Good to know, a little weirder in terms of his attraction, but the fact remains that he respected the “no” and managed to avoid statutory rape at least in this case.
If anyone steps forward with more, or a pattern emerges, etc - then just like with Cosby I say have at him. Take away the one thing he prizes most - his reputation and possibly freedom.
Assuming no one comes out with anything else, and Rapp accepts Spacey’s apology - I think this very public episode will likely be a net positive and a wake-up call for anyone thinking about doing anything inappropriate for at least a while.
I want to save as much distain for the other vile monsters we have, the Weinsteins, Trumps, David Geffens, Bryan Singers, and Sanduskys of the world.
I put intentional and planned predation into the unforgivable category - especially if there is hard evidence, and as of today that doesn’t seem to be where the evidence points.
Corey Feldman’s documentary is going to be awesome in the saddest way imaginable. And I’ll never look at Spacey the same way again, I can’t forget - but at this point it seems he’s done way less than Roman Polanski and is getting hounded extra for it because of the Weinstein-Trump fueled anger that is simmering under the skin of nearly everyone at this point.
There are definitely degrees of hypocrisy and corruption, but the principle that we are worse in private than we are on the outside is pretty clear isn’t it? I mean, I don’t know about you, but if anyone gets a complete transcript of my thoughts (or even my private conversations) I’m in trouble.
If you have to decide on punishment, then do your best to make sure the act was actually committed.
If you are going to reward, then you can be more generous. After all, it’s easier to take back a reward than undo a punishment.
If you are in a “he said, she said” situation, then it’s up to the accuser to make his or her case, not the accused’s.
In your example, then yes, if there is no other evidence, then there is not enough to convict the accused of battery. And honestly, is it so terrible to be generous, to give people the benefit of the doubt as a default setting?
So then the default position in determining the facts of sexual assault is not that “the victim should be believed.” Not that I necessarily disagree. But there has been a lot of rhetoric in recent years on behalf of belief.
I think the issue is if that is the only evidence, if there is nothing to back up either side, then yes. As the old adage says, it is better to let ten criminals go free than to condemn one innocently accused.
That is a courtroom standard, deliberately designed to minimise false positives at the cost of massively inflating false negatives. It is justified by the enormous power imbalance between an individual and the state.
This is not a courtroom, and we are not the state.
“…would have done… Back in the day… But oh no, not now, no way. I completely respect your work, young man. Oh btw I’m bi gay whatever, something like that.”
I’d invite you to talk to some criminal lawyers about this, because you are factually incorrect about this. If person A says person B punched them and person B says they didn’t, that’s not enough for a conviction. If person A says person B punched them and person B won’t say they didn’t that is definitely a conviction. The court system is based on witness testimony. It actually worries me that this has been so badly perverted by people’s ideas of witnesses being unreliable and physical evidence being given primacy. Yes, witnesses are unreliable and yes physical evidence can be compelling, that’s very different from valuing witness testimony at nothing, or saying witness testimony alone can’t result in a conviction.
If you are talking about people you personally know, you should make your own judgments based on the credibility of the people and the situation. This rule you’ve proposed it terrible. What about the third time one of your friends tells you your other friend gets handsy when they are drunk? What about the sixth time? Guy keeps saying, “No I don’t” and according to this principle, you’d say “Good enough for me.” (To be clear, I don’t think you’d do this, I’d wager instead that the principle you’ve stated is one you know doesn’t work).
If we are instead talking about a courtroom this is the warped thinking that results in sexual assault being dramatically under prosecuted. It is the job of the victim of a crime to report it to the police. It is the job of the police to investigate. If the police investigation finds enough evidence to lay charges, it is the job of the prosecutor to prove the case. It is not the job of the accuser to prove their case. But every day in courts we see sexual assault trials treated as “he said, she said” when it’s really “police laid charges, prosecutor argued guilt, her testimony is evidence of guilt, his testimony is [presumably] evidence of innocence, jury must weigh all evidence.”
And on top of that the example I gave met the courtroom standard. If you get charged with a punch you didn’t throw, you probably want to say you didn’t throw it
I think people are right that there’s a lot in his statement that seems less like an apology and more like a way of gathering sympathy and blaming the victim.
I think that being gay in the 1980s was pretty difficult. I’m sure many gay men drank or abused other substances to deal with the pain of being in a society that hated them. I’m sure many gay men, while abusing substances, did things that were very regrettable. I have a lot of sympathy for that.
While I have sympathy, societally-induced self-hatred and mental illness doesn’t result in automatism. Neither does substance abuse. You still make decisions about how to behave and you are still responsible for the people you hurt.
If Spacey does look back on that time of his life with regret and has stopped acting that way, he ought to have written a better apology. If he doesn’t, well, I guess this was the best “apology” he could offer. And if he actually molested children* then how sorry he is a small part of the picture.
* In Canada in the 1980s 14 was actually the age of consent. When I was a teenager I had a couple of friends who dated older men (like 40+). It find it all deeply creepy. I also would think very differently of someone who obeyed the laws at the time and stopped their behaviour as they evolved with society than someone who decided to keep going. Of course wherever this incident took place it might have been illegal for them to have any sexual contact at all, in which case Spacey almost certainly committed some assaults, since presumably someone else didn’t turn him down.
I’m continually surprised over the people that will come out of the woodwork to defend and make excuses for some terrible people. I understand the concept of not rushing to judge someone without knowing all of the facts, but you know what? I’m going to side with the guy who was assaulted as minor, anyone with a differing opinion is entitled to it… but they’re defending the wrong person.
Kevin Spacey is going to be fine. Even if his career were to end today i am more than sure he does not need defending from randos like if he was some helpless damsel in distress.
