit. Why do you think there’s zero percent chance that these people were bad, but Kevin Spacey is 100 percent bad without a shadow of a doubt for seemingly just being rich?
https://people.com/tv/kevin-spacey-controversy-timeline/
Read. Learn.
Your stance treats the government as if it were some kind of perfect arbiter of fact.
It is not, that’s his whole point. What is even happening here are you not capable of reading
Three people died after his “Kill Them With Kindness” youtube video.
Your posts are shit. Go back to Reddit. Its dense like you.
There needs to be trust in the justice system. Otherwise, there’s no point in having a justice system. If he’s cleared, then there wasn’t enough evidence and he should be considered innocent. That’s how our justice system works. Don’t break the social contract because of your vendetta against rich people.
The problem is that our society doesn’t encourage people to immediately report crimes nor provide sufficient support for people who have been abused.
deleted by creator
And OJ went on to live a long, happy, and peaceful life. I was especially glad to see him being honored by Hollywood and the NFL.
Do you think OJ Simpson is innocent? Would you want your daughter or sister to marry him?
The are different standards for a reason. Society is perfectly capable of being aware that someone is a giant dickbag without there being enough evidence to justify using the power of the state to remove their freedom and incarcerate them. Those are two extraordinarily different things and you know it.
To suggest otherwise is to imply that the government is a perfect arbiter of dispute that we should all just blindly accept. Something tells me you wouldn’t be so keen on that stance when it worked against your interests
The government performing arbitration is a power that society has vested in them. The solution to a flawed system is to fix the system, not vigilantism.
The lack of trust in the judiciary is a failure of government and a failure of society.
I don’t believe OJ Simpson is innocent, even though not convicted in a court of law. Sorry, not sorry
Yeah, but the whole system is made by people who benefit from it’s flaws, which means that it’s near impossible to fix it without big societal changes. And while we are working on those (we are working on those, right?) we should remember that our current system is flawed.
It is absolutely a failure of society, yes.Then why isn’t there a revolt? Mass protests? Revolution?
The justice system is literally the foundation of the social contract in society. If it’s flawed and corrupt, society as a whole falls apart. In fact, it should.
Why doesn’t the working class, the bigger of the two classes, not simply eat the rich? There are reasons, tons of them. Mostly, the fact that the rich spend a lot of effort to prevent it, understandably.
The justice system isn’t just, it never is. In fact I struggle to find any historical example of the justice system that would be good, it is at most good enough. But society still chugging along, enduring the unjust system, along with other unjust systems. Until it doesn’t, which lead to the new society with the new, maybe slightly better system, which ultimately is as shit as the previous one.
That’s kind of the corner stone of the human suffering, you know.
I think we need to recognise the moral panic of the situation too. People are out there looking to cancel others, others are out to use the moment for financial gain, and then there is the legitimate ones too. We dont know which they are and for the most part, the judicial system is only OK at separating them.
If you can smear someone and that’s it their life is over, no matter the truth of it, then what justice is that?
What’s the truth here… not very many people know, clearly.
I think we could use a little more moral panic about the actual number of people who are actually raped every year and maybe worry a little less about your proposed miniscule hypothetical
Also, learn to read: https://people.com/tv/kevin-spacey-controversy-timeline/
To replay your own argument: something tells me you wouldn’t be so keen on that if you were the one being accused of a crime you had not committed.
Hahahaha, that’s hilarious. Because I’m actually at extraordinarily high risk of that happening. I’m a nurse. That happens all the time to nurses.
Thorough investigations are done. And no, I don’t worry about it. You know why? Because I’m not a fucking rapist sexual predator and everyone who knows me knows that.
You gotta wonder about people who are sooooooooooooo worried about being “falsely” accused of rape that they think false accusations are worthy of jail time. What exactly are you doing out there in the world that this is a major concern in your life? That you think it’s even possible for your whole life to be ruined over a baseless accusation?
Because this is simply not something I worry about at all.
