George Takei accused of sexual assault.

Isn't the main point though when this stuff becomes news on the internet it gets to a point where the truth doesn't even matter in some ways. Even Takei is innocent it doesn't matter because many people will continue to believe it anyways which means his rep and his career is basically over or severely tarnished.

At what point does privacy became a issue? Isn't talking to the internet the same thing as if a prosecuting attorney went to the press before a trial and leeked everything they had about the accused before the trial even began? Even if the accused is found innocent maybe the public now knows he is gay and hasn't come out or that he goes to prostitues or has a mental illness or anything that people should have some privacy about and maybe he is going to be judged on it for the rest of his life even if he wasn't even guilty of the crime he was accused of.

Jason

 

The expl

The new explanation that he was just playing a part. Prior, you were adamant that he was guilty.

Also, you didn't address your contradictory earlier statement: "I never said Takei was guilty of what he is being accused of(the person claiming he was drugged)."

You clearly did try to make the connection that his "admission" on the Stern show somehow implicated him for the later Brunton accusation.

If you're about to claim you didn't, scroll back up and look up at the bolded portions of your own words.

 

So is this discussion going to be about judging Takei before all the facts are in or two people no one cares about trying to shove each other's words down their throats?

Another thread ready for closure.

 

That was mostly completely made up by a ghostwriter, who Hedy later sued saying all the sex stuff had been made up to sell the book.

There are a ton of old stories about the Hollywood casting couch going back to the Silents. Also about rape being covered up, such as told in the documentary Girl 27, or the 'open' secret about Kirk Douglas raping a 15 year old Natalie Wood and having him be protected, or head of Columbia Harry Cohn being famous for chasing actresses around his desk and it being treated as a joke. It's sad it's taken a full 100 years of Hollywood silence before signs of change happened.

 

Again, I never said Takei was guilty of the specific drugging incident. Here is what I did say:

A: the behavior he described on Stern was sexual assault.

B: in light of the behavior he described on Stern, I said he lost a "presumption of innocence". I still did not say he was actually guilty of the specific drugging incident, but due to what he said on Stern I was not going to give him the "benefit of the doubt" that others were.

C: now that he himself has come out and said his comments on Stern were just joking, but that they WERE wrong and he SHOULDN'T have said it (validating my "A" point above), I said I am willing to believe him as long as there remains a single accusation; but if even one more person comes forward I will not accept his "joking" explanation.

In regard to "C", just because I am willing to conditionally accept his joking excuse does not change my stance that the comments were wrong. It also does not mean I am "okay" with any of it. I'm not. Regardless of whether the specific drugging allegation is true, he never should have been joking about sexual assault.

 

Apparently the latter, then.

 

"Loss of presumption of innocence" means you thought he was guilty. There's no other way to dance around that, though apparently you will try. The entire context of your many, many posts was that because he'd admitted to doing something wrong in the past, he was presumed guilty in the present (or to use your parlance, lost "presumption of innocence"). You were strident in your voicing this, and then you immediately switched gears just because he said he didn't do anything wrong. Like I said, this behavior is exactly why we need a court system rather than the mob to mete out justice.

 

Unfortunately you keep getting more wrong in each post you make, and this one is no exception. Here is a simple "chart" to help you understand how "no presumption of innocence" ≠ "guilty".

Innocent ---> Presumptions of Innocence ---> No presumption either way ---> Presumption of Guilt ---> Guilty

Just because you may not give someone a presumption of innocence does not mean you are saying they are guilty. It means you are not giving them the benefit of the doubt.

Also(and this is pretty important), in all of my posts that you quoted, you specifically left out the one where I CLEARLY said I wasn't saying he was guilty of the accusation:

https://www.trekbbs.com/threads/george-takei-accused-of-sexual-assault.291244/page-9#post-12254275

You will note that that post was made BEFORE he responded to his Stern comments, and BEFORE you claim I changed my stance. Isn't is strange that you would "accidentally" omit the one post where I clearly said I was not saying he was guilty of his current accusation? What an amazing coincidence!

