| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
|
|
|
ECW28
Joined: 04 Nov 2012
Posts: 72
|
 Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:05 pm
|
 |
|
| ZephyrVayu wrote: |
| xBTAx wrote: | | Lol. Blocking someone isn’t unprofessional. It’s literally just using a feature provided by Twitter.
And framing it as “asking for evidence” is, let’s say, generous. Or perhaps outright disingenuous. It’s not just a few people politely “asking” or something, when there’s a crowd of people demanding you somehow miraculously produce... I guess video evidence of something that wasn’t recorded? Is that what would satisfy them? Because apparently testimony isn’t enough for them, even if it might be enough for a court. |
Well, blocking someone could be considered unprofessional if it damages your relationship with your fanbase. Also shows that you're unwilling to engage in discussion or defend your claims. There's a reason sites like Buzzfeed don't have comment sections and it's not just to silence alt-right trolls, it's so their readers aren't exposed to legitimate criticisms.
And in regards to evidence, eye-witness testimony is the least reliable form of evidence, particularly in a court setting. Any judge/lawyer/prosecutor can tell you that. I don't believe video or photographic evidence is an unreasonable request. |
Name one instance someone’s been sexually harassed and thought “I should pull out my camera and record this just in case I have to take this to court”.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
ZephyrVayu
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 79
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:09 pm
|
|
|
| ranran-001 wrote: | | In civil court, its up to the plaintiff, i.e. Vic to show there is a preponderance of evidence such that Funimation, Monical Rial and Jamie Marchi engaged in a conspiracy to knowingly lie and knowingly harm Vic's career. Vic is the one who is accusing Funimation and its employees of conspiracy and defamation and its up to him to prove it.
You cannot see the irony of your post? |
No, I can't, because my post wasn't referring to Vic's decision to take Funimation and co. to court, it was in regards to events and accusations lobbied against him which took place prior. It's obsolutely true that he will have to prove that they knowingly lied. At no point did I say the same level of skepticism shouldn't be applied to Vic.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
kaiser11492
Joined: 19 Feb 2011
Posts: 164
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:13 pm
|
|
|
|
One thing I have seen pop repeatedly is that the judge who will overlook this case will most likely be Republican. How is that a deciding factor in favor of Vic? Isn't the evidence going to be the deciding the factor?
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
BodaciousSpacePirate
 Subscriber
Joined: 17 Apr 2015
Posts: 3018
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:15 pm
|
|
|
| brammerhammer23 wrote: | | You also have to remember the lawsuit was filed in Tarrant County, Texas and I'd dare say all the judges down there have an R next to their name. |
| kaiser11492 wrote: | | One thing I have seen pop repeatedly is that the judge who will overlook this case will most likely be Republican. How is that a deciding factor in favor of Vic? Isn't the evidence going to be the deciding the factor? |
Republican judges are generally more likely to dismiss lawsuits brought against companies by their former employees. Especially in Texas, where it's "you have a right to work", not "you have a right to work wherever you want".
Last edited by BodaciousSpacePirate on Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:15 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
ZephyrVayu
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 79
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:15 pm
|
|
|
| ECW28 wrote: | | Name one instance someone’s been sexually harassed and thought “I should pull out my camera and record this just in case I have to take this to court”. |
You missed my point entirely. Obviously there are many cases in which a person is sexually harassed and they have no evidence to back it up other than their own testimony. If they're genuine, and their attacker gets off due to lack of evidence, then that's horrific. But if someone lies, and an innocent person goes to jail based solely on their testimony which they can easily fabricate, then I believe that's worse.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
Aresef
Joined: 22 Jun 2005
Posts: 914
Location: MD
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:19 pm
|
|
|
| Descent123 wrote: |
| MarzGurl wrote: | | [We’ve been over this before. The jelly bean story is just one example in that investigation. Monica herself confirmed it happened and stated that’s not the only thing he was fired for. Vic’s petition mentions 2 other things besides that, but he also probably either doesn’t have access to the entire investigation, or he’s just nitpicking at the stupidest things in it. Also, I’d like to point out that since Vic isn’t the one being charged here, he won’t be getting a verdict against him. You’ll have to determine yourself whether he’s innocent or guilty based on the evidence provided.