Also, maybe actually take ten seconds to read about this person. This was not one accusation, it was dozens in multiple countries spanning decades: https://people.com/tv/kevin-spacey-controversy-timeline/
This is way too close to “if you’ve done nothing wrong, you’ve got nothing to hide” logic.
What exactly are you doing out there in the world that this is a major concern in your life?
Making terrible choices in friends, for one. Never been accused of SA, thank christ, but figured out too late that many people live in their own reality, and rewrite history once the friendship ends. Have also known people who have been in that situation, and even if no charges end up being pressed, it’s still a gut-wrenching situation to be in.
The issue of how to handle SA accusations is such a nightmare that it’s practically inevitable that we have both innocent people convicted, and guilty people acquitted at the same time. Most of the time we don’t have the kind of oversight and institutional procedure you would enjoy if accused.
You’re being deliberately obtuse and conflating completely different situations, and I think you’re doing it on purpose to muddy the waters. An accusation after a breakup that cause a fight among friends is a very different situation from a report to the police. Even a report to the police often doesn’t trigger an investigation. And God knows it rarely triggers an actual prosecution. These are simply not things that you need to worry about, if you’re not running around the world raping people. If it causes you anxiety that severe, get therapy.
Because it’s not the giant boogeyman that internet apologists like to pretend it is, with data:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21164210/
Compared to actual real sexual assault, which IS a huge problem:
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/sexualviolence/fastfact.html
Because I’m sorry, but losing a few friends is not a terrible enough consequence for me to get worked up about. Shit happens, friends get in fights and stop being friends over all sorts of dumb shit. I see zero reason why that would cause someone to go through their lives in mortal fear that they might be “falsely” accused of a sex crime.
The issue of how to handle sexual assault accusations is not complicated. I told you, we handle them all the time in the medical field. You default to protecting the accuser, you do a thorough investigation, if the investigation turns up no evidence, you move on.
A “he said, she said” situation that never gets formally investigated, but causes the breakup of some friendships is not as terrible as being actually raped. It’s just not.
People, for a whole host of reasons, can be and very much are in different situations than you. Some have very little defense against such allegations, and so it should not be very difficult to understand that they could have their lives destroyed in an instant by false accusations.
For instance, if they engage in non-normalized sexual relations (for their area or country, obviously), be that interracial, same sex, BDSM, etc., particularly if they are not “out”. It’s very easy to go from “he tied me up and we had a great time”, to “that guy did me wrong somehow so now I’m going to press charges and claim he tied me up against my will and raped me”. If you don’t think this happens you’re living in a dream land.
You’re living in a dream land if you think going to the police with nothing more than “yes I went over to his house consensually and it turned bad from there” is likely to result in a legal prosecution.
You have zero empathy. I feel bad for your patients.
I also express little sympathy for people who worry more about the side effects of the Covid vaccine than they do about the negative effects of actual Covid. Because one of those things is an actual serious problem, and the other is a boogeyman used for political purposes.
Supported by data. You know, kind of like the difference between false accusations of rape and ACTUAL RAPE.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21164210/
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/sexualviolence/fastfact.html
So yes, I am more concerned about actual rape. The thing that happens to orders of magnitude more people.
The people who have made false allegations in the past are exactly the reason we can’t just believe every victim that comes forward without proof. They are why we can’t have nice things. It’s not about the odds and ratios either, the state putting a completely innocent person in jail is a travesty of the system. The travesties of what we do to each other are the realities of living on a planet with other humans, we are terrible to one another regularly. We must do the absolute best we can to support victims of sexual assault…untested rape kits are a fucking abomination for instance and I’d be fine with tar and feathers for whoever let that happen. But we still must stop short of allowing even one innocent person to be put in jail.
I recommend watching “The People vs OJ Simpson” on this. It doesn’t really get into guilty vs not guilty, but just showcases just how complicated things got in that case.
As soon as they started arguing over the hair samples I started understanding how complicated that case was.
Innocence is VERY SPECIFICALLY NOT WHAT COURTS declare. They only ever declare that there wasn’t enough evidence presented to proof guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The presumption of innocence is an internationally-recognized human right.
