Of course that is true. Nobody is required to hire him. But if they do then that isn't a bad thing either provided he like mentioned did his time and doesn't become a repeat offender.
Justin Roiland looking at 7 years in prison for domestic violence.
- Thread starter Rich Watson
- Start date
Of course that is true. Nobody is required to hire him. But if they do then that isn't a bad thing either provided he like mentioned did his time and doesn't become a repeat offender.
I am concerned with making sure people understand what justice is. If people do a crime they need to go to jail and serve whatever time is required by law. But when someone gets out of jail they are suppose to be treated equally like everyone else. This is suppose to be the case for everyone. It doesn't matter their skin color or gender or anything.
I know that is easier to believe in concept than reality because we are emotional beings so we do things like hold grudges and do things out of fear and all that stuff. We also understand in reality just how hard is for people to truly change so our opinions are influenced by cynicism as well. I have those feelings as well. I would be dubious myself at hiring the guy even if he did the things he is suppose.
What I am saying is I think that might be wrong. That is if we are trying to aspire to be better people and actually believe the things we say we believe in our laws then maybe you do the thing your emotions don't want you to do but what is right in accordance to our laws.
As for the job you act like him taking a job away from another voice actor is terrible but if he can do the job then that is just the way capitalism works. Sometimes you get hired because someone thinks your going to do the better job.
Plus your dismissing the low end job he would end up doing like say working at Burger King. This despite the fact the person who looses the Burger King job likely needs that money a lot more than the voice actor who looses out on a job because that voice actor is most likely already getting gigs that pay way better than whatever the Burger King person will be making. So maybe they loose out to Roiland for one job but then get another well paying job on another tv show.
But you're not saying he should be treated equally. You're saying he should get special privileges.
Another equally talented one? Yes, it is.
As a democratic socialist, I will be the first to concede that capitalism is, indeed, evil.
I'm not saying he should get special privileges. He still has to be able to do the job. If anything he would be working at a disadvantage because with a criminal record not to mention a public knowledge of what he did it means he is going to have less leeway when it comes to mistakes.
Plus for insurance reasons alone it's more safe to always hire the person without a criminal record than the one with it. I suppose he does bring something to the table in name recognition but it's also a tarnished name so that kind of hurts as well.
That's prejudicial and illegal to OVERTLY discriminate on the basis of a criminal record.
Meanwhile...
Meanwhile...
The person I feel the most sorry for?
The casting director:
https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/10q2dn6/rick_and_morty_casting_director_right_now/
The poor bastard
The casting director:
https://www.reddit.com/r/videos/comments/10q2dn6/rick_and_morty_casting_director_right_now/
The poor bastard
Remember the Longest Yard?
Prison Warden makes Burt Reynolds play foot ball against the Guards.
What if a Sadistic Prison Warden does the same thing to Justin?
He's intimidated into animating and voicing a shitty cartoon to avoid being tossed in an industrial tumble drier again.
Prison Warden makes Burt Reynolds play foot ball against the Guards.
What if a Sadistic Prison Warden does the same thing to Justin?
He's intimidated into animating and voicing a shitty cartoon to avoid being tossed in an industrial tumble drier again.
You are arguing he should be hired for an extremely high-profile, high-prestige, high-income job instead of other, equally-talented people. You are literally arguing he should get special privileges.
How do you know the other people up for the job are equally-talented or even right for the voice the show in this case would want the voice actor to do? Or willing to work for the no doubt reduced income he would be offered. Talented voice-actors are going to be in demand. Other shows hiring them and many of those shows would no doubt would prefer to hire the person without the disturbing criminal record.
If he were to get back in the business it's unlikely he goes right back to the top as soon he is let out of prison. To get even close to the place he was at on Rick and Morty would no doubt take many years of working hard and staying out of trouble for someone to take that chance with a big high profile job.
There's no cynicism at work when encountering a person who committed Roiland's acts. It is reality which no rational mind will ever toss over their shoulders as they put on blinders to shiled themselves against any normal sense of right, wrong and the genesis and cultivation of of Roiland's behavior / acts. Society rarely mirrors your: "when someone gets out of jail they are suppose to be treated equally like everyone else" for too many rational reasons. In other words, a person may have served a sentence, but that does not mean there is a guarantee of psychological rehabilitation at all, and an employer cannot assure other employees that they will be safe sharing an environment with one with Roiland's history.
For that reason. employers must not view the world or the criminal justice system's intention in some naive, pollyanna-esque way (especially with anyone with Roiland's record), which runs the risk of placing others in danger.
Not if hiring someone allegedly capable of doing a "better job" poses a threat to co-workers. More to the point: are you missing something? You seem to be more concerned with the "quality" of some series than the ethics and safety of the people working on it. That's a very fanboy-ish position to argue, and is divorced from reality.
Its just some series, and if someone takes the parts once voiced by Roiland--so...what?
There is always someone else equally talented. Always. The pool of talent is far, far larger than the available job openings in the entertainment industry. There is always someone else just as good.
That is a completely subjective evaluation on the part of the producers, not an objective metric of merit. But in general, there is also always another actor who can do the voice just as well as the original. Steve Whitmire was just as good of a Kermit the Frog as Jim Henson.
Why would he be offered a lower income? If you get your way, he's going to be just as in-demand and just as famous. There would be no incentive whatsoever to offer him a reduced income.
You're spending all this time worrying about protecting the wealth and privilege of a rapist. What the fuck are you doing?
So, basically, after completing his prison sentenced he should be allowed to attempt to get a job again?
I'm stepping in here but I think people are misreading @Jayson1's argument. I think he is just arguing that after he has done his prison time he should still be allowed to look for work. Whether or not he gets hired is up to the employer.
Which @TREK_GOD_1 notes is problematic for employers:
Sad but true.
I think Jayson is ambitious in his idealism of rehabilitation but that doesn't mean that all employers will be so considerate, nor can they afford to be.
Which is fine, but there is a very big difference between saying that someone who has served their time should be able to support themselves and have all their needs met, and saying that someone should return to the kind of vast wealth and privilege that frankly facilitated their crimes in the first place.
I know the chances of someone being totally rehabbed can run the range of naive to hopeful. But justice is suppose to be blind and if we don't follow the ideas we are suppose to believe in then why bother having a justice system at all if we are just going to judge people on our feelings and personal theories in the end.
The America justice system is built on the Blackstone Ratio. Better to let 10 guilty men go free than put 1 innocent man in jail. I believe this is actually the best and most true form of justice. I know it comes with risks but you really don't want a system that works the other way around.
That is basically what I am saying. I do understand it can be naive but it is what we are suppose to believe in at least according to our laws. I don't think a company should be forced to hire him but if someone gave him a job I don't see that as a bad thing. A potentially bad thing for sure. But otherwise until he proves he isn't reformed then that is just the system working the way it is suppose to work.
https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-65049814
Charges have been dropped.
Charges have been dropped.
From the article:
I have a cousin who was raped as a teenager. The prosecutor refused to press charges against the rapist because there was "insufficient evidence."
As usual, the American justice system fails victims and protects the privileged.
Charges involving an ex-girlfriend were dismissed "due to a lack of sufficient evidence beyond a reasonable doubt", a spokeswoman for Orange County district attorney told the Associated Press.
Roiland tweeted the word "justice", and said: "I'm still deeply shaken by the horrible lies reported about me."
He said he wanted to "move forward".
He added: "I'm so disappointed that so many people were so quick to judge without knowing the facts, based solely on the word of an embittered ex trying to bypass due process and have me 'cancelled'.
"That it may have succeeded, even partially, is shameful."
Roiland tweeted the word "justice", and said: "I'm still deeply shaken by the horrible lies reported about me."
He said he wanted to "move forward".
He added: "I'm so disappointed that so many people were so quick to judge without knowing the facts, based solely on the word of an embittered ex trying to bypass due process and have me 'cancelled'.
"That it may have succeeded, even partially, is shameful."
I have a cousin who was raped as a teenager. The prosecutor refused to press charges against the rapist because there was "insufficient evidence."
As usual, the American justice system fails victims and protects the privileged.
Given how all his coworkers seem glad to be rid of him I don’t see him coming back from this even if the charges are dropped.
Similar threads
