Danny Masterson

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they really don’t think he did it.Neither did at least one person on the first jury. So what? That makes them evil?

A boatload of people don’t think Adnan killed that girl. Are they “evil” too? Is it really “evil” to take what you know about a situation and form an opinion, despite what a jury decides?

Well Adnan has since been acquitted, so, a little different

No he hasnt

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they really don’t think he did it.Neither did at least one person on the first jury. So what? That makes them evil?

A boatload of people don’t think Adnan killed that girl. Are they “evil” too? Is it really “evil” to take what you know about a situation and form an opinion, despite what a jury decides?

Well Adnan has since been acquitted, so, a little different

No he hasnt

Because he’s guilty—yet everyone had a ball trying to pick the case apart. This case is different, I suppose, because here the victims can talk, and it’s problematic to suggest a woman would lie about being raped. It was fine to pick apart Jay’s testimony because he wasn’t the victim (or a particularly noble person at the time of the incident).

I don’t really have a point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they really don’t think he did it.Neither did at least one person on the first jury. So what? That makes them evil?

A boatload of people don’t think Adnan killed that girl. Are they “evil” too? Is it really “evil” to take what you know about a situation and form an opinion, despite what a jury decides?

Well Adnan has since been acquitted, so, a little different

No he hasnt

Because he’s guilty—yet everyone had a ball trying to pick the case apart. This case is different, I suppose, because here the victims can talk, and it’s problematic to suggest a woman would lie about being raped. It was fine to pick apart Jay’s testimony because he wasn’t the victim (or a particularly noble person at the time of the incident).

I don’t really have a point.

DP. I’ve always thought adnan was guilty however o think that the real issue is 1) his victims family made a really misguided decision to stay out of the spotlight and did not participate in serial which led to adnan’s view shaping the whole narrative and 2) adnan truly has an incompetent lawyer who was a drunk and later disbarred so I do not think he got a fair trail despite him actually being guilty. Neither of those situations apply to Danny Masterson.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they really don’t think he did it.Neither did at least one person on the first jury. So what? That makes them evil?

A boatload of people don’t think Adnan killed that girl. Are they “evil” too? Is it really “evil” to take what you know about a situation and form an opinion, despite what a jury decides?

Well Adnan has since been acquitted, so, a little different

No he hasnt

Because he’s guilty—yet everyone had a ball trying to pick the case apart. This case is different, I suppose, because here the victims can talk, and it’s problematic to suggest a woman would lie about being raped. It was fine to pick apart Jay’s testimony because he wasn’t the victim (or a particularly noble person at the time of the incident).

I don’t really have a point.

DP. I’ve always thought adnan was guilty however o think that the real issue is 1) his victims family made a really misguided decision to stay out of the spotlight and did not participate in serial which led to adnan’s view shaping the whole narrative and 2) adnan truly has an incompetent lawyer who was a drunk and later disbarred so I do not think he got a fair trail despite him actually being guilty. Neither of those situations apply to Danny Masterson.

Cristina Gutierrez was not an incompetent attorney, nor was she a drunk. She suffered from multiple sclerosis and diabetes, and like many defense attorneys, she gave far too much to her work and didn't know when to quit in preservation of her own health. She made mistakes in her final years practicing law while very ill, and she made no objection to disbarment, after which the bar dropped its investigations into complaints clients had made against her. There was never any evidence that she intentionally shirked her clients but rather that her practice was compromised by her cognitive abilities being compromised by her severe health issues. If anything, Cristina's case is one that shows how the legal community often fails to support peers and get them help when they need it.

As for Adnan - he may not have been acquitted, but it is a very significant thing when the prosecutor tells the court that they no longer have confidence in a conviction. That is the prosecution saying, in effect, that they don't think a jury would or should have found guilt on the evidence as it now exists. It is in effect a declaration of the existence of substantial reasonable doubt.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they really don’t think he did it.Neither did at least one person on the first jury. So what? That makes them evil?

A boatload of people don’t think Adnan killed that girl. Are they “evil” too? Is it really “evil” to take what you know about a situation and form an opinion, despite what a jury decides?

Well Adnan has since been acquitted, so, a little different

No he hasnt

Because he’s guilty—yet everyone had a ball trying to pick the case apart. This case is different, I suppose, because here the victims can talk, and it’s problematic to suggest a woman would lie about being raped. It was fine to pick apart Jay’s testimony because he wasn’t the victim (or a particularly noble person at the time of the incident).

I don’t really have a point.

DP. I’ve always thought adnan was guilty however o think that the real issue is 1) his victims family made a really misguided decision to stay out of the spotlight and did not participate in serial which led to adnan’s view shaping the whole narrative and 2) adnan truly has an incompetent lawyer who was a drunk and later disbarred so I do not think he got a fair trail despite him actually being guilty. Neither of those situations apply to Danny Masterson.