The presumption of innocence doesn’t preclude the fact that criminal courts don’t find someone innocent, rather they find someone not guilty.
This is for the simple fact that it’s neigh impossible to establish someone’s innocence, whereas it’s easier to establish that there isn’t enough evidence to consider someone guilty.
This case is, and sexual assault cases in general are, a great example why we can’t expect criminal courts to establish innocence.
These are often cases with little evidence available either which way, because often there are no other witnesses. Even if there would be physical evidence of a sexual act, it’s still challenging to prove under what circumstances those acts have occurred, specifically on the matter of consent.
To expect a court to be able to say with certainty that something hasn’t occurred is unreasonable.
That is not to say that it isn’t good that we have these high standards before we impose punishment onto someone, but it is important to recognize what it means when a court comes to a decision.
Additionally the presumption of innocence is just that, a presumption to establish who has the onus to prove something, there is no additional meaning attributed to it in the legal principle beyond establishing who has the onus to prove the facts at hand.
In that regard it’s rather unfortunately named, as it would’ve been more apt to name it “the presumption of not guilty” but I suppose that doesn’t roll as nicely off the tongue
To add to that, that the presumption is specifically a principle that only has meaning in criminal court, because the burden of proof is generally higher than in civil court.
People can be, and have been, found liable in civil court for the very thing a criminal court has found them “not guilty” on, on the very basis that criminal court can’t establish innocence and that the bar that needs to be met in civil court is generally lower than in criminal court.
As such to bring up the presumption of innocence in a vacuum is kind of like bringing up the generally recognized human right of freedom of speech when a social media company bans someone and removes their post.
Yes, the concept exists, but it’s irrelevant because it doesn’t apply to the topic at hand, because the concept aims to govern a very specific circumstance that isn’t applicable here and withholding the important context surrounding it (i.e. the role it plays in criminal court for the presumption and the fact that it only limits governments for the freedom of speech) masks the limitations of said concept.
None of the above aims to reflect my opinion on Spacey’s innocence (or lack thereof), rather it aims to provide the necessary details to put things into context.
Considered innocent, by the state organs. Considered innocent, in how the state treats them. NOT EVER AT ALL PROVEN innocent by the courts.
Courts are not and have never been concerned about proving innocence. All they care about is guilty or not guilty. Not guilty could mean innocent, but again, the courts don’t care about that.
In terms of punishment from the government, yes. The court of public opinion is another matter entirely. Civil court too.
Do you think the people are not part of the government?
no, we are not part of the government. same reason the 1st amendment does not apply to private property. it protects speech from censorship from the government.
Right, so the only thing the court states is that innocence could not be disproven. Incidentally that’s similar to how statistical hypotheses are being proven - by showing that it’s unlikely to be false.
deleted by creator
Considered innocent, by the state organs. Considered innocent, in how the state treats them. NOT EVER AT ALL PROVEN innocent by the courts.
Courts are not and have never been concerned about proving innocence. All they care about is guilty or not guilty. Not guilty could mean innocent, but again, the courts don’t care about that.
deleted by creator
Well maybe we can fantasize about vigilante justice from masked super heroes then. Who somehow can right with punches in the middle of the night what courts couldn’t figure out with extensive investigations.
Or maybe we could get a serial killer to figure it all out and judge Dredd that shit.
Or we accept that our justice system can’t be perfect and accept that there won’t be any legal ramification against Spacey. Sexual assault charges always are hard to prove if you don’t get physical prove right after the crime. That’s even more so when the crime happened years ago. The fact we have to accept is that quite a lot of guilty people will walk free from such a crime.
But that doesn’t mean we all now have to believe he’s innocent and it certainly doesn’t mean we all have to ignore that and be forced to watch further movies with him.
While you may trust implicitly, many have witnessed and experienced enough injustice to understand how the world works.
and he should be considered
innocentnot guilty.FTFY. Words have meanings and those meanings are important.
