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 was thinking the same. Ultimately we can never know the truth but the reality of people is we often operate in morally grey areas. I do think 30 years based on the evidence provided and what we know from the courthouse is unwarranted. Something definitely feels off about this second trial.
When there are multiple victims making fresh complaints to multiple people, and the accused pays $400k to one of the victims to keep her quiet, it is no longer a he said/she said scenario, imo. The jury apparently agreed.
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.
Damn Ezza. Well said. To even be able to try someone for rape is extremely rare. Of course these accusations are old, it’s taken a long time for women to even get a fair chance to tell their story. Watch the Conan interview. His non chalance is so telling.
Thanks! The girls were up against a system not in their favor and also Scientology. And if anyone thinks Scientology is a red herring, don’t forget his defense team was sanctioned from the first trial for passing documents to the lawyer for Scientology.
I’m on the fence, wasn’t invested in trial, appreciate your post! My only immediate response to your post is in regards to “perceived failed metoo movement.” I think it’s not only failed, but has horrible roots with grudge/fame- hungry actresses, who would not have said a WORD if their careers had shot to the moon and stayed there. FOUNDATIONS of any movement are critical.
There is always evidence if crime occurred. Rape kit is a must. I am sorry, but believing someone's story without it is just insane. I was raped. I didn't go to the police, but I didn't plan to press charges.
As a Scientologist, this court case has hit me much deeper than just a prosecution of a man. He is innocent until proven guilty, and the court did not prove him guilty. Obviously the prosecution, judge and media are biased against the Church of Scientology and this was heavily leaned on in this case.
I believe that if this is going on in this country, nobody is safe. Anyone with political and religious beliefs counter to the ruling class is in danger of being jailed and ostracized.
The only thing this trial proved is that it is possible in the United States today to convict and sentence someone for their religion. A VERY dark and dangerous precedent for every American indeed.
Didn’t you say you were across the hall for the Weinstein trial the entire time? I think plenty of people do understand, actually. There may even be people who understand more than you do. Shocking, I know. Stop talking down to ppl bc they don’t believe exactly the same as you by claiming we don’t understand. I do not believe all women who claim rape are victims of it. I also don’t believe that all men accused of rape are guilty of it. I do believe Scientology to be a cult and a silencing one. One that destroys lives. One that forces members to cut off contact w all family members who leave the church. And these women tried to come forward years ago and they were silenced. Bijou also discounted her sister’s story when Makenzie came forward years back saying her father molested her for years and years. As long as she looked “effortless” while doing so. Jesus.
"I do not believe all women who claim rape are victims of it." I think the same way. I also don't believe all men who claim it wasn't a rape. I didn't watch the trial. May justice have been served. If it wasn't served, then karma will come around.
Okkkk, girl. Never said Scientology was on trial. You know, the cult that tells you that you are never a victim, everything that happens to you is your responsibility, and if you leave the church, you also leave behind all you’ve ever known including your own fucking family.
So, “for the trillionth time,” they didn’t wait twenty years to come forward. They were silenced, harassed, and threatened when they DID come forward decades ago. I’m so sick of hearing they aren’t credible bc they waited SO long to come forward when that is just not true. And the church played a huge role in that. Like it or don’t. Idgaf.
Cult aside, you’ve never heard of women who go back to their abusers? Don’t act like this is brand new behavior. Also, him not doing drugs personally? Wtf does that prove? This isn’t coke or pot. We’re talking Rohypnol. The date rape drug. Jesus. Rapists don’t have this drug on them to mix themselves a roofie cocktail and lounge by the pool.
Innocent ppl don’t usually pay $400,000 to keep someone quiet either.
In light of the defense's argument that the women waited SO LONG to report the sexual assaults to the police, therefore they are not believable, any evidence showing that they DID report it to Scientology and they persuaded (strong-armed/threatened) these women not to report the rapes becomes 100% relevant. To do that, they had to explain the tech.
Perhaps you also don't understand this case and have a bit of misinformed commentary yourself;, because this case is a really good example of the complexities and difficulties in trying sex crimes. This accusations in and of themselves aren't really harder to understand than many other rape cases, they're similar to how a lot of sexual assaults occur. The addition of Scientology is probably the bigger swing in the pendulum for the victims and that might be the easiest thing to understand about it all.
Dear Lord. If u actually think the jury found that these women "consented" you are way off track. He was sentenced to life b/c he was convicted of 2 forcible sexual assaults against two separate victims. That is the law.
Furthermore, did u follow the trial? Only one of the 3 victims was a girlfriend and the jury hung on that count. The women on the counts he was convicted were never his girlfriend. Geesh 🙄
Oh come on. You are brainwashed if you think there aren’t dark sides to religion. Ummm...the Catholic Church. This trial also proved how hard it still is for victims to get their voices heard. Do you have a daughter? Scientology obviously has some shady shit going on if you don’t even know where your “leaders” wife is or has been for some time. Transparency is non existent, why do you think they would tell their members about the business of senior members of the church.
