709 replies to this topic

[Mike K.]

Oh yeah, you’re right. I guess she has not spefically tied him to her complaint:

“A former “ER” actress claims that she was sexually and racially harassed daily on set — and George Clooney helped “blacklist” her from Hollywood when she complained.

“Clooney helped blacklist me when I spoke up abt harassment on ER.’women who dont play the game lose career’I did,” tweeted Vanessa Marquez, who played a nurse on the show’s first three seasons.”

https://pagesix.com/...sconduct-claim/

[VicHockeyFan]

And to be fair, Clooney was not the harraser, and was not a producer or anything on ER, he was just a cast member.  This actress accused lots of the other co-stars too.

 

But I suppose we can all just bow down and take the #WeBelieveYou stance in every single case.

Edited by VicHockeyFan, 17 October 2017 - 07:14 AM.

[nagel]

Uhh I don't think most people take it in every single case but when you get 13 women saying Arnold groped them, 50+ for Cosby, and about the same for Harvey, it's pretty clear there's a pattern going on for all 3 of those creeps.  Sure there probably isn't anything solid enough for him to go to jail for, but the public shaming/reputation in tatters, is entirely justified.

[VicHockeyFan]

Uhh I don't think most people take it in every single case but when you get 13 women saying Arnold groped them, 50+ for Cosby, and about the same for Harvey, it's pretty clear there's a pattern going on for all 3 of those creeps.  Sure there probably isn't anything solid enough for him to go to jail for, but the public shaming/reputation in tatters, is entirely justified.

 

VicPD for example has already told everyone, including all victims that have not yet come forward, that they believe them, period full stop.  They did it all day yesterday.  That seems like a funny way to run a police operation. 

 

 

Good thing judges don't operate that way.

Edited by VicHockeyFan, 17 October 2017 - 07:31 AM.

[Mike K.]

Makes you wonder if the VicPD social media person(s) is overstepping protocol? I dunno, maybe not, since it's just a hashtag?

 

"To all using #metoo to share your story. It's not your fault. We commend you on your courage. #Webelieveyou. #yyj" (12H ago)

 

"To those who aren't ready to share their stories - we'll be here if & when you are ready. #metoo #webelieveyou" (12H ago)

 

"To those who aren't ready to share their stories - we'll be here if & when you are ready. #metoo #webelieveyou" (20H ago)

 

"To all using #metoo to share your story. It's not your fault. We commend you on your courage. #Webelieveyou. #yyj" (20H ago)

[rjag]

 

 

I doubt if anyone here can talk to that with personal experience.

 

Yes I can, but I wont as it was my wife that was approached and harassed by photographers, agents, night club owners etc...., but I can say it happened big time in Victoria and Vancouver

Edited by rjag, 17 October 2017 - 08:25 AM.

[Mattjvd]

VicPD for example has already told everyone, including all victims that have not yet come forward, that they believe them, period full stop. They did it all day yesterday. That seems like a funny way to run a police operation.

screenshot-twitter.com-2017-10-17-08-29-28-050.png

Good thing judges don't operate that way.

But it is the Police forces' job to believe them at face value. Then investigate to find evidence to either support or not support. It's the judge and or jury's job to determine if the accused is guilty, not the police. That is not a funny way to operate a police force at all.

[VicHockeyFan]

But it is the Police forces' job to believe them at face value. Then investigate to find evidence to either support or not support. It's the judge and or jury's job to determine if the accused is guilty, not the police. That is not a funny way to operate a police force at all.

 

No, you do not believe them at face value.  You can take the information at face value.  Because then when you go get the other side of the story and it's wildly different, and you have already decided you believe the victim, you are already in a very biased position. 

 

What if 30 other witnesses back up the accused's version, and you can not find a single witness to back the victim?  Still believe her?

 

Let's take this case for example:

 

A woman who claimed to have been sexually assaulted two days before Jenique Dalcourt's 2014 murder near the same spot in Longueuil has admitted she lied to police, pleading guilty to charges of mischief and making and using false documents.

 

In February 2015, Carole Thomas went public with claims she had been sexually assaulted on a bike path in Longueuil, just two days before 23-year-old Jenique Dalcourt was fatally attacked in the same area.

 

 

http://www.cbc.ca/ne...ation-1.3790462

 

Do police still believe her original story?

 

 

 

How about this one?

 

The roots of English’s charges go back to January 2009, after her then boyfriend was convicted of assaulting her and received an intermittent weekend jail sentence, absconding for the west coast before completing it.

 

After he was gone, English went to Kingston Police, complaining that before he’d left the man assaulted her again, brutally raped her multiple times and in various ways and afterward forced her into a bathtub where he poured bleach over her to destroy evidence. She also claimed that he threatened her with a gun, held her prisoner, at one point, duct-taped her to a chair and inflicted cruelties on her dog.

 

Masse was told that Kingston Police took the accusations seriously enough that they located her former partner in Vancouver and flew there to charge him and bring him back

 

The man was sent to Quinte Detention on Feb. 16, 2009, and remained there until May 1 that year, with multiple allegations, including sexual assault charges, hanging over his head.

 

The whole time he was there he insisted it was a fabrication and he hadn’t done any of it. And as assistant Crown attorney Janet O’Brien noted in her closing argument, English’s claims just wouldn’t hold up under scrutiny.

 

Eventually, police and the Crown attorney’s office became convinced they were holding a man in custody based on falsehoods. The charges against him were dropped and English was charged with public mischief in his stead.

 

“Her first statement is at odds with her second,” O’Brien told the judge and the more times English repeated her tale the more inconsistent it became.

 

Moreover, the man she accused claimed that English had blackmailed him into continuing their relationship by threatening that if he didn’t come to see her - in contravention of court orders - she’d accuse him of assaulting her again to police.

 

Her victim told Kingston Police investigators that he left the city before completing his intermittent sentence, however, after English, who worked as a bartender at the time, convinced some men of her acquaintance to beat him up.

 

Masse, in his judgement convicting English, noted that it was evident in photos the Kingston officers took after arresting him in Vancouver that he had been severely beaten.

 

But he also found there was evidence he and English had assaulted each other the night before he fled, and there was insufficient evidence of the involvement of the others he’d named.

 

With regard to English’s other accusations, however, Masse said, “I am satisfied beyond any reasonable doubt that the video statement [she gave police] is a complete fabrication,” and her accounts to police were comprised of nothing but “outright lies, half-truths and omissions.”

 

 

http://www.thewhig.c...-month-sentence

 

 

 

Now, I'm saying all of this is pretty rare on balance, but it's not very good if police go into it saying #WeBelieveYou.

Edited by VicHockeyFan, 17 October 2017 - 09:44 AM.

[Mattjvd]

No, you do not believe them at face value. You can take the information at face value. Because then when you go get the other side of the story and it's wildly different, and you have already decided you believe the victim, you are already in a very biased position.

What if 30 other witnesses back up the accused's version, and you can not find a single witness to back the victim? Still believe her?

Let's take this case for example:


http://www.cbc.ca/ne...ation-1.3790462

Do police still believe her original story?



How about this one?


http://www.thewhig.c...-month-sentence



Now, I'm saying all of this is pretty rare on balance, but it's not very good if police go into it saying #WeBelieveYou.

That would be the part where the police force investigates and gathers evidence either supporting or not supporting the alleged victim's statement. Exactly what I said. But when someone walks into the police station and makes a complaint or accusation, it's the forces job to take it seriously and believe it, at least until they are discover evidence to the contrary.

[VicHockeyFan]

That would be the part where the police force investigates and gathers evidence either supporting or not supporting the alleged victim's statement. Exactly what I said. But when someone walks into the police station and makes a complaint or accusation, it's the forces job to take it seriously and believe it, at least until they are discover evidence to the contrary.

 

Take it seriously, for sure.  Believe it, no way.

[Mattjvd]

Take it seriously, for sure.  Believe it, no way.

Okay, I'll say believe with a healthy allowance for investigative skepticism.

 

After reading your post again, I think we're mostly on the same page re: How police should treat the complaints. But we have different interpretations on what the VPD tweet means.

[VicHockeyFan]

Okay, I'll say believe with a healthy allowance for investigative skepticism.

 

After reading your post again, I think we're mostly on the same page re: How police should treat the complaints. But we have different interpretations on what the VPD tweet means.

 

I was going to say, we are on the same page.  I'd rather VicPD just say what they want to say, maybe in a paragraph, rather than a hashtag.

[Nostalgic Victoria]

I don't know, this is an industry that does a pretty good job of employing lawyers and creative accounting and methods to screw over lots of people downstream financially.  I'm sure they will employ the same methods that people think they will be exposing to meet a similar objective.

 

"Hey, actor Bob Smith, this is Big Producer X over at company Y.  I heard you are supporting actress Sally Smith in exposing Director Z.  That would be a big mistake if you want to get more jobs here.  Not telling you what to do of course, but think it through, we already hear the rumours coming from your circles."  CLICK

 

In an event like that, they might also want to look at Producer X for covering for Director Z - odds are, more likely than not, that Producer X knows what Director Z was doing and did nothing to stop it, and may also have some skeletons in his own closet.

[LJ]

Perfect....

Attached Images

• 

[amor de cosmos]

what about the oscars? could anyone beat woody harrelson & sally hawkins for lead actor/actress?

[nagel]

what about the oscars? could anyone beat woody harrelson & sally hawkins for lead actor/actress?

Too on topic.  This thread is supposed to be hijacked by the moderators' hard on for US politics.

[amor de cosmos]

what about roger deakins? will bladerunner be the movie that finally wins him a cinematography oscar?

[VicHockeyFan]

Please tell me Hans Zimmer is up for an award!

[Mattjvd]

I finally went to see Dunkirk. It was very impresive on the museum IMAX.

[VicHockeyFan]

I finally went to see Dunkirk. It was very impresive on the museum IMAX.

 

I saw it last night!  First time in IMAX, second time overall.  I picked up a lot more stuff this time.  Knowing now how all the stories are intertwined and not always in order.  

 

For example, showing a set from the plane's point of view, you might see them fly over a trawler with guys bailing out.  But you do not immediately connect that to the guys that boarded it to escape 20 minutes ago, when it was onshore.  But then a scene or two later you see them from the water point of view.  All well done.

 

I had not read previously about this Canadian connection to Dunkirk (the event and the movie):

 

http://www.macleans....ute-that-wasnt/

Edited by VicHockeyFan, 18 October 2017 - 10:57 AM.