REMINDER: THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to monitor the Forums. However, THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to review any materials submitted to or posted on the Forums, and remove, delete, redact or otherwise modify such materials, in its sole discretion and for any reason whatsoever, at any time and from time to time, without notice or further obligation to you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. has no obligation to display or post any materials provided by you. THE ARENA PLATFORM, INC. reserves the right to disclose, at any time and from time to time, any information or materials that we deem necessary or appropriate to satisfy any applicable law, regulation, contract obligation, legal or dispute process or government request. Click on the following hyperlinks to further read the applicable Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Johnny got a solid thrashing so he should have paid more. I guess it comes with the territory. Maybe our resident convict GWS will chime in.Rich guys pay everyone for protection and pref treatment from the guards. Hell even gotti paid the aryans 50k per year or something. Not saying he won’t be miserable but he likely will never see the Shawshank treatment
Wouldn't surprise meOr pulls an Epstein (yes that’s supposed to be a loaded statement)
there was something like 90+ reports against him. NY cops also had a wire recording of him raping and/or attempting rape from years ago. can't remember if it was or wasn't included in this case. it was repetitive behavior. when putting them all together you get a pretty damn good picture of his actions.While I am no fan of Weinstein, I am a bit troubled by the legal tactic of using prior similar acts to convict a guy. Some of the most damaging testimony in Weinstein's case came from women who claimed he abused/raped them many years earlier, even though no charges were filed against him. Does the fact that he did it once prove he is guilty of doing it again 15 years later to someone else? That evidence is pretty controversial, but was admitted. I'm not so sure it should be.
Just like Cosby, there's an M.O. here. A bad driver vs. a serial rapist? Not a comparable analogy.It's still controversial. By way of example, if someone is a bad driver and has multiple accidents over a number of years, evidence of those prior accidents would not be admissible to prove negligence in a lawsuit against said driver for a subsequent accident.
On some level, you would think that prior similar acts would be even harder to get into evidence in a criminal case.