Danny Masterson

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are Ashton and Mila in Scientology?

I can see pressures on them via Scientology if they are. That video was odd. The tone and script was just off for an apology video or even an explanation video.

They’ve never announced it publicly. However, Masterson was very involved in Scientology and as they emphasize in their letters, they worked together and were friends for many years. Given that information and the fact they even wrote these letters, it is very likely that Masterson tried to bring one or both of them to the Scientology celebrity centers. It’s well known that they keep tapes of sessions and who knows what Ashton and or Mila divulged. They would have both been very young and naive.

Whatever Scientology has on them must be really bad for them to become rape apologists.

You guys are reading into this. I grew up in a wealthy circle and a few of my friends parents were prosecuted for white collar crimes. Friends and clergy of their religious institutions certainly wrote letters. The rapes happened more than 20 years ago. Danny should’ve been prosecuted then, but he wasn’t, and in that time, he led another life where he was a friend, husband and father. Doesn’t make him less of a monster, but they are writing letters of their account of him over the last 20 years.

Imagine a Nazi being tried for war crimes decades after the fact. They may have run a gas chamber in the war, but gone on to be typical people after that. They should get prison (and worse), but it doesn’t change who they were to the people in their lives who knew them as entirely different people in the aftermath.

You are disgusting.

I’m not disgusting. I believe his victims and agree with his sentence. But you guys sound deranged with your conspiracy theories. It’s completely plausible that he did terrible things to a few women but was also a beloved friend to others who didn’t display any red flags of criminal behavior. And that he didn’t commit any additional crimes in the 20 years that have lapsed, so they are telling their account. He hasn’t appeared to be a threat to society at this time, so this is purely abojt punishing him for past acts , which, again, is right. But people become eligible for parole on the grounds of good behavior all the time- so it’s fair game for people who can vouch for you to write to a judge on the same grounds regarding sentencing, particularly in a case like this one where the verdict is decades after the fact.

Well said. People have many different sides. Those who wrote character letters for Masterson are attesting to their experience of him-they aren't saying that they know unequivocally that he didn't commit rape. I don't have a problem with it and they shouldn't be attacked.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are Ashton and Mila in Scientology?

I can see pressures on them via Scientology if they are. That video was odd. The tone and script was just off for an apology video or even an explanation video.

They’ve never announced it publicly. However, Masterson was very involved in Scientology and as they emphasize in their letters, they worked together and were friends for many years. Given that information and the fact they even wrote these letters, it is very likely that Masterson tried to bring one or both of them to the Scientology celebrity centers. It’s well known that they keep tapes of sessions and who knows what Ashton and or Mila divulged. They would have both been very young and naive.

Whatever Scientology has on them must be really bad for them to become rape apologists.

You guys are reading into this. I grew up in a wealthy circle and a few of my friends parents were prosecuted for white collar crimes. Friends and clergy of their religious institutions certainly wrote letters. The rapes happened more than 20 years ago. Danny should’ve been prosecuted then, but he wasn’t, and in that time, he led another life where he was a friend, husband and father. Doesn’t make him less of a monster, but they are writing letters of their account of him over the last 20 years.

Imagine a Nazi being tried for war crimes decades after the fact. They may have run a gas chamber in the war, but gone on to be typical people after that. They should get prison (and worse), but it doesn’t change who they were to the people in their lives who knew them as entirely different people in the aftermath.

You are disgusting.

I’m not disgusting. I believe his victims and agree with his sentence. But you guys sound deranged with your conspiracy theories. It’s completely plausible that he did terrible things to a few women but was also a beloved friend to others who didn’t display any red flags of criminal behavior. And that he didn’t commit any additional crimes in the 20 years that have lapsed, so they are telling their account. He hasn’t appeared to be a threat to society at this time, so this is purely abojt punishing him for past acts , which, again, is right. But people become eligible for parole on the grounds of good behavior all the time- so it’s fair game for people who can vouch for you to write to a judge on the same grounds regarding sentencing, particularly in a case like this one where the verdict is decades after the fact.

Well said. People have many different sides. Those who wrote character letters for Masterson are attesting to their experience of him-they aren't saying that they know unequivocally that he didn't commit rape. I don't have a problem with it and they shouldn't be attacked.

+1

People are free to make choices in life. Kutcher and Kunis are free to use their time and resources to beg for a lighter sentence for a convicted rapist. I'm free to never support their work again.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are Ashton and Mila in Scientology?

I can see pressures on them via Scientology if they are. That video was odd. The tone and script was just off for an apology video or even an explanation video.

They’ve never announced it publicly. However, Masterson was very involved in Scientology and as they emphasize in their letters, they worked together and were friends for many years. Given that information and the fact they even wrote these letters, it is very likely that Masterson tried to bring one or both of them to the Scientology celebrity centers. It’s well known that they keep tapes of sessions and who knows what Ashton and or Mila divulged. They would have both been very young and naive.

Whatever Scientology has on them must be really bad for them to become rape apologists.

You guys are reading into this. I grew up in a wealthy circle and a few of my friends parents were prosecuted for white collar crimes. Friends and clergy of their religious institutions certainly wrote letters. The rapes happened more than 20 years ago. Danny should’ve been prosecuted then, but he wasn’t, and in that time, he led another life where he was a friend, husband and father. Doesn’t make him less of a monster, but they are writing letters of their account of him over the last 20 years.

Imagine a Nazi being tried for war crimes decades after the fact. They may have run a gas chamber in the war, but gone on to be typical people after that. They should get prison (and worse), but it doesn’t change who they were to the people in their lives who knew them as entirely different people in the aftermath.

You are disgusting.

I’m not disgusting. I believe his victims and agree with his sentence. But you guys sound deranged with your conspiracy theories. It’s completely plausible that he did terrible things to a few women but was also a beloved friend to others who didn’t display any red flags of criminal behavior. And that he didn’t commit any additional crimes in the 20 years that have lapsed, so they are telling their account. He hasn’t appeared to be a threat to society at this time, so this is purely abojt punishing him for past acts , which, again, is right. But people become eligible for parole on the grounds of good behavior all the time- so it’s fair game for people who can vouch for you to write to a judge on the same grounds regarding sentencing, particularly in a case like this one where the verdict is decades after the fact.

Well said. People have many different sides. Those who wrote character letters for Masterson are attesting to their experience of him-they aren't saying that they know unequivocally that he didn't commit rape. I don't have a problem with it and they shouldn't be attacked.

+1

People are free to make choices in life. Kutcher and Kunis are free to use their time and resources to beg for a lighter sentence for a convicted rapist. I'm free to never support their work again.

They love to brag about advocating for victims of sex trafficking but when the rubber net the road they'd sooner support a rapist friend

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don’t know if this has been said yet, but it’s crazy to put someone away for 30 years without hard evidence.

It’s hard to discount multiple women testifying that they were drugged and raped by him even if there was no dna evidence. I don’t know who else the jury heard from. But maybe other people corroborated their experiences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t know if this has been said yet, but it’s crazy to put someone away for 30 years without hard evidence.

It’s hard to discount multiple women testifying that they were drugged and raped by him even if there was no dna evidence. I don’t know who else the jury heard from. But maybe other people corroborated their experiences.

Everything was reported and written down by Scientology at the time of the assaults.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Are any of his accusers recent? I am NOT discounting the older cases or implying that he should not be punished for those; he absolutely should be. I am just curious if that behavior continued to present day.

[Anonymous]

The posters blindly defending folks writing character references are completely missing the point. Nobody's saying convicted people can't have loved ones weigh in on their sentencing. No one.. it is totally reasonable to write a letter that says, his daughter would really suffer from not having her father, a shorter sentence would be appropriate, he wouldn't be a threat and he would be paying his debt....That's not what these letters did. These letters are saying that Danny is this person who has been wonderful every moment of his life and they have never ever seen him act inappropriately, and he just hates drugs.

He is convicted of drugging and raping these women. These letters are saying that these women are lying. Let that sink in. These letters are being written by people like Ashton kutcher, who personally knew these women. He knows that Danny Masterson is a slime ball. they also have a mutual friend who is a huge cokehead and that is common knowledge. It's all bs. The fact that Ashton has a charity for victims of sex trafficking makes it a million times worse. (Topher Grace never got along with the lot of them, and this is why. He has never been into bad behavior and this gross lifestyle. He also comes from money but was not flashy, which I think is telling.)

You can write a character reference for a friend. You cannot re-traumatize their victims and say quite blatantly that it's impossible he did the crimes he was CONVICTED of.

[Anonymous]

8 women have said they were drugged and raped (not all were part of this trial). Not 5.

[Anonymous]

Mila and Ashton recorded an “apology” that totally skirted the issue. I will say they look pretty shell shocked that those letters became public and the resulting backlash.

[Anonymous]

https://www.instagram.com/reel/Cw-6kG2PusA/

On Ashton’s instagram.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Don’t know if this has been said yet, but it’s crazy to put someone away for 30 years without hard evidence.