Cristina Gutierrez was not an incompetent attorney, nor was she a drunk. She suffered from multiple sclerosis and diabetes, and like many defense attorneys, she gave far too much to her work and didn't know when to quit in preservation of her own health. She made mistakes in her final years practicing law while very ill, and she made no objection to disbarment, after which the bar dropped its investigations into complaints clients had made against her. There was never any evidence that she intentionally shirked her clients but rather that her practice was compromised by her cognitive abilities being compromised by her severe health issues. If anything, Cristina's case is one that shows how the legal community often fails to support peers and get them help when they need it.

As for Adnan - he may not have been acquitted, but it is a very significant thing when the prosecutor tells the court that they no longer have confidence in a conviction. That is the prosecution saying, in effect, that they don't think a jury would or should have found guilt on the evidence as it now exists. It is in effect a declaration of the existence of substantial reasonable doubt.

To clarify, reasonable doubt to the extent that a responsible prosecutor following the ethical mandates of prosecution would not have brought the case in the first place.

~ former prosecutor and defense attorney

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe they really don’t think he did it.Neither did at least one person on the first jury. So what? That makes them evil?

A boatload of people don’t think Adnan killed that girl. Are they “evil” too? Is it really “evil” to take what you know about a situation and form an opinion, despite what a jury decides?

Well Adnan has since been acquitted, so, a little different

His conviction was vacated and he is out of jail. And recent DNA tests show “multiple contributors” and show none of Adnans DNA. And another suspect had threatened to kill her prior to her murder. So, no, he is not “definitely guilty”.

No he hasnt

Because he’s guilty—yet everyone had a ball trying to pick the case apart. This case is different, I suppose, because here the victims can talk, and it’s problematic to suggest a woman would lie about being raped. It was fine to pick apart Jay’s testimony because he wasn’t the victim (or a particularly noble person at the time of the incident).

I don’t really have a point.

[Anonymous]

His conviction was vacated, he is no longer in jail, and recent DNA tests showed “multiple contributors” and none of Adnans DNA. Also a different suspect threatened to kill her prior to her murder. So… no, not necessarily guilty.

[Anonymous]

How is Bijou though???! Seriously. They have a super young kid and does she have any source of income?? Yikes

[Anonymous]

Now Ashton has stepped down from the trafficking organization that he founded. Interesting. It seems like he has something to hide.

[Anonymous]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/09/15/entertainment/...ign-thorn/index.html

Ashton Kutcher has stepped down from his role at Thorn, an anti-child sex abuse organization he co-founded, after drawing criticism last week over letters of support he and his wife Mila Kunis wrote on behalf of their former “That 70s Show” co-star Danny Masterson ahead of a sentencing hearing.

Kunis is also stepping down as an observer on the Thorn board, according to a report by Time.

“After my wife and I spent several days of listening, personal reflection, learning, and conversations with survivors and the employees and leadership at Thorn, I have determined the responsible thing for me to do is resign as Chairman of the Board, effectively immediately. I cannot allow my error in judgment to distract from our efforts and the children we serve,” Kutcher wrote in his resignation letter to the board, shared by the organization on its website Friday.

Masterson was convicted in May on two counts of rape. He was sentenced last week to 30 years to life in prison.

Kutcher co-founded Thorn more than a decade ago with his ex-wife Demi Moore. The group works to end the sexual exploitation of children and human sex-trafficking.

“Victims of sexual abuse have been historically silenced and the character statement I submitted is yet another painful instance of questioning victims who are brave enough to share their experiences,” Kutcher noted in his letter to the board. “This is precisely what we have all worked to reverse over the last decade.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now Ashton has stepped down from the trafficking organization that he founded. Interesting. It seems like he has something to hide.

They didn't want him on the board after he wrote a letter of support for a RAPIST! I can't believe any of you think he deserves one iota of sympathy or relief.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How is Bijou though???! Seriously. They have a super young kid and does she have any source of income?? Yikes

PPs have already responded to this question -- who effing cares? She's widely known to be a horrible person. Mocking the rape victims was just the tip of the iceberg.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Now Ashton has stepped down from the trafficking organization that he founded. Interesting. It seems like he has something to hide.

They didn't want him on the board after he wrote a letter of support for a RAPIST! I can't believe any of you think he deserves one iota of sympathy or relief.

Yep!! Good riddance.

[Anonymous]

How much you want to bet Ashton and Mila are among the first if not the only actors to appear on Drew Barrymore's new season?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Now Ashton has stepped down from the trafficking organization that he founded. Interesting. It seems like he has something to hide.

I wonder if peloton is going to remove its tread series with Ashton running with celebrities raising $ for Thorn.