30 Years To Life
30 Years To Life
Danny Masterson's Sentencing Day: Court Notes & Letters From Friends And Family
I hate sentencing days. I don’t care who it is or what charges we’re dealing with, it’s always an emotionally draining day in court. Family members are watched like zoo animals by a room packed full of reporters, and victims are put on fragile display to give impact statements before a sentence is announced.
The finality of that reading is a grim conclusion after many weeks in trial trying to decipher who is telling the truth. The first trial in November ended in a mistrial after a split jury could not reach a verdict. 7-5 voted in favor of acquittal. Ultimately, the jury could not convict him based on the evidence presented. But this hung jury meant the prosecution could (and would) retry him. The second verdict was announced yesterday, September 7th, and found Masterson guilty. Many are wondering what changed the jury’s minds during the second trial and why did he receive such a severe sentence without any solid evidence?
Major differences during the second trial: implication of Danny drugging the woman (absent of any toxicology report), and a heavier emphasis on the Church of Scientology.
I didn't follow either of the trials closely enough to form a solid opinion. My biggest mistake last year was choosing Weinstein over Masterson. Harvey was a tired tale. Masterson had more compelling layers to it, and for good reason I do not trust the final verdict based on the media recaps I’ve seen. As someone who has attended many high-profile court cases, I know how much the media leaves out in these cases. Without cameras in the room, all of the public’s opinions are skewed. The cameras are what saved Johny Depp.
The Vibe In The Courtroom Was Severely Divided Yesterday
“He wouldn’t be here if he wasn’t a scientologist,” is a phrase I heard yesterday in the hallway before the courtroom doors opened. Another person muttered, “this is all about money,” inferring that the three women behind these accusations are all “broke.”
“He’s going to get rolled in prison,” the same man said. “Pedophiles are number one targets. Convicted rapists are second to that.”
I spotted a friend of Danny’s on my way to the restroom and paused to say hello and make small talk. I asked how he’s doing in jail, to which he replied flatly, “not good.” After his conviction in May, he was handcuffed on the spot and taken to L.A. County Men's Central Jail where OJ Simpson and Surge Knight were both housed.
A heavily done up TV reporter in line in front of me knew nothing about the case. She tried (and failed) to make sense of who was who. She finally asked me to point out Masterson’s family members to her. Once she had the names down, she placed top value on their reactions. She urged her assistant to focus mainly on the reactions of Danny’s wife, Bijou and Danny’s mother, Carol. It was a weird and soulless thing to witness and proved just how disconnected most of these trial reporters are. They don’t care about the story or the people attached to it. They are simply there to collect the most basic details as quick as possible so they can throw them online with the driest take and move on to their next assignment. Their only concern is being the first outlet to get the story out, failing to investigate all the important details.
Tension inside the courtroom was palpable. Danny’s mother was worried about having enough seating since the court only grants the family 10 seats. Danny’s brothers found a place on the bench. His sister sat down at the end, wrapped in a knit sweater around her shoulders, a bun and gold jewelry. Bijou was wearing another effortless outfit- a striped wide collar shirt tucked into white palazzo pants with dark sunglasses. She stood alone in the hallway and was occasionally embraced by members of Danny’s family, before finally filtering into the front row to take her seat behind the glass wall by Danny’s empty chair.
Once seated, Masterson’s attorney, Shawn Holley walked over to give his mother a hug.
Danny entered the room in a slim fitted navy suit, his hair slicked back with a full beard. From across the courtroom, I heard Bijou audibly weeping when Danny appeared. She managed to compose herself shortly after.
In the seats in front of me, were the three Jane Does, one of their mothers, and their partners. Leah Remini was seated beside them.
The first two hours the attorneys dragged through a series of penalty codes and other related legal arguments. Afterwards, victim impact statements were read aloud by two of the women. One asked her attorney to read hers for her.
“When you raped me, you stole from me,” said one woman. “That’s what rape is, a theft of the spirit.”
“You are pathetic, disturbed and completely violent,” she added. “The world is better off with you in prison.”
Another victim told Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Charlaine Olmedo that the actor “has not shown an ounce of remorse for the pain he caused.”
“I knew he belonged behind bars for the safety of all the women he came into contact with. I am so sorry, and I’m so upset. I wish I’d reported him sooner to the police,” she told the court.
“Mr. Masterson, you are not the victim here. Your actions 20 years ago took away another person’s choice and voice. Your actions 20 years ago were criminal, and that’s why you are here,” Judge Olmedo said.