Innocent until proven guilty*
NO! That is how the court system, and therefore the state sees him in regards to punishment and treatment. That does not mean, and has never ever ever ever meant, that being declared not guilty means they are proven to be innocent. Just that there’s wasn’t evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.
deleted by creator
Yes, the UK justice system works on the same principle
GTK… Thanks
Innocent until proven guilty is literally the fundamental basis of our justice system. He is innocent by definition.
Obviously, no one should be convicted if evidence is insufficient. The issue that I have is that it’s difficult to believe someone is innocent when multiple people have alleged similar complaints. Does that make him guilty? No. But it increases my suspicion. And I’ll never be able to shake that suspicion. It doesn’t mean I want him locked up. It only means that I’m not comfortable with his art going forward. Which is a shame, because he’s one of the best actors of our time.
I’m not saying to blindly trust the judiciary, but that not trusting the judiciary is an inherent failure in society. We need to fix that, not focus on individual cases that will keep happening if our judicial system is morally and ethically compromised.
> I’m not saying to blindly trust the judiciary, but that not trusting the judiciary is an inherent failure in society.
Who’s not trusting the judiciary? I for example do think they did their due diligence in not punishing someone they couldn’t prove beyond reasonable doubt that he did the crime he’s accused. That simply can mean that there weren’t enough evidence to proof his guilt. And I think many who still don’t believe his innocence see it similar. With cases about sexual assault this is very often the case simply because of the isolated nature of such a potential crime. It often comes down statement against statement with very little evidence to back either side. And since our justice system rightfully rather errs on the side of the accused, that means that many such crimes will never be proven in court!
That’s the prize we pay for making sure as few people get falsely imprisoned/punished as possible. The knowledge that there are people out there who committed all kinds of crimes but they will walk free because we couldn’t prove their guilt.
But of course that doesn’t mean we people simply have to ignore that fact and treat everyone as innocent until they are judged before a court. So in this case, I find it very suspicious that there are so many independent accusation and I look at the case of Netflix which have won the case of their dismissal of him because his actions on set. To me that’s enough to no longer want want to watch a movie of him and that’s perfectly fine since I’m not a judge trying to decide if serious legal punishment should be forced upon him but rather a random dude on this planet who can’t do shit against him beside not watch a movie of him.
Yeah, more apologetics from someone who doesn’t get that our system is clearly failing us and we want, no DEMAND something new and different.
A new justice system? Might as well overthrow the government and start over then, because the common law system is literally the foundation of society.
It is the single largest common belief that literally holds together our larger society like glue.
I like your style btw your holding your own in this very candidly. Respect.
That’s exactly what we want, yes. And we’ll end up getting it too, with climate collapse, so trying to intimidate me into submitting to a system that is inherently biased and abusive and has done nothing but hurt myself and everyone I know and love personally will get you nowhere.
I will NOT change my mind on this and you can’t make me.
WE will not change our minds on this and you can’t make us.
We can and will make something better and there’s nothing you can do to stop us.
Nothing.
Right, because the court of public opinion is never wrong.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
They do? Which lynchings did the justice system rubber stamp?
deleted by creator
Wow. Reading through those Descriptions is rough. Many of them involve the cop lying with verbal testimony not matching bodycam footage. One I saw was after the guy was already restrained, he bit the cop’s finger, so the cop shot him. Others show that they are looking for (or will make up) any excuse to shoot: one person had a lighter in their hand which caused the cop to shoot and kill them. It’s honestly disgusting that people will go out of their way to defend this system. I guess that’s a level of privelege that I just don’t understand; how can you possibly be sure you’ll never be in such a situation with a lying, murderous police officer?
Huh, looks like this is talking about cops, of which there are millions of in America, and cops lying in reports, and not a about a court of law ruling a lynching was okay.
The American people had to do a countrywide uprising just to get the courts to prosecute one case but go off 👍
You’re taking an overly specific definition of lynching and framing the situation wrong, and coming to a bad conclusion.
A court’s refusal to punish it, in nearly every case, is tacit support. They aren’t saying “please, lynch!” but they’re saying they won’t punish lynching.
