Leslie Moonves out as CBS CEO after sexual harassment allegations

a reply to: vinifalou

Define force.

Did he have a gun?

How do you force someone to do that?

Why am i the only person that questions this stuff?

The metoo people got 20 million for these claims and les is out 200 million.

20 year old allegations that only come to light cause someone wants to take over cbs.

"tell your stories regardless of your past"

How convenient is it that the statute of limitations is up on the claims of forced oral sex.

This is contrived and people need to stand up against this b.s..

I have said it before but if someone is forcing you into something speak up now people not later when someone pays you too.

a reply to: howtonhawky

How old are the allegations and define forced.

Matters not in the slightest how old. Anything done after the word "no", or anything even remotely resembling non-consent.

originally posted by: seagull
a reply to: howtonhawky

How old are the allegations and define forced.

Matters not in the slightest how old. Anything done after the word "no", or anything even remotely resembling non-consent.

Bullocks!

If it did not matter then there would be no statute of limitations.

Are you familiar as to why the statute of limitations is in place in the first place?

Simply put things and people change.

The general purpose of statutes of limitation is to make sure convictions occur only upon evidence (physical or eyewitness) that has not deteriorated with time. Time Limits for Charges: State Criminal Statutes of Limitations - FindLaw criminal.findlaw.com...

So the claims are not good enough for our justice system but plenty good when a corporation is seeking to steal 200 million from someone.

a reply to: vinifalou

The head of CNN is a sleazeball pervert. His time is almost up as well.

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: vinifalou

The head of CNN is a sleazeball pervert. His time is almost up as well.

lol

So say carewemust!
Who is he and what makes him sleazy?
Have women went through the proper channels to out his ways?

I totally understand that people with power can abuse that but i also understand that there is a right way to do things and a wrong way.

Will you personally be benefiting from any of the allegations? Do you not find it odd that the blackmailist at me2 have benefited 20 million from out dated claims.



Am i the only one that thinks ronin ferral needs to get laid?

Look NO ONE is saying force sexual contact, harassment, rape, ect BE FROM MEN OR WOMEN is ok or justified.
NO ONE is saying those that have committed said crimes should get away with it.
I also understand maybe with a person in power reporting it takes an act of courage and is hard.

HOWEVER we have this BASIC RIGHT of "innocent until PROVEN GUILTY in A COURT OF LAW".

In that basic principle the ACCUSED is granted rights and protection as is the ALLEGED victim.

No party should be taken at fact value and BOTH have to provide FACTS AND EVIDENCE.

But in sexual crimes the cold hard truth is your GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT and even then your life may be destroyed even though your found innocent.

Hell it is a common tactic in messy divorces where money, children or both involved.

what should disturb people is that alot of these cases now are DECADES old with most (not all) having NO PHYSICAL PROOF.
just he said she said (or vice versa).

How in hell does one get a fair trial when the accuser doesnt come forward for (ex) a decade and its up to you to prove your innocent not her/him to prove your guilty "beyond reasonable doubt" ?

do you all supporting blindly the metoo movement realize that some lady or ladies can come years if not decades later and accuse you of (ex) rape with NO PROOF other than their word and DESTROY your life?
maybe you did or maybe they have a grudge for some reason and your now a target (be just because, you are successful, you refused them, whatever)
then if proven you were innocent they go scott free but you lost your job, your reputation is gone, and/or a divorce?

It is a nightmare that can happen literally to anyone. A modern day salem witch trial

there needs to be some sanity here and BOTH SIDES need to be treated as you would any other crime.
no one is taken at blind face value and EVIDENCE rules the day.

Lastly and possibly most controversial (but fair) is if you cant make a criminal case or a current (ex employee) case then you cant go after them in civil court.

just ask yourself this... do you want to be guilty until proven innocent?

Scrounger

a reply to: vinifalou


Well, here's what *I* think...that no one in Moonves' position resigns so readily if there isn't at least some shred of truth to the allegations.

a reply to: alphabetaone

My opinion as well. And they're donating 20$ million to the #MeToo movement only because they're good guys?

Come on. They're not even making publicity out of this...

originally posted by: vinifalou
a reply to: alphabetaone

My opinion as well. And they're donating 20$ million to the #MeToo movement only because they're good guys?

Come on. They're not even making publicity out of this...

Well, I think the media may be a little gunshy by having been burned in a couple of cases where they made such a huge spectacle out of it only for charges to have been dropped either by statute of limitations or just plain lack of evidence.

But the donation? Clearly damage control. My personal feelings on the MeToo movement is that it is TOO over-the-top in its radicalism, there are abuses yes...but I get the feeling that they want every brush from a male against a womans arm or a mistaken run into a breast, tried as criminal conduct. I also feel that men should be able to show their desire for a woman....just do it correctly and respect the word no.

a reply to: alphabetaone

IMO I think the removal and "donation" isn't proof of guilt or that there is a "small shred" of evidence
it is the result of going away from "innocent until proven guilty IN A COURT OF LAW" but the now popular COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION.

a "court" where your GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT and FACTS/PROOF not needed or be damned if it counters what the accuser or crime is.

better to cut the person (be guilty or innocent) and "donate" to someone / some group than care about guilt or innocence.

what people on for and part of (in this case but applies broadly) meetoo movement is once you let this monster out of the bottle you wont be able to control it or cry foul when IT WILL NOT IF TURN ON YOU.

As the old saying goes....those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

just remember the french revolution turned on its founders and they shared the same fate as their targets.

scrounger

a reply to: scrounger


Yea, I agree with a lot you've said here.

But Moonves is a bit different simply because, from what I can see, he was able to let accusations roll off his back in a couple other instances. For some reason this one is different.

The problem iin my estimation is that we've turned isolated incidences into all incidences being evidentiary proof.

Funny thing I read from an ultra-feminist on twitter the other day is, that she said "we women have always been angry. It's just that now we're angry and have super-power beind us to get them". The problem I found with that statement is that of tipping the scales in the direction which puts them in the same positions that they were decrying in the first place: Abuse of power...even if it's real power or imagined the intent is to abuse it.

a reply to: [post=23771518]alphabetaone[/post

well stated.

what is interesting is the feminist quote you states shows how (sadly and scarily ) accurate in the warnings he gave in his books.

Her quote shows the warning given in animal farm....the oppressed become identical to the oppressors...

Scrounger