Olmedo told Masterson she knows he’s wondering “how you can be convicted” of a sexual incident “occurring 20 years ago” involving “a woman who you believe is disgruntled and has a vendetta against you. You were not convicted on the testimony of one person.”
Olmedo continued: “You were not convicted based on rumors, innuendo, gossip and speculation,” “You were convicted based on evidence that 12 people in the community found to be credible. … You were convicted because each of the victims reported the rapes to someone shortly after the rapes occurred.”
She pointed out that Masterson paid one of his victims nearly $1 million to sign a non-disclosure agreement, which she said was “an awful lot to pay” for something he insists never happened.
She went on to quote Martin Luther King, Jr: “The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral, begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy.”
When we are excused by the bailiffs, Leah Remini paused briefly to address a publicist seated in the back.
She said something along the lines of “I’m not your girl” — with a finger wagging as a warning that she is not to be messed with. The publicist snapped back at her telling her repeatedly not to talk to her. “Do not speak to me,” she said loudly a few times as she filed past her.
The public perception of Leah Remini is mixed. Some claim she is a heroine in this situation, and others claim she is a famed-starved bully who has been stalking Masterson’s family and friends throughout the entire case, often sitting at the front and turning around to see who was at court on days she was there. “She loves the attention,” someone said.
When the sentence was read aloud, Bijou hung her head and cried softly. Danny blew her a kiss on his way out. The door closed and the gallery was released.
“30 years to life” means Masterson will not be eligible for parole until he serves 30 years.
Public Opinion is Divided on Masterson’s Conviction
Below Are The Top Questions From Those Who Don’t Support the Verdict:
How did it go from almost an acquittal to a full guilty verdict? Theories on juror pay off are circulating online and in court
Anyone with a basic understanding of the Church of Scientology’s policies knows that Scientologists don't do drugs. How did this drug angle become a valid testimony without any evidence? Why was it allowed in court the second time around?
In this letter, Ashton talks about how Danny has always been against drug use for himself and his friends, encouraging everyone he knows to stay away from mind altering substances
Victim collusion. All of the victim’s stories were so different from police report to trial 1 then in trial 2. Some suggest they seemed coached.
All of the victim’s stories were in perfect sync this trial, with newly added drug claims that were not in any police reports or mentioned in the first trial.
Was this a rape trial or a trial about the Church of Scientology?
No evidence was presented 23 years later and Masterson was still sentenced to 30 years to life in a ‘he said, she said’ scenario.
Why is his sentence so severe without any evidence?
Could Danny be the perfect fall guy for the #MeToo movement AND the Church of Scientology?
NEXT UP: Details from anon sources close to one of the Jane Does during her relationship with Danny Masterson. Expect, as always, a different spin on what we currently know.
Failing to consider the complexities, the incongruent duality of human nature is what fuels many rigid opinions. Is it possible that Danny is all the things he’s been accused of and all the things he’s been loved for? Could he be a loving father and a rapist? A drug-eschewing Scientologist who drugged women? A caring friend and a violent lover? Is it possible that he is a good husband today but was a bad boyfriend years ago? So many things can be true that I find myself incapable of forming a black/white opinion on him. What I do find concerning is a legal system that convicts based on he-said/she-said and that people don’t care because sometimes the means justifies the end, and…well…we got our guy. I mean no disrespect to true victims; their story is complex as well. Fear, shame, you name it, influence a woman’s decision to tell or not tell or tell 20 years later when she’s found her voice and strength.
I urge everyone who says “without any evidence” to research sexual assault cases. Before dna & forensics became as important as it is today rape cases that were prosecuted didn’t have much, if any, evidence at all. That’s why investigators who specialise in sex crimes are so so important. The investigators are one of the biggest parts of why this case ended in conviction. Add to that, the defence’s job is to attack any shreds of credibility and sow doubt. Sexual assaults are some of the most difficult because there may not ever be evidence in a lot of cases.
I find it sad because, tbh, I think a lot of social media and the public hide under the safety net of Depp/Heard’s media circus and the perceived failed metoo movement. Yes, think objectively, look at the facts, look at statistics, get as much information as you can…but a lot of people who don’t understand the legal system and sex crimes trials are commenting and don’t see how hard it was to try Masterson, how they had to do it twice, and ultimately how and why they were successful.
The first jury doesn’t matter here. The ‘lack of evidence’ only matters insomuch as the prosecution fought an uphill battle twice and were ultimately victorious in getting justice.