Taylor Swifts court trial

[sharon45]

Uh, this was already taken care of in the OP:

And yet he continued to argue that it wasn't a big deal. Talk about mixed messages.

Well, I am more interested in what the OP says, than mere unfounded accusations; then I can make up my own mind from that. He misunderstood the case and has since admitted he was initially wrong about it. As someone pointed out, this is really about understanding Taylor Swift's view, not of women in general, which imo, we are never going to honestly know.

 

[LordKiran]

And yet he continued to argue that it wasn't a big deal. Talk about mixed messages.

Well, I am more interested in what the OP says, than mere unfounded accusations; then I can make up my own mind from that. He misunderstood the case and has since admitted he was initially wrong about it. As someone pointed out, this is really about understanding Taylor Swift's view, not of women in general, which imo, we are never going to honestly know.

I would be too if it didn't sound like he's just arguing to argue. If we all agree that sexual assault is wrong and should not be tolerated, then what's to argue over? The degree of punishment perhaps, but Swifty doesn't factor into that discussion at all, as she hasn't made a point to punish him herself and was seemingly content to leave well enough alone.

 

[beero1000]

Her answers on the stand make it sound like she's had enough of this bullshit.

Mueller’s attorney Gabe McFarland asked Swift why the photo shows the front of her skirt in place, not lifted up, if Mueller was reaching underneath to grab her butt. “Because my ass is located in the back of my body,” Swift replied. She offered a similar response when asked whether she saw the grope taking place. When McFarland pointed out that the photo shows Swift closer to Mueller’s girlfriend than Mueller himself, Swift answered, “Yes, she did not have her hand on my ass.”
...
Swift was confident in her version of the story, unintimidated by a cross examination that implied she was a liar and unmistakably incensed when McFarland tried to cast doubt on her behavior during the evening in question. Wasn’t Swift critical of her bodyguard, who didn’t prevent such an obvious assault? “I’m critical of your client sticking his hand under my skirt and grabbing my ass,” she told the attorney. But, McFarland said, Swift could have taken a break in the middle of her meet-and-greet if she was so distraught. “And your client could have taken a normal photo with me,” Swift countered, explaining that a pop star has a responsibility to her fans.
...
When McFarland asked her how she felt when Mueller got the boot from his job at the Denver radio station, Swift said she had no response. “I am not going to allow your client to make me feel like it is any way my fault, because it isn’t,” she said. Later, she continued: “I am being blamed for the unfortunate events of his life that are a product of his decisions and not mine.”

Also, the $1 countersuit is about more than a dollar - if (when?) he loses, it's officially showing that she's in the right and that he's in the wrong, as opposed to him just withdrawing the suit and claiming unfairness. Also, if he loses, he might have to pay her legal fees, which are no doubt substantial.

 

[laughing dog]

Ok. Fair enough Ford. I relate to all you have said. Thank you.

And yes I am a little biased about feminism perhaps more than I should. I would not call them fem nazis like Rush Limbaugh but after that last comment from Rhea, now I can sort of see where Rush Limbaugh is coming from.....

No one wrote you should be put into jail for what you wrote. Rhea wrote you and the groper need to be separated from society which does not require jailing. Frankly, you should be more worried that you can "sort of see where Rush Limbaugh is coming from..." than anything posted in this thread.

 

[Rhea]

So I should go to jail for being wrong?

LOLz. You're funny. YOU asked whether we had to admit that men were fundamentally different and we would not ever be capable of making them equal. The CONTEXT of men being different here, is you and the creep both thinking that grabbing women's asses without permission is no big deal. The CONCLUSION, then, when adding up that you and this creep don't think sexual assault is a big deal and your claim that you can never be fixed, is LOGICALLY to remove you from society.

I didn't suggest you should be locked up.
You did.

 

[Rhea]

Ok. Fair enough Ford. I relate to all you have said. Thank you.

And yes I am a little biased about feminism perhaps more than I should. I would not call them fem nazis like Rush Limbaugh but after that last comment from Rhea, now I can sort of see where Rush Limbaugh is coming from.

Seriously? You can see where Rush Limbaugh is coming from?!?!?

Where he is coming from, jusst to be clear, is that women are meat and if any of them has the temerity to speak up for herself she's a slut and a cunt.

And you're feeling like you really get that viewpoint?

You said that?

Doooood....

In any case, feminism is not such a big deal to me as the first amendment.

LOL. You seem to have this vision of the first amendment that says "I can say anything I want and no one is allowed to call me a creep for it!"

That makes you bad at history and civics AND a creep.

So that just happened there

Yeah, if it's anything like your interpretation of this thread, I'm thinking maybe it didn't happen at all. This, by the way, is how Limbaugh thinks, so maybe you're understanding him after all.

and I know Rhea (who I think is a social worker)

Jesus.
I'm an engineer.

is telling me I should be in jail for what I said.

No, I did not say that. YOU said you thought sexual assault was no big deal and you could never be fixed.
Generally, in society, we do remove those folks from public.

I just think turning people in to the government is going too far for just what you have said. Especially when you live in America.

I h'ain't turned you in, dude. You made that up. Voluntary martyrdom, like.
You're the one saying you don't get why it's wrong to stick your hand up a woman's skirt and grab her ass.
We don't allow that shit when you live in America.

 

[RavenSky]

So I should go to jail for being wrong?

I would like for you to answer Ford's questions:

What I would ask is why you... jumped to the conclusion that what was happening here was a rich young woman trying to ruin a man's life over what you considered to be insignificant. This guy was - at the time of the incident - 51 years old. Taylor was 23. A middle aged man grabbing the ass of a woman young enough to be his daughter is certifiably creepy, but when you read the story your brain turned it into a woman victimizing a hapless man.

How did you initially come to that conclusion?

And now that you realize this was not the case, why are you still stuck on this being somehow related to "feminism?"

I would also like to know why you think women should just shrug off being sexually assaulted?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I still don't see what feminism has to do with sexual assault. This feels much more like trolling as RVonse has gone from the act being 'nasty' to empathizing with Rush Limbaugh about women rights.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[RavenSky]

Or an excuse for him and Derec to fly their anti-women flags

 

[sharon45]

Well, I am more interested in what the OP says, than mere unfounded accusations; then I can make up my own mind from that. He misunderstood the case and has since admitted he was initially wrong about it. As someone pointed out, this is really about understanding Taylor Swift's view, not of women in general, which imo, we are never going to honestly know.

I would be too if it didn't sound like he's just arguing to argue. If we all agree that sexual assault is wrong and should not be tolerated, then what's to argue over? The degree of punishment perhaps, but Swifty doesn't factor into that discussion at all, as she hasn't made a point to punish him herself and was seemingly content to leave well enough alone.

Most of the problem I see is that the facts are just slowly coming out across in this thread, so some bits of arguments from both sides have to be changed as more accurate news concerning this case flows through.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

I would be too if it didn't sound like he's just arguing to argue. If we all agree that sexual assault is wrong and should not be tolerated, then what's to argue over? The degree of punishment perhaps, but Swifty doesn't factor into that discussion at all, as she hasn't made a point to punish him herself and was seemingly content to leave well enough alone.

Most of the problem I see is that the facts are just slowly coming out across in this thread, so some bits of arguments from both sides have to be changed as more accurate news concerning this case flows through.

The news has always been available that he's guilty and that he initiated action, not her.

Where do people get their news to think there are 2 "sides?" There is no debate and as such the case was thrown out.

Any further argument is like after having been told creationism is not an alternative theory in a biology classroom, still saying "...but...but...but..."

 

[RavenSky]

I would be too if it didn't sound like he's just arguing to argue. If we all agree that sexual assault is wrong and should not be tolerated, then what's to argue over? The degree of punishment perhaps, but Swifty doesn't factor into that discussion at all, as she hasn't made a point to punish him herself and was seemingly content to leave well enough alone.

Most of the problem I see is that the facts are just slowly coming out across in this thread, so some bits of arguments from both sides have to be changed as more accurate news concerning this case flows through.

The facts are the facts and those have not changed. If you or anyone else failed to be acquainted with the facts of the case before commenting here, that is on you. It is not a problem of the case itself.

 

[sharon45]

Most of the problem I see is that the facts are just slowly coming out across in this thread, so some bits of arguments from both sides have to be changed as more accurate news concerning this case flows through.

The news has always been available that he's guilty and that he initiated action, not her.

