I am out of the loop on this whole thing. Do they have any direct evidence that he raped anybody? Or are they all casting couch type situations?

I have a feeling he is not going to be criminally convicted (but he will get his ass sued off).

The derivative thread for this would actually be an entertaining debate

I think at one point he was trying to go without the walker but was clearly struggling with his balance.

Tobias Funke said:

---

The derivative thread for this would actually be an entertaining debate

---

There's no reason for debate. It's Liam Neeson.

John Hamm supposedly is on the list. Wait, what're we talking about?

aTmAg said:

---

I am out of the loop on this whole thing. Do they have any direct evidence that he raped anybody? Or are they all casting couch type situations?

I have a feeling he is not going to be criminally convicted (but he will get his ass sued off).

---

This.

Thought this thread was going to be about Stallone

Urban Ag said:

---

I'm not sure being surrounded by fat, ugly, mafioso looking dudes is the right look for his defense, but you do you Harvey.

---

I'm not sure if those are lawyers. They could be security or his handlers.

He wouldn't really hire mafia looking thugs to represent him in court? Would he? Then again it's Harvey Weinstein, he's a degenerate sexual abuser of women, I honestly wouldn't put anything past him.

aTmAg said:

---

I am out of the loop on this whole thing. Do they have any direct evidence that he raped anybody? Or are they all casting couch type situations?

I have a feeling he is not going to be criminally convicted (but he will get his ass sued off).

---

Cosby was convicted largely based on victim testimony. It can (and does) happen all the time.

I think a conviction will depend on how the witnesses do on the stand. His defense team is going to hammer them in every way they can. If I'm not mistaken there weren't contemporaneous rape claims / police reports. The delay in reporting prevented physical evidence being collected.

Not sure about how the law works in this jurisdiction with "modus operandi" evidence. Some states allow for testimony regarding patterns of action and some don't. If they are allowed to parade witness after witness who can testify he's done the same to them, it could be huge. If not, I could actually see him walking.

Moxley said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

I am out of the loop on this whole thing. Do they have any direct evidence that he raped anybody? Or are they all casting couch type situations?

I have a feeling he is not going to be criminally convicted (but he will get his ass sued off).

---

Cosby was convicted largely based on victim testimony. It can (and does) happen all the time.

I think a conviction will depend on how the witnesses do on the stand. His defense team is going to hammer them in every way they can. If I'm not mistaken there weren't contemporaneous rape claims / police reports. The delay in reporting prevented physical evidence being collected.

Not sure about how the law works in this jurisdiction with "modus operandi" evidence. Some states allow for testimony regarding patterns of action and some don't. If they are allowed to parade witness after witness who can testify he's done the same to them, it could be huge. If not, I could actually see him walking.

---

There is a fundamental difference between this and Cosby. In this one, the victims ended up working with Weinstein and doing his movies afterwards. That would be like a Cosby's victims going on subsequent dates with him afterwards. Also, in Cosby's case, they unsealed old testimony from before it was all over the news that corroborated the part of the story where he drugged them.

Somebody posted secretly recorded audio a while back of a failed Weinstein encounter. He was being creepy as hell, but he didn't force her. She left on her free will. If anything, that is hard evidence in his favor, not the other way around.

Unless there is better evidence that I'm unaware of (which could easily be the case), then I can't see how a jury could properly convict him. If anybody who's been paying more attention than me knows of such evidence, I'm all ears.

Moxley said:

---

What is being alleged here is that the sexual activity was highly unwanted and not in exchange for roles, but rather (if I'm not mistaken) he is alleged to use his influence in the industry to keep them quiet.

---

Ah, thanks for the clarification.

It has been a while so I may have gotten this story mixed up with another.

I sat on a jury several years back and a child molester pulled this stunt. Didn't work.

Junkhead said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

There is a fundamental difference between this and Cosby. In this one, the victims ended up working with Weinstein and doing his movies afterwards. That would be like a Cosby's victims going on subsequent dates with him afterwards.

---

Slow down there. Neither of those situations mean the women weren't raped.

---

It would certainly be evidence against it.

If all it took to convict somebody of rape was for a woman (or several) to claim rape well after the fact, then there would be a lot of rape convictions after one night stands or bad breakups. That would be load of crap. There needs to be better evidence than that.

Junkhead said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Junkhead said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

There is a fundamental difference between this and Cosby. In this one, the victims ended up working with Weinstein and doing his movies afterwards. That would be like a Cosby's victims going on subsequent dates with him afterwards.

---

Slow down there. Neither of those situations mean the women weren't raped.

---

It would certainly be evidence against it.

---

Not to an intelligent person, it wouldn't.

---

That is a non-intelligent assertion. Rapist have been cleared by texts after the fact. Yet you think going on a DATE with the supposed-rapist afterwards wouldn't? We aren't talking about an abused spouse or a sufferer of Stockholm syndrome here.

third coast.. said:

---

This story is worthless because there are literally no details.

---

Apologies I am at work. Will search for the story when I get home because it wasn't coming up in a few searches I did here. My point was completely different than Cosby.

aTmAg said:

---

Junkhead said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

Junkhead said:

---

aTmAg said:

---

There is a fundamental difference between this and Cosby. In this one, the victims ended up working with Weinstein and doing his movies afterwards. That would be like a Cosby's victims going on subsequent dates with him afterwards.

---

Slow down there. Neither of those situations mean the women weren't raped.

---

It would certainly be evidence against it.

---

Not to an intelligent person, it wouldn't.

---

That is a non-intelligent assertion. Rapist have been cleared by texts after the fact. Yet you think going on a DATE with the supposed-rapist afterwards wouldn't? We aren't talking about an abused spouse or a sufferer of Stockholm syndrome here.

---

Keeping up appearances to maintain the potential of achieving your dream while dying inside doesn't mean the rape/sexual assault didn't occur. I'm not saying it definitively did in this case, but the dude is a well known ******* and the likelihood that at least some of the crimes are true is pretty high.