Your sentiment on this topic is proof of the insidious and toxic nature the biased media has on "popular opinion".
Have you considered that the unfair, slanted, biased and vitriolic treatment Scientologists and the Church have gotten over the decades may be the very reason you don't see anyone in the Church bothering to do or say anything to any reporter or pundit? Why on earth would anyone in the Church validate ridiculous claims of conspiracy when the same "reporters" have dismissed and ignored every effort and offer to observe evidence contrary to their claims.
Do you think in LA county, where they will put away a prominent Scientologist for 30 years on flimsy evidence, they would also close a missing person's report within 4 hours after a simple welfare check? You know who filed the missing person's report? Leah Remini. This woman has absolutely no idea what is going on with the leadership of the Church. It was a ruse to get attention and headlines, nothing more.
We are people, we have lives and families and we pay bills, go to the dentist, raise kids and build businesses just like anyone else. The VAST majority of Scientologists do not commit crimes, we pay our taxes and as you have heard from the trial we not only don't do drugs, we help our friends get off of them. We have secular social betterment campaigns that have helped millions live better lives. If you've never looked for yourself I can assure you that your information on Scientology is sensationalized false and bigoted junk.
The woman who’s Substack you are on has raised that very question. I don’t care in the least bit about Scientology, what I do care about are rape victims. You are obviously looking at this one side as an attack on Scientology. When the perpetrator of these acts involves the church of Scientology to harass, cover up or silence the victims, that is when it is positively acceptable to bring the church of Scientology into this. If it weren’t for his status in the church, maybe this wouldn’t have happened. I’m not talking about the average Scientologist either. According to the victims, they were average Scientologists, that were abused, disrespected, and betrayed but their church. Can you have some compassion for them?
No because I believe they are lying or severely twisting the truth just like so many other past litigants against the Church spanning decades. Make no mistake, I have nothing but compassion for true victims of violent crime. I have nothing but contempt for liars and I believe these three Jane Does and their accomplices are just that.
There are people who will do whatever it takes to take down Scientology because they are afraid of it. And people like you form an opinion that has been pre-formed on your behalf by the propaganda media machine who have been handed the task.
Throughout history popular political and religious movements have been violently treated because cowards in power felt threatened. This is nothing new.
I was a member of the Catholic Church for 30 years and our leaders absolutely duped us, lied to us and covered it up. One should never be so trusting in organized religion.
I am sorry that you had a bad experience with the Catholics. Scientology is 100% not the Catholic Church in any way. I have extensive experience with it over the last 25 years and I have yet to be "duped".
I have gained so much more spiritually from my religion than any monetary donations. You can't tell me that my experiences aren't real and that I can't trust my own observations and actually I'm not happy, because I am.
And this doesn't comport with the twisted propaganda you've been exposed to about it, and that's sad. We live in a world now where everyone is told what to believe and what to like and what to hate. We're socially stigmatized for free expression. We're told ugly things are beautiful, and that things of beauty should be dismantled or that so-and-so has it out for you so you better fight them. The ONLY way to truly be free is to look for yourself and make your own observations; keep your own counsel and have some courage to say what you believe despite unpopularity.
Serious question, are you allowed as a Scientologist to even be reading media such as this? That might speak poorly of Scientology? I thought Scientologists were not allowed to? Did you read Leah’s book and what are your thoughts on Scientology and the Aftermath show and the people who appeared on it? I wish Jessica would interview you I think it would be fascinating.
Point #1 of the Code of a Scientologist (which is freely available on scientologyreligion.org) states "To keep Scientologists, the public and the press accurately informed concerning Scientology, the world of mental health and society." Of the 19 remaining, there are a number of other applicable points to this topic.
When you're only listening to apostates and people who have been expelled from the Church you tend to get a one-sided view simply by way of the fact that no other information is being looked at. But the other side of the story is all available at standleague.org and if you take an objective look at the facts presented you would be much better informed as to the true intentions of these people.
Did you see the video a couple weeks ago of a naked homeless woman shooting randomly at cars in the middle of the freeway in San Francisco? That's about how I view Leah Remini. A mentally disturbed righteously indignant lunatic with no regard for the lives she harms. I would never bother to listen to the hate and vitriol that comes from her mouth. On the same token I would never listen to a rabid anti-semite or heed the words of militant Islamist terrorists. I don't think I'd read books written by anyone who has an axe to grind with any religion. Just give me the facts and hold the bias and cherrypicking.