There is no legal category of "hard evidence" which shows your lack of knowledge of the legal system and this case. In this particular case, the victims gave direct testimony under oath and subject to cross examination by the defendant's counsel. That is evidence. It is up to the jury to decide whether or not that testimonial evidence is reliable and truthful (which this jury found it to be) and up to cross examination to discredit (which this jury did not find). Masterson also waived his right to testify and exercised his right to remain silent. Hence he deliberately gave up his right to give his own testimony and allowed the only first hand account to be those of the accusers. This is not insignificant, it is a huge gamble and typically is not looked favorably on by juries as they want to hear both sides. Masterson did not provide his testimony, that was his decision.

Two of the victims also individually told third parties (friends) of these events after they happened. One even filed a police report in 2004. These facts were all permitted to be admissible as evidence.

If you are suggesting that "hard evidence" is only DNA to satisfy your personal comfort level, then you have zero knowledge of criminal court. And you should know that the overwhelming majority of sexual assault cases do not have any DNA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t know if this has been said yet, but it’s crazy to put someone away for 30 years without hard evidence.

It’s hard to discount multiple women testifying that they were drugged and raped by him even if there was no dna evidence. I don’t know who else the jury heard from. But maybe other people corroborated their experiences.

Yes, and DNA evidence isn't the only form of "hard evidence."

Testimony is hard evidence. Corroborated testimony even better. Yes, the fact that it was multiple women alleging similar things matters. So does the fact that at least one of the women reported her rape to the police at the time, and at least two of them told people in their lives about what had happened close in time (this eliminates the possibility that these women, who did not know each other at the time, could have conspired to allege matching experiences). Testimony from the police in that original investigation is hard evidence.

Keep in mind, Danny didn't testify and his entire defense was just "they are lying." That's it. And the only victim for which he can produce a motivation for lying is the one who was an ex-girlfriend, and that's also the one count of rape for which the jury did not convict. He basically did not produce a defense for why these two other women would have such similar allegations about him, both of them having told others about it at the time, one of whom filed a police report, if they were just making it all up. That makes no sense. They did not profit financially from their allegations at any point. It has been pretty unpleasant for them to come forward. If, on top of all that, their testimony was compelling and could be corroborated by one another and by other witnesses? That's "hard evidence."

If you only think someone should be convicted of something if there is video footage, or a fingerprint or DNA evidence, then god help you if you are ever the victim of a crime because you will never see justice. That's not how it works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Don’t know if this has been said yet, but it’s crazy to put someone away for 30 years without hard evidence.

There is no legal category of "hard evidence" which shows your lack of knowledge of the legal system and this case. In this particular case, the victims gave direct testimony under oath and subject to cross examination by the defendant's counsel. That is evidence. It is up to the jury to decide whether or not that testimonial evidence is reliable and truthful (which this jury found it to be) and up to cross examination to discredit (which this jury did not find). Masterson also waived his right to testify and exercised his right to remain silent. Hence he deliberately gave up his right to give his own testimony and allowed the only first hand account to be those of the accusers. This is not insignificant, it is a huge gamble and typically is not looked favorably on by juries as they want to hear both sides. Masterson did not provide his testimony, that was his decision.

Two of the victims also individually told third parties (friends) of these events after they happened. One even filed a police report in 2004. These facts were all permitted to be admissible as evidence.

If you are suggesting that "hard evidence" is only DNA to satisfy your personal comfort level, then you have zero knowledge of criminal court. And you should know that the overwhelming majority of sexual assault cases do not have any DNA.

DP but what does knowledge of criminal court or our legal system have to do with forming an opinion that it’s crazy to lock someone up for 30 years without hard evidence?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are Ashton and Mila in Scientology?

I can see pressures on them via Scientology if they are. That video was odd. The tone and script was just off for an apology video or even an explanation video.

They’ve never announced it publicly. However, Masterson was very involved in Scientology and as they emphasize in their letters, they worked together and were friends for many years. Given that information and the fact they even wrote these letters, it is very likely that Masterson tried to bring one or both of them to the Scientology celebrity centers. It’s well known that they keep tapes of sessions and who knows what Ashton and or Mila divulged. They would have both been very young and naive.

Whatever Scientology has on them must be really bad for them to become rape apologists.

You guys are reading into this. I grew up in a wealthy circle and a few of my friends parents were prosecuted for white collar crimes. Friends and clergy of their religious institutions certainly wrote letters. The rapes happened more than 20 years ago. Danny should’ve been prosecuted then, but he wasn’t, and in that time, he led another life where he was a friend, husband and father. Doesn’t make him less of a monster, but they are writing letters of their account of him over the last 20 years.

Imagine a Nazi being tried for war crimes decades after the fact. They may have run a gas chamber in the war, but gone on to be typical people after that. They should get prison (and worse), but it doesn’t change who they were to the people in their lives who knew them as entirely different people in the aftermath.

You are disgusting.

+1