This also easily fits any definition of lynching that’s not so restricted so as to only include “hanging black people from trees in town squares”.
Courts are refusing to punish lynching?
Surprising to find some sane, reasonable voices here. Thanks for being you.
From his wiki:
On October 29, 2017, actor Anthony Rapp alleged that Spacey, while appearing intoxicated, made a sexual advance toward him at a party in 1986, when Rapp was 14 and Spacey was 26.[118][119] Rapp had also shared this story in a 2001 interview with The Advocate, but Spacey’s name was redacted from publication to avoid legal disputes and public outing.[120] Spacey stated through Twitter that he did not remember the encounter, but that he owed Rapp “the sincerest apology for what would have been deeply inappropriate drunken behavior” if he had behaved as asserted.[121][122] On September 9, 2020, Rapp sued Spacey for sexual assault, sexual battery, and intentional infliction of emotional distress under the Child Victims Act.[123]
Fifteen others then came forward alleging similar abuse,[124] including Boston anchorwoman Heather Unruh, who alleged that Spacey sexually assaulted her son;[125][126] filmmaker Tony Montana; actor Roberto Cavazos;[127] Richard Dreyfuss’s son Harry;[128] and eight people who worked on House of Cards.[129] The Guardian was contacted by “a number of people” who alleged that Spacey “groped and behaved in an inappropriate way with young men” as artistic director of the Old Vic.[130][131][132]
Spacey also appears on flight logs from Jeffrey Epstein’s private jet from the early 2000s.[133]
Coming Out Controversy On the same day as Rapp’s allegations against him, Spacey came out as gay when apologizing to Rapp. He said, “I have had relationships with both men and women. I have loved and had romantic encounters with men throughout my life, and I choose now to live as a gay man.”[134][135] His decision to come out via his statement was criticized by gay celebrities, including Billy Eichner, George Takei, Lance Bass, and Wanda Sykes, as an attempt to change the subject and shift focus from Rapp’s accusation, for using his own drunkenness as an excuse for making a sexual advance on a minor, and for implying a connection between homosexuality and child sexual abuse.[136][137][138]
Some readers additionally felt that by claiming he was “horrified” by Rapp’s story, Spacey was attempting to paint himself as the victim of the alleged abuse.[139] In October 2022, Spacey expressed regret over the way he came out and said that it was “never [his] intention” to deflect from the allegations against him or conflate them with his sexual orientation.[140][141]
Reaction and ramifications Amid the allegations, filming was suspended on the sixth and final season of House of Cards. The show’s production company had implemented “an anonymous complaint hotline, crisis counselors, and sexual harassment legal advisors for the crew”, and stated that in 2012, “someone on the crew shared a complaint about a specific remark and gesture made by Kevin Spacey. Immediate action was taken following our review of the situation and we are confident the issue was resolved promptly to the satisfaction of all involved.”[142] According to the production company, Spacey “willingly participated in a training process and since that time MRC has not been made aware of any other complaints” involving him.[143] The show had been due to end in 2018.[125] The season was shortened from 13 episodes to eight, and Spacey was removed from the cast and from his role as executive producer.[144]
The Gore Vidal biographical film Gore, starring Spacey, which was set to be distributed by Netflix, was canceled,[145][146] and Netflix went on to sever all ties with him.[147] He was due to appear in All the Money in the World as industrialist J. Paul Getty; his scenes were cut and Christopher Plummer replaced him as Getty in reshoots.[67] In an interview with Variety, Plummer said, “It’s really not replacing [Spacey]. It’s starting all over again.” Plummer elaborated saying, “I think it’s very sad what happened to him… Kevin is such a talented and a terrifically gifted actor, and it’s so sad. It’s such a shame. That’s all I can say, because that’s it.”[148]
The International Academy of Television Arts and Sciences reversed its decision to honor Spacey with the 2017 International Emmy Founders Award.[149] On November 2, 2017, Variety reported that his publicist Staci Wolfe and talent agency Creative Artists Agency were ending their relationships with him.
