TheMaster666
Potential
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2021
- Messages
- 320
These are really two completely separate stories, but I just found out about both of them in the span of 2 days. I'm not really the kind of person into celebrity gossip, but when I saw these headlines, it was pretty depressing.
Kevin Conroy, arguably the greatest incarnation of Batman (certainly my favorite), passed away just a few days ago. He was in his 60s and he died of cancer, but not before leaving us with a final, truly inspirational message.
Danny Masterson, aka. Steven Hyde on That 70s Show, has been on trial for raping 3 women in the early 00s. Now this isn't exactly news to people who aren't me, since his accusers first came forward publicly in 2017 or so I think. He had been removed from his Netflix show Ranch he started with Ashton Kutcher (aka Michael Kelso) I've been reading some of the details of the case and court transcript, and honestly the conclusion I find most likely is that he's guilty. I'm struggling to come up with a reasonable doubt, and I bet the jury is too. (They are currently deliberating, the closing arguments were made yesterday or day before.) The prosecution seems to make a very strong case, with evidence, witness testimony, etc., while the best the defense could muster was some minor "inconsistencies" which the prosecution could reasonably explain away. Danny didn't testify in his defense, and his defense called no other witnesses either. When your defense attorney is reminding the jury, "If you have any reasonable doubt, you must vote not guilty," that's not exactly a ringing endorsement of innocence. An innocent party would deny false claims, or explain how they've been exaggerated, misconstrued, etc. The defendant needs his proverbial day in court to tell his side of the story. Well he has his day, and he's pleading the fifth. Doesn't inspire confidence, to say the least. Add to that a pattern of history, with 4 accusers (one who is not part of this trial) all describing a similar method of taking advantage of women when they're so drunk they were passed out, or when they were sleeping. The narratives presented leave no room for possibly misinterpreting something as consent, with some of the women repeatedly protesting and/or fighting back to break free. The only possible question mark in his defense, that I can see, is that one of his accusers was an ex-girlfriend. The rape purportedly happened while they were dating, and she continued to have sex with him even afterwards, multiple times. That's the only thing that maybe calls into question whether she was really raped, but even still that's just one of the 3 women, and I don't think it necessarily implies she wasn't raped. People in love have feelings, attachment, she may have tried to explain away the incident at first and rationalize it, only coming to terms with the gravity and reality of the event after the fact.
____________
I think most likely the jury will vote to convict, and I believe that is the right call. This pains me to say, because I loved That 70s Show, and his character Hyde was one of my favorites. He was the cool one, the real rock 'n' roll character on the show. But actors are completely different people to the characters they play, and no one is above the law or deserves special treatment for being a star.
Anyway, this is just my opinion. You can read up on the details of the case yourself, if you're interested. Let me know what you think about all this. And I apologize to be the bearer of ill news.
Kevin Conroy, arguably the greatest incarnation of Batman (certainly my favorite), passed away just a few days ago. He was in his 60s and he died of cancer, but not before leaving us with a final, truly inspirational message.
Danny Masterson, aka. Steven Hyde on That 70s Show, has been on trial for raping 3 women in the early 00s. Now this isn't exactly news to people who aren't me, since his accusers first came forward publicly in 2017 or so I think. He had been removed from his Netflix show Ranch he started with Ashton Kutcher (aka Michael Kelso) I've been reading some of the details of the case and court transcript, and honestly the conclusion I find most likely is that he's guilty. I'm struggling to come up with a reasonable doubt, and I bet the jury is too. (They are currently deliberating, the closing arguments were made yesterday or day before.) The prosecution seems to make a very strong case, with evidence, witness testimony, etc., while the best the defense could muster was some minor "inconsistencies" which the prosecution could reasonably explain away. Danny didn't testify in his defense, and his defense called no other witnesses either. When your defense attorney is reminding the jury, "If you have any reasonable doubt, you must vote not guilty," that's not exactly a ringing endorsement of innocence. An innocent party would deny false claims, or explain how they've been exaggerated, misconstrued, etc. The defendant needs his proverbial day in court to tell his side of the story. Well he has his day, and he's pleading the fifth. Doesn't inspire confidence, to say the least. Add to that a pattern of history, with 4 accusers (one who is not part of this trial) all describing a similar method of taking advantage of women when they're so drunk they were passed out, or when they were sleeping. The narratives presented leave no room for possibly misinterpreting something as consent, with some of the women repeatedly protesting and/or fighting back to break free. The only possible question mark in his defense, that I can see, is that one of his accusers was an ex-girlfriend. The rape purportedly happened while they were dating, and she continued to have sex with him even afterwards, multiple times. That's the only thing that maybe calls into question whether she was really raped, but even still that's just one of the 3 women, and I don't think it necessarily implies she wasn't raped. People in love have feelings, attachment, she may have tried to explain away the incident at first and rationalize it, only coming to terms with the gravity and reality of the event after the fact.
____________
I think most likely the jury will vote to convict, and I believe that is the right call. This pains me to say, because I loved That 70s Show, and his character Hyde was one of my favorites. He was the cool one, the real rock 'n' roll character on the show. But actors are completely different people to the characters they play, and no one is above the law or deserves special treatment for being a star.
Anyway, this is just my opinion. You can read up on the details of the case yourself, if you're interested. Let me know what you think about all this. And I apologize to be the bearer of ill news.
Last edited: