184
“Trial by social media”
I dunno. He certainly didn’t help his cause there when he released that creepy vague cringe vid he did about the accusations in his House of Cards character.
Testifying at your own trial is almost always a bad idea, even if it's a social media trial
He did like 3 of those, one per year, consecutively
I'm still surprised how quickly this guy's 30 year career imploded. He went from a household name to basically non-existent in the span of a week. Can't say he didn't bring it upon himself but it's still surprising.
What's the public sentiment on this verdict going to be? I have not been following the case.
I think he was found not guilty. Anyone that continues to demonize him should probably step up with more information than came out at the trial before they open their mouths again and ruin a man's career.
I'm not sure where the first witch hunt came from, but I'd lay it at the feet of social media platforms like Reddit causing an echo chamber that drove it.
The fact that he was abandoned by the studios and the people he worked with said more about them than it does about him.
A verdict in a court of law is based on what is presented, not on what happened. This is what makes it possible for people to commit a crime, and get away with it (or get framed for something that they didn't do).
This is a question that I do not want you to answer here, but one to ponder:
If your son/nephew/younger was up for a part in a project that was directed by, and starring Kevin Spacey? What weight would you assign to that Not Guilty due to insufficient evidence verdict?
load more comments
(5 replies)
Calling it a social media witchunt is a bit trite. A number of people came forward, detailing a history that spanned years. His claims that they were motivated 'by money' and painting it as 'aspiring actors' when we're talking a group that includes professionals with their own VERY well established careers also reeks of the rear end of the equine.
Yeah, let's not confuse "not guilty" with "not a creepy old man". The bar for the state taking away your rights based on your activity is fairly high -- as it should be -- but not being able to produce sufficient evidence of acts that don't leave a whole lot of physical evidence behind doesn't make the accusations false.
It just makes them not enough.
And, I'm sorry to everyone out there who seem weirdly motivated to want to believe that accusers are overwhelmingly liars, but his hand-waving away of the accusations was not confidence inspiring.
Let's not forget that multiple accusers up and fucking died while waiting for their day in court, also.
Kinda hard to provide testimony that could have been compelling for the court when a number of key witnesses don't survive the trial.
Multiple sources i've read indicate that Spacey seems to believe he can climb right back on top of the A-list again now this court case is over.
It was around the qanon situation
And after Weinstein
Edit: just read the harassment stuff on Wikipedia.
I'm not sure if this trial tells anything about the whole truth with all that going on
load more comments
(9 replies)
You are still allowed to dislike innocent people. The law is not morality.
He also wasn't found "innocent", but "not guilty".
There's a vast difference between that. Not guilty means that we can't prove he's guilty beyond reasonable doubt, not that we can prove that he's innocent.
It's still very likely he committed crimes, but we can't be sure enough to send him to jail.
Came here to say this! With all we've heard about the man, I'd say he's slam-dunk "not innocent". BUT, he was found not guilty as charged.
People really get up in arms because they don't know the difference. And it's not just some legal shenanigans, it's a real-world thing.
Another example is my sleezebag Congressman, Matt Gaetz. People act like he wasn't prosecuted due to being in Congress, money, whatever. No, he wasn't prosecuted due to lack of evidence and witness testimony.
Is he an innocent man? Fuck no. But that's not enough to lock him up. Given the nature of the case, I wouldn't have prosecuted either. About zero chance of a jury returning a guilty verdict. Pretty sad about it, I really hoped to see that man in orange.
I have never heard about an "innocent" verdict, is that really a thing?
They are just making a point. No such thing, just pointing out that criminal courts don't prove innocence.
I think the closest you get to that is if you counter-sue (or they get sued for lying in court, etc.) the accusers and win.
When Depp won against Heard, Reddit went full on circle jerk around Depp. Sure his ex was an abusive fuck, but that doesn't excuse Depp's horrendous actions and his general creepyness. Dude is 60 chasing after 20 year olds and complains when they're immature. His ex may have been worse than him, but he's still an abusive creep.
semen (the body fluid)
You are still allowed to dislike innocent people.
Just a small correction. Being not proven guilty doesn't proves innocence. It just means that the accusation couldn't be proven in court. That's the price we pay for our justice system which tries to keep wrong convictions as small as possible, quite a few guilty people will walk free.
And I think in this case a guilty person walks free.
Even though I haven't been following the case, I'm quite surprised.
I wonder if Netflix will hire him to do an alternate ending for House Of Cards now that he's been found not guilty.
I'm not too invested in this so I could be wrong but wasn't there a news story just recently that like 3 people set to testify against him died mysteriously or something?
Will be interesting to see if his career rebounds after this or what.
No chance, he's tainted goods. Maybe with the right social media spin, after a LONG time, he could come back.
Really sucks, loved his acting. Just watched American Beauty the other night and was able to see the actor and not the sins. But still, tell me Spacey is in a new movie, and guess what's top of mind?
this post was submitted on 26 Jul 2023
184 points (92.6% liked)
News
22838 readers
3640 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS