Someone in a comment a few days ago, who was themselves asked to write such a letter for someone they knew who was charged and ultimately convicted, made an excellent observation:

Defense attorneys are very likely to have requested those character reference letters way before the case even made it to trial. So it's entirely possible that Kutcher and Kunis wrote those letters long ago, based on information they had at the time, probably thinking the charges were unfounded.

Now, obviously, the easy solution to that would be if they were to come out now and tell whether that happened or not, and make clear what they think now. Which is what I would do, but I'm also not a Hollywoo celebrity with publicists and handlers and lawyers.

But he mentors other actors! And he doesn’t take drugs!

I really don’t know what either of them were thinking. Rapists don’t need leniency, especially in this situation.

I'm sure that's not what was in his letter.

If your question is merely about public relations, sure it's a terrible move. But I think there's actually a more meaningful question underlying all this furor; what are the limits of friendship or love? What is one supposed to do when someone close does something horrible? Cast them aside? Pretend you never knew them?

Kutcher must have had some idea of the risk he was taking, but he did it anyway. I find that striking. For some people friendships can be like family. I feel like this is an older sentiment that doesn't find expression often today. Would you find it appalling if Masterson's mother spoke on behalf of his character, or should she likewise keep her distance?

I don't know. It all just seems more complicated and tragic than the typical social media mob can process.

They likely assumed it wouldn’t get out. They were banking on being able to use their celebrity to try and influence the outcome.

I knew a guy, generally a good guy, and he helped me out when I was young.

Anyways, he made some bad choices (namely cheating on his fiance with his childhood bestie), knocked said girl up, they got married... they had another kid... a few years later this relationship turned sour, and I was rarely hearing from him. I later learned he was living out of his car at times.

At one point during this mess he told me his soon to be ex wife invited him over one night, they slept together, then he woke up with the cops in his face and her accusing him of raping her last night.

I didn't know what to think of it at the time, and I still don't. The person I thought I knew never would've cheated on his fiance... surely he wouldn't have raped someone.

Unlike this story, the charges for the guy I know were dropped and he wasn't prosecuted, let alone convicted. Maybe it was just a ploy for a better outcome in the divorce? That seems to be the conclusion the police drew. If it had gone to trial and he'd been convicted... I probably wouldn't have written a similar letter? But also maybe it would've been in some ways good for the judge to see not just this person at their worst moments but at better moments? What if the evidence wasn't strong? What if I hadn't followed the case closely?

I haven't heard from this guy in years at this point, hence why I'm avoiding the word friend. However at one point, he was a friend ... and I don't find it so easy to reconcile the "person you know" with the "person you've been told you know"

I think it's more about that difficulty reconciling, than "he never raped me." If they weren't lying in their letters as well... maybe this should just be considered part of the process? Like, yes Masterson committed the crime, now who else was he? Did he contribute nothing to society except for being a vicious Hollywood predator? etc.

The scientology thing adds a whole other angle here...

Anyways, the point is it's easy to not understand why someone would do something, but that doesn't mean it's not understandable (it doesn't mean it's justified either).