Legal issues The Los Angeles District Attorney’s office stated in April 2018 that it would investigate an allegation that Spacey had sexually assaulted an adult male in 1992.[158][159] In July 2018, three more allegations of sexual assault against Spacey were revealed by Scotland Yard, bringing the total number of open investigations in the UK to six.[160] In September 2018, a lawsuit filed at Los Angeles Superior Court claimed that Spacey sexually assaulted an unnamed masseur at a house in Malibu, California, in October 2016.[161]
In December 2018, Spacey was charged with a felony for allegedly sexually assaulting journalist Heather Unruh’s 18-year-old son in Nantucket, Massachusetts, in July 2016.[162] Spacey pleaded not guilty to the charge on January 7, 2019.[163][164] Unruh’s son told police he was texting with his girlfriend throughout the alleged “groping” incident. Spacey’s defense attorneys spent months trying to obtain copies of the texts and the phone itself. In mid-May 2019, Unruh’s son’s personal attorney informed the court that the cell phone in question is “missing”.[165] On June 4, 2019, the defense learned that when Unruh gave her son’s cell phone to police in 2017, she admitted she had deleted some of the text messages.[165] Later that month, her son filed a lawsuit against Spacey, claiming emotional damages. On July 5, 2019, he voluntarily dismissed the claims with prejudice.[166]
On July 17, 2019, the criminal assault charge against Spacey was dropped by the Cape and Islands prosecutors.[167] When the anonymous massage therapist who accused him died, the last remaining criminal case against Spacey was closed.[168]
On September 9, 2020, Anthony Rapp accused Spacey in a complaint about actions that allegedly happened in 1986 (sexual assault and sexual battery) and intentional infliction of emotional distress under the Child Victims Act, which extended New York’s statute of limitations for suits related to child sexual abuse.[123] Joining Rapp in the suit against Spacey was a man who requested to remain anonymous who accused Spacey of sexually abusing him in 1983, when he was 14 and Spacey was 24.[169][170] On June 17, 2021, the anonymous accuser was dismissed from the case due to his refusal to publicly identify himself.[171] As Rapp’s trial lawsuit against Spacey commenced in October 2022, it was revealed that he had given an inaccurate description of the apartment where he alleged the abuse took place.[172][173] On October 17, the judge dismissed the emotional distress charges due to them being a “duplicate” of the battery charges.[14] On October 20, a jury found Spacey not liable.[174][175]
In 2020, Spacey and his production companies M. Profitt Productions and Trigger Street Productions were ordered to pay $31 million to MRC, the studio that produced House of Cards, for violating its sexual harassment policy.[176] Spacey appealed to have the arbitration award overturned, but the request was denied on August 4, 2022.[177]
On May 26, 2022, Spacey was charged by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in the United Kingdom with four counts of sexual assault against three complainants. The alleged offenses occurred between 2005 and 2013 in London and Gloucestershire.[178][179] According to the Crown Prosecution Service, it would only be possible to formally charge Spacey if he entered England or Wales. If Spacey refused to do so voluntarily an extradition process would have been necessary.[180] Nevertheless, in a statement to Good Morning America on May 31, 2022, Spacey said that he would “voluntarily appear in the U.K. as soon as can be arranged”.[181]
In his first British court appearance on June 16, Spacey denied the allegations against him.[182] On July 14, 2022, Spacey pleaded not guilty to the charges in London. [183][184] On November 16, 2022, the CPS authorized an additional seven charges against Spacey, all related to a single complainant arising from incidents alleged to have occurred between 2001 and 2004.[185][186] Three charges were dismissed before or during the trial which began on June 28, 2023, and on July 26, 2023, a jury found Spacey not guilty of the remaining nine charges.
Frankly I wish more court details were in the articles about this. There are a lot of accusers and info on the wiki, I can’t help but feel if he was accused of assaulting women this would have gone differently
~~So, Spacey has been accused by a number of people and the charges from one accuser have been dismissed ~~
I need to learn to read the article fully before commenting 🤦♂️
No, these were nine accusations bought by four separate men. All were dismissed by the jury and notably this was a unanimous, not majority verdict.