I've been in Scientology for 25 years and I have been very active with my Church community for most of that time. I have seen with my own eyes the miracles the technology is capable of. I've done plenty of courses and received auditing which helped me in ways you wouldn't believe. I was married by a Scientology minster and had a Scientology wedding ceremony. I have been to multiple Scientology funeral services, including for my mother and brother. Been to many of the international events and have had the pleasure to meet and befriend many other Scientologists from around the world. My experience has not just been "good," it's been spectacular.
Don't you think it's kind of weird that the mainstream media press who never passes up an opportunity to viciously discredit any "conspiracy theorist" would go to such great lengths to push conspiracy theories about the Church? My advice to anyone reading is to look up Occam's Razor and take it to whatever they hear about anything in the popular media. It's 99% fabricated misdirection and the remaining 1% is earthquake and tornado coverage.
I would politely decline an interview as I don't think it's my place to "go on the record" about it. But it's been nice to be able to write out my thoughts and experiences on this thread. Hope you have a lovely day!
But biases can be based on truth. All journalists aren’t out there to spread main stream medias biases. They do hard work to uncover things themselves.
As a skeptic of Scientology, I am stunned and horrified that someone can be convicted with so little evidence, and for so long. I will admit that I know next to nothing about this case, and closer examination is necessary on my part, still I can’t shake my feeling of dread.
It's an appropriate feeling. We collectively need to cast aside our differences and somehow reign in this frightening trend toward casual conviction and imprisonment.
That's very cute but you look a little stupid making insulting quips to total strangers on the internet. Maybe go back to Twitter?
And before you waste more of your time trying to convince me that I am in a "cult" I would advise you spare me as I won't engage further with this bigoted nonsense.
Most religions don't interfere with its members decision on whether to report a crime to the police. Arguably, Danny took full advantage of that in the early 2000's. Justice was simply delayed. As long as u don't violate the law, you will be fine so just chillax.
Without verifiable evidence your presumptions don't constitute guilt. You presume he did this. You presume the Church was involved. There is no evidence other than verbal testimony. I would never want you on a jury of mine.
"As long as u don't violate the law, you will be fine". In a world where evidence is optional if the prosecution just doesn't like you, nobody is safe. Crime or no crime. Just look at other cases going on this year that laughingly pass as "justice." Prosecution of political opponents by the Biden DOJ as a glaring example. Very conveniently these court dates are set for the day and week of important Primary elections. Coincidence? Haha. Not when the alleged crime occurred nearly three years ago.
Tinfoil hat thought coming in hot: Bijou’s dad, John Phillips, allegedly had pretty strong ties to the CIA (through his military father) and was heavily involved in the Laurel canyon music scene CIA operation, according to Weird Scenes from Inside the Canyon by David McGowan and other accounts. I’ve also read several articles about Scientology being a branch of the CIA. Maybe Bijou and Danny pissed off some of the of the wrong people at the top and this is their punishment?? It’s far reaching i know, but, well, so is the alleged moon landing too so why not. I trust nothing anymore (except you lol)
And again, as with Weinstein, we have to ask ourselves: WHY is our outrage/ disgust/ horror/ empathy being STOKED and directed towards this one target with no tangible connection to us? If the average person simply looks around within their own family and peer circle, there are all sorts of grey-area truths to contend with. WHY does the public repeatedly fall for the bait that we can expunge ourselves of our own uncertainty, paralysis, complicity, and guilt by taking it out of effigies of famous people?
If true, this would actually make a lot of sense. If the dots you're connecting are valid, who's to say the effort to prosecute Masterson isn't coming from >within< the Church of Scientology, unbeknownst to its lower-level members. The church gets its man while also getting to present itself as a wrongfully-persecuted religious minority -- which, I'd imagine, is good for business in terms of recruiting and also in further isolating adherents from the outside world. Something about the harshness of that sentence just REEKS of something suspicious going on. I mean, it's SO in-excess of what's standard.
As a rape survivor, I am in disbelief that in the year 2023 folks are still generally ignorant of the effects of trauma and how hard it can be to speak up, let alone press charges, in a climate as victim-averse (sometimes shaming) as ours. Whether you believe them or not, these women's stories are *a* valid form of evidence. And this conviction was bolstered by the fact that they all told friends shortly after the incident—additional evidence.
In my case, I told no one after the first rape, and only one person after the second (different predator) and that person was a counselor in training. He was so visibly uncomfortable with my experience that I figured, guess no one wants to hear this and didn't go further. Reading some of these comments, it feels like folks still don't want to hear it. Unless they're bot generated, in which case, I'll breathe a sigh of relief for humanity. Otherwise, there's plenty of literature on trauma readily available for anyone who wants to genuinely understand.
Incorrect. In court, testimony IS evidence. It’s up to the jury to decide whether to believe it or not. But, it is considered evidence whether we like it or not.