Personally so far, i am more likely to believe Vic is innocent. For one he is not forging any evidence unlike Monica and them. Who tried to defame him over a photoshop image. either way it should be settled in court but so far based on everything that has happened Vic case is looking pretty solid and i really do hope he wins. If he did do any of that then i would say yea lock him up but so far. Nothing points that he actually has done anything except say a bad jelly bean joke |
I recommend you stop posting now. You are part of this mess and it isn't hard for Vic's attorney to serve you with a discovery request (including all of your online communication).
If you are wise, I would just stop posting everywhere for awhile. |
A discovery request for *what?*
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
ZephyrVayu
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 79
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:21 pm
|
|
|
| Animehermit wrote: | | I'm confused has Vic been convicted of a crime? Because while yes you do need evidence to convict someone of a crime, you dont need as much evidence to say, drop them from the pool of actors you work with, or uninvite them from conventions.
Its incredibly disengenous to compare what happened to him to actual criminal proceedings and something like lynching. |
True, you don't need as much evidence to fire someone who uninvite them from conventions, it's just a pretty sh*tty thing to do imo.
And I'm not sure if you know what "compare" means. Because I only said that always listening and believing was a slippery slope which has led to miscarriages of justice and lynching in the past. I never compared anything directly. It's easy to latch onto a small thing someone said and misconstrue it in order to discredit their entire post.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Greed1914
Joined: 28 Oct 2007
Posts: 4575
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:26 pm
|
|
|
| kaiser11492 wrote: | | One thing I have seen pop repeatedly is that the judge who will overlook this case will most likely be Republican. How is that a deciding factor in favor of Vic? Isn't the evidence going to be the deciding the factor? |
The assumption there seems to be that a judge will come into it with a bias against the metoo movement due to political leanings and have already made up their mind in favor of Vic. Of course, at this point we're so far away from when a decision about the merits of the case might be made that it's obviously just speculation.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
SilverTalon01
Joined: 02 Apr 2012
Posts: 2416
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:26 pm
|
|
|
| Dardre wrote: | | This will not go well for him. The investigation found sufficient grounds to terminate their contract with him, and that alone will likely be enough to cause him to lose this case. |
It is Texas. Even if he wasn't on contract work which it seems like all of their voice actors are, do you know how much an internal investigation needs to find to terminate someone? Literally nothing. They could have (not at all saying this is the case) found all the claims to be completely fabricated and terminated contact with him just because they didn't like the optics.
Anyway, we will probably never find out because this is probably just going to get settled.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
ZephyrVayu
Joined: 02 Jan 2012
Posts: 79
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:29 pm
|
|
|
| Greed1914 wrote: |
| kaiser11492 wrote: | | One thing I have seen pop repeatedly is that the judge who will overlook this case will most likely be Republican. How is that a deciding factor in favor of Vic? Isn't the evidence going to be the deciding the factor? |
The assumption there seems to be that a judge will come into it with a bias against the metoo movement due to political leanings and have already made up their mind in favor of Vic. Of course, at this point we're so far away from when a decision about the merits of the case might be made that it's obviously just speculation. |
I don't know enough (anything) about the court system in Texas to comment on that. All I will say is that a good judge shouldn't let his or her political leanings influence their decision. (but it may very well)
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Noggy
Joined: 24 Apr 2006
Posts: 88
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:29 pm
|
|
|
| Ron Donald wrote: | | uh, no. It's defamation per se. the people being sued have to prove they're telling the truth. |
Defamation per se just means that Vic doesn't have to prove exact monetary damage and/or damage to his reputation. Considering there's zero question that what has been said about him cost him acting roles and convention appearances, there's no debate that Vic was damaged.