There was also the earlier case bought in the US which was dismissed by the judge, I believe.
Yeah, we need to see more details. The allegations against him were serious. This was a spot copy so is understandably sparse on details. I guess we will see more in depth stories being published by tomorrow.
Love the wording for the charges, “causing a person to engage in penetrative sexual activity without consent”.
That’s an awful lot of words for rape.
The wording covers men and women. In the US rape is usually defined as vaginal penetration. Sex acts is usually defined as everything but vaginal.
…it’s from a odd technicality where on ol’ blighty, a male can’t be “raped” because of how the laws are written. Call it a peculiarity of their system or sexism, but it results in oddly sounding charges like what you see reported at least.
I don’t think this changes thing. Not for me at least. He’s had at least a dozen other people accuse him - including people that don’t need his money or notoriety. And while he was cleared of criminal wrong doing in the Anthony Rapp case, I don’t think he ever denied making an advance on a 14 year old boy. Just that he “didn’t remember it” - which hardly matters. I don’t care how drunk I get. I’m not accidentally going to hit on children.
37 years ago he may have made a mistake, with no proof other than hearsay…
What kind of proof do you think typically exists when a crime is committed and the only individuals present are the alleged victim and perpetrator?
That’s kind of the point. We live in a system that is supposed to be “innocent until proven guilty”. Not because people who commit crimes should get away with them, but because the opposite system would be completely untenable. How exactly is he supposed to prove that he is innocent? I don’t care how sure anyone is that he did it. Prove it, or by our legal standard, he must be considered innocent.
If you want to live in a society where accusation is tantamount to fact, you’re going to regret it as soon as anyone says anything about you.
Your conflating the legal system with greater society. He’s not in jail or paying a settlement because there wasn’t enough evidence to convict him in court. The rest of society is not bound by these same restrictions and are free to pass judgment as they please.
I wouldn’t say accusations are tantamount to fact, but when you get dozens of people making the same accusation, about a crime that’s difficult to prosecute and convict because of the nature of the crime, it’s hard to give him the benefit of the doubt.
Are you not also passing judgement on the accusers here? You’re essentially calling them all liars who are guilty of making false reports. Both sides can’t be “innocent” here.
They were responding to a comment about the legal system and problems with prosecuting SA cases, so of course they are going to be discussing that over the wider social implications.
I don’t know why you are jumping to conclusions here. The point they made about the legal system is extremely valid. As a survivor of CSA myself it’s something I confront in my mind every single day, but they are right: the opposite method would be horrific.
I mean these types of comments come from the same crowd that chants “eat the rich” at every opportunity, without considering that, for the vast majority of the world, they are the rich and henceforth deserving of being “eaten”
Lol exactly, thank you for reminding me why I hate that phrase so much 🤣
“a mistake” is a strange way to word sexually assaulting a child
Allegedly
Didn’t many of his accusers die?
Yes. All after that weird “Kill Them With Kindness” youtube christmas video.
An anonymous massage therapist.
Ari Behn, a Norwegian author and television host.
And now, many of the remaining accusers seem to be reluctant to push forward. Almost like the christmas was a coded message to people he has dirt on, but Hollywood’s never associated with people with delusions of spy novels. Clearly all those people were clout chasers.
Wish there was more details in the article. Wonder if he’s blacklisted now or will he be able to get back into movies or shows.
Since when did film directors and producers not hire rapists
As we’ve seen, a lot of them are rapists too.
He’s been doing work still (two movies this year) and I’d imagine some directors might start to bring him back in on indie stuff which is where he’s usually best anyway.
I know it’s incredibly difficult, but if you are ever sexually assaulted, it’s crucial to report it as soon as possible.
Time erodes facts, witnesses, memory, and only hurts a victim’s chance to seek justice. Prosecuting a sexual predator early also ensures that no one else can be victimized.