I didn’t follow this trial but for as many criminals as LA let’s off right now there is definitely something more to this story. I’m not saying those women lied because they most definitely could have been raped and no one listened. Or the Church of Scientology wanted to cover it up. But was the conviction pushed because he was a Scientologist or rapist? Anyone who watches the news knows LA let’s people off for worse crimes. We likely will never know but at the same time maybe people will speak to Jessica because you have shown you do the work in your investigation and write things that they don’t want the public to read.
Unfortunately, two things can be true. He can be the wonderful guy described in the statements from friends and family, he can be a good father and husband, but he also could very well have raped these women. We’ll never know...
Hm. I’m just listening and following along and learning to ask better questions. I’ve been raped more than once , Ive lived with PTSD, I’ve healed, I’ve forgiven, And I’m confused and stunned by the 30 year sentence and where I stand on all of this. This makes my heart ache for many reasons. Grateful for these conversations that ask us to dig deeper.
I'm not understanding why you continue to ask "what evidence" when you included the judges statement:
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.”
A few interesting things not mentioned: When asking for leniency in sentencing why did his own lawyer say she would argue rehabilitation had already taken place if he’s supposed to be innocent? Why didn’t he testify? Perhaps because that would open the way for him to be questioned about his words in the internal Scientology documents from all those years ago, prosecution would have obliterated him. There’s no way the first trial could’ve been fair without the context of how the church handled him and the women. The judge walked a fun line and tried to keep it tight most likely with a view of appeal in mind. We’ll see about that but I think the real bombshells will be in the civil trial when all the documentation is out there and if everything on him can be seen.
There must have been evidence that was strong that we aren’t privy to? After all there weren’t cameras in the courtroom, and I don’t believe all the details of the trial were released? I’m probably in the minority but I don’t like Danny Masterson, he just gives me an ick vibe, I’ve always felt that way, even before the charges came out. That’s just a gut feeling and it could be wrong, not all gut feelings are correct. I watched the documentary on Scientology and I wholeheartedly believe that they tried to suppress the alleged victims from coming forward.
Rapists are known to construct a false image to hide that dark side of themselves and victims of sexual abuse are often coerced into silence. Family, spouses, colleagues and longtime friends wouldn’t know about such transgressions. To my knowledge, rape cannot be ruled out just because of a romantic relationship status and SA victims often can’t backup claims. And lastly, the Church of Scientology is being exposed more and more for protecting sexual predators/abusers.
This is truly a difficult one for me personally because I know too many sexual predators walking free due to lack of evidence and coercion.
I do not believe he did it. I read tony Ortega’ said Substack daily for both trials and they were VASTLY different trials. I believe he may have been an arrogant asshole to his girlfriend and I believe he may have felt entitled at the time. When you know better, you do better rings so loudly to me in these stories. It seems like he was young, they were all drinking, they made bad decisions and didn’t like that he didn’t fall in love with them. I get it. I’ve been there. I’ve also had boyfriends that when we had sex it didn’t feel great and they thought only about themselves. I’ve woken up from a messy drunken escapade in my 20’s having slept with a friend and thinking we were going to fall in love and it would be magical and I’ve also woken up and thought oh bloody hell what did I do now? I’ve been embarrassed by an asshole or 10, and they’ve grown up and I’ve grown up and they don’t act that way anymore.
They just convicted a man of being an immature asshole 23 years ago. Watch your boys because apparently every mistake they make will haunt them for their ENTIRE life and they could die in prison for poor judgement and disrespecting someone years ago.
Absolutely teach your fucking kids that people. Your actions have CONSEQUENCES. THATS THE FUCKING POINT. TEACH boys about consent and then they won’t go to prison. Is it that hard?!?!
I’m so sorry for the things you experienced. This is clearly very personal and jarring for you and for that, I do feel deep sadness and empathy. I think what some are trying to relay, and Jenn Z got closest, is that 20 something years ago, as a 20-something, things were just “different”. Rape is never ok. It shouldn’t be swept under the rug. But also, back then, the definition of rape was “different” in culture at large. Date rape was only *just* being acknowledged as real. It was only in 1994 that my home state of Texas made marital rape illegal. It wasn’t until 2021 that California equalized penalties of “spousal rape” and “rape”. Keeping that in mind, rape between consensually dating adults 20 years ago would be viewed and experienced by both parties very differently.
Yes, everyone should be raised to understand and respect consent. But THAT conversation simply didn’t happen in the 80’s and 90’s when we were growing up. The conversation was, “watch you drink, carry a rape whistle, use the buddy system, and don’t run at night (especially with headphones on)”. We simply can not forget what the culture and atmosphere was at the time of the events that transpired.
The issue at hand now is an incredibly unfair (in my opinion) sentence and that these now grown women are raping a child of her father. The narcissism is stomach churning.