Defamation per se isn't going to make it any easier nor any harder for Vic to win in court. Vic is still going to have to prove that it's more likely than not that the others knowingly lied about him. Defamation per se doesn't raise or lower the burden of proof, just rules out one possible defense that was never realistically going to be used anyway.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
BodaciousSpacePirate
Subscriber
Joined: 17 Apr 2015
Posts: 3018
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:32 pm
|
|
|
| SilverTalon01 wrote: | | They could have (not at all saying this is the case) found all the claims to be completely fabricated and terminated contact with him just because they didn't like the optics. |
I think this one sentence really emphasizes how much better off Vic's case would be if Funimation was based in a blue state. Ever wonder why Funimation stays in Texas, rather than moving out to LA where they could have access to a broader pool of actors?
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
CrowLia
Joined: 24 Feb 2012
Posts: 5528
Location: Mexico
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:32 pm
|
|
|
| kaiser11492 wrote: | | One thing I have seen pop repeatedly is that the judge who will overlook this case will most likely be Republican. How is that a deciding factor in favor of Vic? Isn't the evidence going to be the deciding the factor? |
It does say a lot about their values and the legitimacy of this whole charade that they went out of their way to find a Republican judge in a Republican state in a "conservative" county to ensure their victory; it's almost like they're using this whole thing just as political propaganda and a personal vendetta agains #MeToo and women in general
| Quote: | | In my opinion, Nick Rekieta, not Vic, is the real villain in this overall controversy. |
Vic is allowing himself to be used by Rekieta. They're both equally guilty.
| BodaciousSpacePirate wrote: | | Republican judges are generally more likely to dismiss lawsuits brought against companies by their former employees. Especially in Texas, where it's "you have a right to work", not "you have a right to work wherever you want".
|
I was going to ask about this too. I'm not American so I may be misinformed, but I was under the impression that Republicans love neoliberalism and big CEO's -they even elected one as their president!- so wouldn't a Republican be more likely to side with a company as big as Sony rather than some nobody VA who didn't even have a lot of VA work in recent years?
| Alestal wrote: | | But why the kissy face though...? Really? |
Vic fans: MeToo is out of control! Ruining a man's career through baseless twitter accussations!!
Also Vic fans: She used an EMOJI! She's clearly a liar and deserves to go to jail!
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Alestal
Joined: 22 Apr 2005
Posts: 605
Location: Dallas, Texas
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:34 pm
|
|
|
| BodaciousSpacePirate wrote: |
| brammerhammer23 wrote: | | You also have to remember the lawsuit was filed in Tarrant County, Texas and I'd dare say all the judges down there have an R next to their name. |
| kaiser11492 wrote: | | One thing I have seen pop repeatedly is that the judge who will overlook this case will most likely be Republican. How is that a deciding factor in favor of Vic? Isn't the evidence going to be the deciding the factor? |
Republican judges are generally more likely to dismiss lawsuits brought against companies by their former employees. Especially in Texas, where it's "you have a right to work", not "you have a right to work wherever you want". |
Well, he is suing for defamation that resulted and will continue to result in damages via lost income.
Honestly, Funimation/Sony should have reacted immediately and asked that the VAs involved not use their public platforms to bash a co-worker. Especially when it involved a private investigation. They should start passing around social media use agreements to all their contractors. When you work with a company you are representing yourself as well as the organization.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Shay Guy
Joined: 03 Jul 2009
Posts: 2253
|
|
Posted: Fri Apr 19, 2019 1:35 pm
|
|
|
The mods have my sympathies.
| ZephyrVayu wrote: | | Any accusor needs to provide evidence to backup their claims. This is how it is with every crime, we cannot make an exception just for sexual harrassment/assault. Obviously someone that comes forward saying they've been abused should not be dismissed or disbelieved, but it's illogical to expect everyone to take their word as gospel just because they're describing a henous act. That's how lynch mobs are formed and innocenct men end up in prison. |
Vic Mignogna is not at risk of ending up in prison AFAIK. "Proven beyond a reasonable doubt" is the standard for applying criminal penalties. That's it.
And if we're talking about "lynch mobs", I'd say Christine Blasey Ford has been harmed more by such behavior than Brett Kavanaugh has.
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