100% this. I wish I had… I’m only confronting it psychologically now, 20 years later, and I have to face the fact there’s no chance of getting justice.
I don’t know if it helps or not for me to point this out (I hope it’s something that gives you some solace), but depending on the circumstances it’s also very difficult to go through an investigation and trial. Maybe things are better now, but 20 or 30 years back it was an ordeal for the victim. The “what were you wearing?” mentality was very prevalent within the male-dominated judiciary and they made it so hard on the victims that they often felt like they were on trial - and in many cases they still didn’t get justice either, despite their personal lives being dissected in front of a room full of strangers, some of whom were intent on falsely portraying them as promiscuous. After seeing this happen to a friend, I lost faith in the system to deliver justice. I don’t have a solution, but an adversarial system just doesn’t seem ideal for this kind of prosecution.
I choose now, to live, as a creepy old man. 👏👏👏👏
Rich white man got away with crime. Shocker.
I just want to know if I can start enjoying The Usual Suspects again :’(
Can I go ahead and finish the house of cards yet?
I havent stopped watching Horrible Bosses.
I don’t know what stopped you if you would do that. He wasn’t even in the last season.
They already fucked it up. Just pretend it was 5 seasons and move on.
I don’t think it matters. He’s got the stink on em and a lot of people aren’t going to be able to overcome that.
deleted by creator
Hard to tell what actually happened. Looks like he/she (he?) said thing. Why are some of these charges being brought decades later. If incident happened, the evidence can only be gathered right after, otherwise, it will be just that he/she said, which is not enough for a criminal conviction.
deleted by creator
Well, then the entire case is just an accusation without much evidence besides “trust me bro” and outside of Weinstein who was notorious, it is very unlikely to result in conviction.
Criminal law requires evidence, otherwise it would be abused by people to get rid of people they don’t like or for profit.
This is actually the truth. I am a CSA survivor, and I didn’t report and now I wish so bad I did.
If anyone reading this has recently been through it, report it now! Don’t wait 20 years like me to even confront it and then never have a chance at closure.
Why are some of these charges brought decades later?
If the case isn’t iron clad you’ll have to defend against libel and it gets ugly fast. See for example the case of Evan Rachel Wood or Amber Heard, who had to not only defend herself once, but twice losing once and having her reputation utterly ruined because the one time she lost got so much more media attention.
See also this interview from 2005! Thats 17 years before Weinstein was finally found guilty. https://www.tmz.com/watch/0-2mpyk0xk/
I don’t think Amber Heard is a good example since jury sided with Depp in the libel suit.
Weinstein was so bad that jury went along with it, as Spacey case shows, most juries are not willing to convict on “trust me bro” evidence.
I think Heard is an excellent example because Depp lost the UK trial, but won the US one which got so much more attention. Plus despite the claim Depp’s side put forth that “the abuse was a hoax” being found libelous, as in the jury decided it wasn’t a hoax, this didn’t get any attention and Heard is made out to be the sole villain in the story and having made it all up to hurt Johnny Depp.
This will make victims think thrice before even speaking up against (much less sue) celebrities as they risk being vilified if the case isn’t ironclad.
Claiming Heard is victim here is not fair to actual victims but that’s just an opinion.
Also, she is celebrity herself, I highly doubt she was scared to sue.
Most people did not believe her for various reasons. Since she decided to take the entire drama into court of public opinion, people are entitled to make their own judgement, which they did, just not in the way she expected or wanted.
A case like this should be ironclad, though. “Beyond all reasonable doubt” is the standard for criminal charges. I wouldn’t want people to be convicted of life-ruining crimes based on non-ironclad cases.
I’m saying the evidence doesn’t just have to be “ironclad” enough for a guilty verdict, it has to be so overwhelming that the outcome of the trial can be reasonably certain before a case is made. Why would I argue for the standard for evidence in a trial to be lessened? That doesn’t make sense.
Uncanceled, I guess. After reading the background on his case and seeing this outcome I’d imagine we’ll see him pop back up in a few projects assuming he doesn’t just decide to retire.