Wrong again. Even after I said I am currently inclined to believe his explanation about joking, I still maintained that his comments on Stern were WRONG. I absolutely never said he didn't do anything wrong, and actually said the complete opposite.

I agree, so it's great that we actually have a court system. We aren't a mob meting out justice, we are some people talking about something on a message board.

 

Jesus guys. I was happy just being a lurker but decided to create an account just to say enough with the back and forth.

Let me settle this:

Flork: the other guy did not specifically say Takei was guilty of what the dude is accusing him of. In fact in his last post he quotes an example of him specifically saying otherwise.

Jack: the other guy doesn't seem to like you and you are wasting your time. You also may or may not have assumed too much about Takei's interview with Howard Stern.

Neither of you are going to convince the other and it makes you both look dumb so just stop already.

 

Welcome!

As to your admonition, I'm certain the moderator will handle it if it crosses the line.

 

It does not matter how long sexual assault has happened--morally repugnant acts/behavior remain unacceptable. This should not need to be explained.

I'm well aware of the casting couch and associated sickening situations throughout the decades, but your criteria for the value of assault is bankrupt at best, as one could make the same argument that murder had gone on forever, so any recent murders are no big deal. The culture and practice of sexual harassment/assault in entertainment must be dealt with--as forcefully as possible, and in the case of Takei, the accuser's claims have no expiration date, except to those (in this case) who wish to wear blindfolds where Takei is concerned. Takei's Howard Stern interview is far too close to the accuser's claim to be considered coincidental, and cannot be dismissed as a "joke", since any truly moral person would not find those sickening statements funny, or material for their alleged routine, but Takei has always been provided cover (until recently) to do whatever he desired--from wasting decades trying to defame old co-workers to the freedom to admit to something very close to the claims of the accuser.

If he's guilty, he should face the consequences and treated the same as Cosby, Allen, Spacey, or any other sexual predator.

 

Add Stephen Collins to the list. People seem to have forgotten about that one.

 

Stephen Collins, the clean cut actor from Star Trek:The Motion Picture who abused the trust of his step-daughter I believe, is that correct?
JB

 

Part of the reason why Trump got elected I think is because people are sick of having to worry about saying and doing the most correct thing all the time. Like if you do something and someone calls it harassment, sexist, racist, discriminating, it puts the accused on the defensive where they have to put themselves in the best possible light to appease society like Orville "Majority Rules" showed. So people voted for Trump to stick it to Black Lives Matter, sexual type allegations, feminism or whatever it is. It's the backlash to all the whining

 

Three years ago, an audio tape leaked to the media with a male voice (supposedly Collins) admitting to abusive acts against minors. The voice was never proven to be Collins.

Then later the same year, Collins was interviewed by People and admitted engaging in such acts in '73, '82 and '94. AFAIK, none of these was his stepdaughter.

 

I balk at the characterization of such things as "whining".

We all self-censor our speech all the time. Most parents don't curse in front of their children, we don't say certain things in front of clergy, our bosses, etc. That's not actual censorship as much as being respectful. Personally, once I realized how loaded many statements I'd grown up hearing were and how they subtly impugned or subtly disrespected women or people of various religious affiliations, ethnicities, or what have you, I made an effort to purge those from my own speech and writing, because why not be respectful of other people's feelings?

 

Oh, the humanity! Imagine being forced to do right things all the time!

We can't just select random time frames and forgive all the bad stuff people did during it. This is not "The Purge", that's not how a civilized society works.

So, you're suggesting we should just forget centuries of institutionalized racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, etc. because a vocal minority who never experienced those types of oppression feel annoyed about marginalized folks being open about it ? That doesn't sound very practical to me.

 

What I'm suggesting is being weary of people making something out of nothing where there's no criminal intent like they were just joking, being too affectionate, or it's just not a big deal but people can spin it into something more serious and bring the public into it. Then we're supposed to treat them like a queen/king afterward like "poor so and so got victimized". If someone has a double standard in this thread because this is a case of gay men, oh well it's not like we're running for public office. Some people value women's safety more than men's, that's just how it is. If I were Takei being 80 years old at retirement age I would just tell people "screw off, mind your own business, you ain't my momma"