Signed,
A rape survivor themselves (since you have been demanding we raise our hand)
Not demanding you raise your hand but I do appreciate you doing so. And I absolutely agree that it was different 20 years ago, but hiding behind that makes things worse. It was never okay for men to do this yet society makes excuses (not you, but society). Whether it happened in 1800 or 1950, 1993, or 1999 in my case, the way society speaks about rape victims, at any point in time for sure causes me to spiral. I should take a break from this case but it’s so freaking frustrating to me when people who haven’t experienced rape try to weigh in. A 30 year sentence is lenient in my comparison. Those victims will suffer for way longer than 30 years.
And his daughter will suffer for longer than all of them. As will her children. We can agree to disagree on the fairness of the sentencing. But a stronger victim would likely have asked for another sentence than to destroy a small girl’s world. They have only added to the burden they carry, not alleviated it. Again, only my opinion. I respect yours.
Just my two cents but this logic assumes he would never do it again and if he is truly guilty of raping these women, who is to say he wouldn’t again? It’s terrible his daughter has to suffer for this but if he truly did it, it was his own actions that will cause his daughter pain, not the women that came forward.
I feel horrible for his wife and child and family. If he were remorseful and admitted he wasn’t aware what he was doing was rape but has learned etc, I would absolutely ask for a lesser sentence. He’s denying the truth of others though, proving he’s still a danger to society.
Yes. Take a break. You’re definitely projecting your feelings on to others in this thread. Your experience is unique to you. I’ve had some of the exact experiences as these women stated they had. Woke up with bruises on my thighs from someone having sex with me in my sleep after being up for days on drugs. I don’t condone what they did but I also don’t feel that it was rape as I willingly had sex with them multiple times. And if I did I wouldn’t go after them now, 15 years later, because it serves no purpose. When you know better you do better and I believe the ppl that did that to me do better now. I’m sorry for what happened to you but just because that is your story doesn’t mean I have to bow down to your demands that he suffer. Sorry. Also, feel free to not comment on every single persons comment, opinion, or belief.
But you made the choice to be ‘up for days on drugs’ (not excusing that as a reason for rape someone) these women were drugged against their will by someone else with the soul purpose of having sex with them.
You can’t have it both ways. The victims of this trial also chose to be drinking, which we know leads to inability to make responsible choices. Was it the first drink of the night? The 4th? I don’t know that answer based on my limited knowledge of the case. But the question is, does it matter? If it doesn’t matter then your response about her choosing to be on drugs for days doesn’t matter. But it *does* do an excellent job of pointing out how juries can easily be swayed one way or another based on language allowed. And different language was allowed in this trial than in the first. Very important difference in the two trials. Language creates your reality, afterall.
Most victims of rape and incest don’t come forward ... at least not right away. That is why there has to be extended statute of limitations.
These women were part of the cult of Scientology ... I believe them when they say they were threatened to keep quiet. They also faced expulsion from their cult, their families, their life long friends, the only way of life they have ever known...not much wonder they waited so long. The same type of expulsion can be faced by victims of incest - they can lose their entire family.
There may not be physical evidence but these women told people in their lives who could testify on their behalf. There often isn’t in people who report immediately as a persons first instinct is to wash the perpetrator off their skin.
People who have never experienced sexual assault, rape, incest etc themselves have no idea the way a person feels afterward; the PTSD they experience for the rest of their lives. If statistics are true, at least 1 in 3 women (or more) have been the victim of sexual assault, abuse, rape etc. The majority of them never come forward and many of the comments being made here are the reason why.
Personally, I am pleased to see that a rapist is getting a sentence commensurate with at least part of the number of years a victim deals with the after math of being raped.
Maybe the feeling is that it's very likely an innocent man is now going to prison for at least 30 years and we're all just watching it happen. The jury pool is tainted by the media's biased reporting on Scientology and the prosecution leaned on it heavily.
This wasn't the prosecution of a man, it was the persecution of religion in the United States. Far more icky than a single sentence.
Scientology was a HUGE factor in the second trial where it wasn’t allowed to be admitted in during the first trial. Interestingly enough after he was not convicted the first time both the prosecution and defense get to talk to the jurors to find out what was keeping them from finding him guilty or what worked for the defense. Guess they got their answer and went harder on Scientology in the second trial. Religious beliefs and hatred of religion just cost someone their life and freedom.
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 was thinking the same. Ultimately we can never know the truth but the reality of people is we often operate in morally grey areas. I do think 30 years based on the evidence provided and what we know from the courthouse is unwarranted. Something definitely feels off about this second trial.
When there are multiple victims making fresh complaints to multiple people, and the accused pays $400k to one of the victims to keep her quiet, it is no longer a he said/she said scenario, imo. The jury apparently agreed.
Well said!
My thoughts exactly!
100%
I’ve been thinking this and you put it into words perfectly.
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.
Damn Ezza. Well said. To even be able to try someone for rape is extremely rare. Of course these accusations are old, it’s taken a long time for women to even get a fair chance to tell their story. Watch the Conan interview. His non chalance is so telling.
Thanks! The girls were up against a system not in their favor and also Scientology. And if anyone thinks Scientology is a red herring, don’t forget his defense team was sanctioned from the first trial for passing documents to the lawyer for Scientology.
Can you explain this? I don’t quite understand.
Ezza,
I’m on the fence, wasn’t invested in trial, appreciate your post! My only immediate response to your post is in regards to “perceived failed metoo movement.” I think it’s not only failed, but has horrible roots with grudge/fame- hungry actresses, who would not have said a WORD if their careers had shot to the moon and stayed there. FOUNDATIONS of any movement are critical.
There is always evidence if crime occurred. Rape kit is a must. I am sorry, but believing someone's story without it is just insane. I was raped. I didn't go to the police, but I didn't plan to press charges.
As a Scientologist, this court case has hit me much deeper than just a prosecution of a man. He is innocent until proven guilty, and the court did not prove him guilty. Obviously the prosecution, judge and media are biased against the Church of Scientology and this was heavily leaned on in this case.
I believe that if this is going on in this country, nobody is safe. Anyone with political and religious beliefs counter to the ruling class is in danger of being jailed and ostracized.
The only thing this trial proved is that it is possible in the United States today to convict and sentence someone for their religion. A VERY dark and dangerous precedent for every American indeed.
I have to agree. I don't think people understand this case at all, so It leaves plenty of room for misinformed commentary.
Didn’t you say you were across the hall for the Weinstein trial the entire time? I think plenty of people do understand, actually. There may even be people who understand more than you do. Shocking, I know. Stop talking down to ppl bc they don’t believe exactly the same as you by claiming we don’t understand. I do not believe all women who claim rape are victims of it. I also don’t believe that all men accused of rape are guilty of it. I do believe Scientology to be a cult and a silencing one. One that destroys lives. One that forces members to cut off contact w all family members who leave the church. And these women tried to come forward years ago and they were silenced. Bijou also discounted her sister’s story when Makenzie came forward years back saying her father molested her for years and years. As long as she looked “effortless” while doing so. Jesus.
"I do not believe all women who claim rape are victims of it." I think the same way. I also don't believe all men who claim it wasn't a rape. I didn't watch the trial. May justice have been served. If it wasn't served, then karma will come around.
Okkkk, girl. Never said Scientology was on trial. You know, the cult that tells you that you are never a victim, everything that happens to you is your responsibility, and if you leave the church, you also leave behind all you’ve ever known including your own fucking family.
So, “for the trillionth time,” they didn’t wait twenty years to come forward. They were silenced, harassed, and threatened when they DID come forward decades ago. I’m so sick of hearing they aren’t credible bc they waited SO long to come forward when that is just not true. And the church played a huge role in that. Like it or don’t. Idgaf.
Cult aside, you’ve never heard of women who go back to their abusers? Don’t act like this is brand new behavior. Also, him not doing drugs personally? Wtf does that prove? This isn’t coke or pot. We’re talking Rohypnol. The date rape drug. Jesus. Rapists don’t have this drug on them to mix themselves a roofie cocktail and lounge by the pool.
Innocent ppl don’t usually pay $400,000 to keep someone quiet either.
In light of the defense's argument that the women waited SO LONG to report the sexual assaults to the police, therefore they are not believable, any evidence showing that they DID report it to Scientology and they persuaded (strong-armed/threatened) these women not to report the rapes becomes 100% relevant. To do that, they had to explain the tech.
Perhaps you also don't understand this case and have a bit of misinformed commentary yourself;, because this case is a really good example of the complexities and difficulties in trying sex crimes. This accusations in and of themselves aren't really harder to understand than many other rape cases, they're similar to how a lot of sexual assaults occur. The addition of Scientology is probably the bigger swing in the pendulum for the victims and that might be the easiest thing to understand about it all.
Omg. You read my mind. Thank you.
Dear Lord. If u actually think the jury found that these women "consented" you are way off track. He was sentenced to life b/c he was convicted of 2 forcible sexual assaults against two separate victims. That is the law.
Furthermore, did u follow the trial? Only one of the 3 victims was a girlfriend and the jury hung on that count. The women on the counts he was convicted were never his girlfriend. Geesh 🙄
I agree!
Oh come on. You are brainwashed if you think there aren’t dark sides to religion. Ummm...the Catholic Church. This trial also proved how hard it still is for victims to get their voices heard. Do you have a daughter? Scientology obviously has some shady shit going on if you don’t even know where your “leaders” wife is or has been for some time. Transparency is non existent, why do you think they would tell their members about the business of senior members of the church.
Your sentiment on this topic is proof of the insidious and toxic nature the biased media has on "popular opinion".
Have you considered that the unfair, slanted, biased and vitriolic treatment Scientologists and the Church have gotten over the decades may be the very reason you don't see anyone in the Church bothering to do or say anything to any reporter or pundit? Why on earth would anyone in the Church validate ridiculous claims of conspiracy when the same "reporters" have dismissed and ignored every effort and offer to observe evidence contrary to their claims.
Do you think in LA county, where they will put away a prominent Scientologist for 30 years on flimsy evidence, they would also close a missing person's report within 4 hours after a simple welfare check? You know who filed the missing person's report? Leah Remini. This woman has absolutely no idea what is going on with the leadership of the Church. It was a ruse to get attention and headlines, nothing more.
We are people, we have lives and families and we pay bills, go to the dentist, raise kids and build businesses just like anyone else. The VAST majority of Scientologists do not commit crimes, we pay our taxes and as you have heard from the trial we not only don't do drugs, we help our friends get off of them. We have secular social betterment campaigns that have helped millions live better lives. If you've never looked for yourself I can assure you that your information on Scientology is sensationalized false and bigoted junk.
The woman who’s Substack you are on has raised that very question. I don’t care in the least bit about Scientology, what I do care about are rape victims. You are obviously looking at this one side as an attack on Scientology. When the perpetrator of these acts involves the church of Scientology to harass, cover up or silence the victims, that is when it is positively acceptable to bring the church of Scientology into this. If it weren’t for his status in the church, maybe this wouldn’t have happened. I’m not talking about the average Scientologist either. According to the victims, they were average Scientologists, that were abused, disrespected, and betrayed but their church. Can you have some compassion for them?
No because I believe they are lying or severely twisting the truth just like so many other past litigants against the Church spanning decades. Make no mistake, I have nothing but compassion for true victims of violent crime. I have nothing but contempt for liars and I believe these three Jane Does and their accomplices are just that.
There are people who will do whatever it takes to take down Scientology because they are afraid of it. And people like you form an opinion that has been pre-formed on your behalf by the propaganda media machine who have been handed the task.
Throughout history popular political and religious movements have been violently treated because cowards in power felt threatened. This is nothing new.
I was a member of the Catholic Church for 30 years and our leaders absolutely duped us, lied to us and covered it up. One should never be so trusting in organized religion.
I am sorry that you had a bad experience with the Catholics. Scientology is 100% not the Catholic Church in any way. I have extensive experience with it over the last 25 years and I have yet to be "duped".
I have gained so much more spiritually from my religion than any monetary donations. You can't tell me that my experiences aren't real and that I can't trust my own observations and actually I'm not happy, because I am.
And this doesn't comport with the twisted propaganda you've been exposed to about it, and that's sad. We live in a world now where everyone is told what to believe and what to like and what to hate. We're socially stigmatized for free expression. We're told ugly things are beautiful, and that things of beauty should be dismantled or that so-and-so has it out for you so you better fight them. The ONLY way to truly be free is to look for yourself and make your own observations; keep your own counsel and have some courage to say what you believe despite unpopularity.
Serious question, are you allowed as a Scientologist to even be reading media such as this? That might speak poorly of Scientology? I thought Scientologists were not allowed to? Did you read Leah’s book and what are your thoughts on Scientology and the Aftermath show and the people who appeared on it? I wish Jessica would interview you I think it would be fascinating.
Point #1 of the Code of a Scientologist (which is freely available on scientologyreligion.org) states "To keep Scientologists, the public and the press accurately informed concerning Scientology, the world of mental health and society." Of the 19 remaining, there are a number of other applicable points to this topic.
When you're only listening to apostates and people who have been expelled from the Church you tend to get a one-sided view simply by way of the fact that no other information is being looked at. But the other side of the story is all available at standleague.org and if you take an objective look at the facts presented you would be much better informed as to the true intentions of these people.
Did you see the video a couple weeks ago of a naked homeless woman shooting randomly at cars in the middle of the freeway in San Francisco? That's about how I view Leah Remini. A mentally disturbed righteously indignant lunatic with no regard for the lives she harms. I would never bother to listen to the hate and vitriol that comes from her mouth. On the same token I would never listen to a rabid anti-semite or heed the words of militant Islamist terrorists. I don't think I'd read books written by anyone who has an axe to grind with any religion. Just give me the facts and hold the bias and cherrypicking.
I've been in Scientology for 25 years and I have been very active with my Church community for most of that time. I have seen with my own eyes the miracles the technology is capable of. I've done plenty of courses and received auditing which helped me in ways you wouldn't believe. I was married by a Scientology minster and had a Scientology wedding ceremony. I have been to multiple Scientology funeral services, including for my mother and brother. Been to many of the international events and have had the pleasure to meet and befriend many other Scientologists from around the world. My experience has not just been "good," it's been spectacular.