It hasn't been proven in court yet, unless there is even more current news needed for this thread.

Where do people get their news to think there are 2 "sides?" There is no debate and as such the case was thrown out.

Much of the news does have a slant.

 

[whichphilosophy]

The news has always been available that he's guilty and that he initiated action, not her.

It hasn't been proven in court yet, unless there is even more current news needed for this thread.

Where do people get their news to think there are 2 "sides?" There is no debate and as such the case was thrown out.

Much of the news does have a slant.

We certainly will have to wait for the verdict. The charges are relating to the DJ's conduct where he is seen in a photo at least with his hand behind her. The DJ sued her for loss of job but this was rejected by the court.

 

[sharon45]

Most of the problem I see is that the facts are just slowly coming out across in this thread, so some bits of arguments from both sides have to be changed as more accurate news concerning this case flows through.

The facts are the facts and those have not changed. If you or anyone else failed to be acquainted with the facts of the case before commenting here, that is on you. It is not a problem of the case itself.

To me, the so-called facts have changed throughout this thread, which is one reason why I haven't bothered to reply until late, once it seems to have mainly evolved into an attack on the OP.

 

[RavenSky]

The news has always been available that he's guilty and that he initiated action, not her.

It hasn't been proven in court yet, unless there is even more current news needed for this thread.

The molester is not facing criminal charges, so there is nothing to be "proven in court" regarding his sexual assault on her.

His company fired him approximately two years ago, so that fact has been long available to anyone caring to know before commenting.

HE filed his lawsuit against Taylor Swift, her mother, and several others before she filed her counter-suit. That is also a fact readily available to anyone - including the OP author - before making uninformed comments in this thread.

I really don't see what "more current news" is needed for this thread, or why anyone else is obligated to provide it to you.

Where do people get their news to think there are 2 "sides?" There is no debate and as such the case was thrown out.

Much of the news does have a slant.

Sure... and so does the OP and other posts in this thread. Decidedly anti-women slants. That doesn't mean anyone else must seriously entertain misogynistic bullshit as a legitimate "side" in the discussion

 

[RavenSky]

The facts are the facts and those have not changed. If you or anyone else failed to be acquainted with the facts of the case before commenting here, that is on you. It is not a problem of the case itself.

To me, the so-called facts have changed throughout this thread, which is one reason why I haven't bothered to reply until late, once it seems to have mainly evolved into an attack on the OP.

There are no "facts" that have changed, and the actual facts have been available to anyone who cared enough to inform themselves before replying here.

Now, if you are referring to the uninformed opinions of some of the people here, starting with the OP, then you may have a point.

 

[Ford]

The news has always been available that he's guilty and that he initiated action, not her.

It hasn't been proven in court yet, unless there is even more current news needed for this thread.

Where do people get their news to think there are 2 "sides?" There is no debate and as such the case was thrown out.

Much of the news does have a slant.

You are correct that his groping has not been proven in court. However it is a fact that he initiated legal action against Swift, which has been thrown out. The judge tossed his case because he utterly failed to establish that Swift had him fired from his job.

There's no "slant" here except for OP's initial (and failed) attempt to turn this into a "feminist" issue. The (alleged) groper tried to turn this into a $3 million payday and failed. All that remains is for the jury to rule on the suit against Swift's mother and to award Taylor her $1.

 

[sharon45]

It hasn't been proven in court yet, unless there is even more current news needed for this thread.

Where do people get their news to think there are 2 "sides?" There is no debate and as such the case was thrown out.

Much of the news does have a slant.

We certainly will have to wait for the verdict. The charges are relating to the DJ's conduct where he is seen in a photo at least with his hand behind her. The DJ sued her for loss of job but this was rejected by the court.

Right, I was suspending comments until the more final details for this trivial case came out, so we could eventually get to the real meat of what it universally means.

 

[RavenSky]

We certainly will have to wait for the verdict. The charges are relating to the DJ's conduct where he is seen in a photo at least with his hand behind her. The DJ sued her for loss of job but this was rejected by the court.

Right, I was suspending comments until the more final details for this trivial case came out, so we could eventually get to the real meat of what it universally means.

The molester is not facing any "charges are relating to [his] conduct", so what "verdict" are you two waiting for?