Don't you think it's kind of weird that the mainstream media press who never passes up an opportunity to viciously discredit any "conspiracy theorist" would go to such great lengths to push conspiracy theories about the Church? My advice to anyone reading is to look up Occam's Razor and take it to whatever they hear about anything in the popular media. It's 99% fabricated misdirection and the remaining 1% is earthquake and tornado coverage.
I would politely decline an interview as I don't think it's my place to "go on the record" about it. But it's been nice to be able to write out my thoughts and experiences on this thread. Hope you have a lovely day!
But biases can be based on truth. All journalists aren’t out there to spread main stream medias biases. They do hard work to uncover things themselves.
As a skeptic of Scientology, I am stunned and horrified that someone can be convicted with so little evidence, and for so long. I will admit that I know next to nothing about this case, and closer examination is necessary on my part, still I can’t shake my feeling of dread.
It's an appropriate feeling. We collectively need to cast aside our differences and somehow reign in this frightening trend toward casual conviction and imprisonment.
Wait, you meant CULT* right?
That's very cute but you look a little stupid making insulting quips to total strangers on the internet. Maybe go back to Twitter?
And before you waste more of your time trying to convince me that I am in a "cult" I would advise you spare me as I won't engage further with this bigoted nonsense.
Most religions don't interfere with its members decision on whether to report a crime to the police. Arguably, Danny took full advantage of that in the early 2000's. Justice was simply delayed. As long as u don't violate the law, you will be fine so just chillax.
Without verifiable evidence your presumptions don't constitute guilt. You presume he did this. You presume the Church was involved. There is no evidence other than verbal testimony. I would never want you on a jury of mine.
"As long as u don't violate the law, you will be fine". In a world where evidence is optional if the prosecution just doesn't like you, nobody is safe. Crime or no crime. Just look at other cases going on this year that laughingly pass as "justice." Prosecution of political opponents by the Biden DOJ as a glaring example. Very conveniently these court dates are set for the day and week of important Primary elections. Coincidence? Haha. Not when the alleged crime occurred nearly three years ago.
What you or I think is irrelevant. Only the jury's opinion mattered. (And to a lesser extent, the judge's.) Apparently, they disagree with you.
P.S. Verbal testimony is evidence and, again, it appears the jury believed it. A jury Danny's team selected and agreed to.
P.S.S. I'm not a fan of conspiracy theories so u are going to have to find another windmill to shout that crap to...
Tinfoil hat thought coming in hot: Bijou’s dad, John Phillips, allegedly had pretty strong ties to the CIA (through his military father) and was heavily involved in the Laurel canyon music scene CIA operation, according to Weird Scenes from Inside the Canyon by David McGowan and other accounts. I’ve also read several articles about Scientology being a branch of the CIA. Maybe Bijou and Danny pissed off some of the of the wrong people at the top and this is their punishment?? It’s far reaching i know, but, well, so is the alleged moon landing too so why not. I trust nothing anymore (except you lol)
You had me at “Inside the Canyon”. Such a fascinating read and now you’ve got me thinking…
check out Phillips links with The Process Church of the Final Judgement and Manson next, enjoy ~~~
And again, as with Weinstein, we have to ask ourselves: WHY is our outrage/ disgust/ horror/ empathy being STOKED and directed towards this one target with no tangible connection to us? If the average person simply looks around within their own family and peer circle, there are all sorts of grey-area truths to contend with. WHY does the public repeatedly fall for the bait that we can expunge ourselves of our own uncertainty, paralysis, complicity, and guilt by taking it out of effigies of famous people?
If true, this would actually make a lot of sense. If the dots you're connecting are valid, who's to say the effort to prosecute Masterson isn't coming from >within< the Church of Scientology, unbeknownst to its lower-level members. The church gets its man while also getting to present itself as a wrongfully-persecuted religious minority -- which, I'd imagine, is good for business in terms of recruiting and also in further isolating adherents from the outside world. Something about the harshness of that sentence just REEKS of something suspicious going on. I mean, it's SO in-excess of what's standard.
Scientology has no ties into the CIA. That’s a real tinfoil hat conspiracy, wow.
Not the CIA, but L Ron Hubbard, the OG flim flam man, enjoyed the company of both Aleister Crowley and Jack Parsons
As a rape survivor, I am in disbelief that in the year 2023 folks are still generally ignorant of the effects of trauma and how hard it can be to speak up, let alone press charges, in a climate as victim-averse (sometimes shaming) as ours. Whether you believe them or not, these women's stories are *a* valid form of evidence. And this conviction was bolstered by the fact that they all told friends shortly after the incident—additional evidence.
In my case, I told no one after the first rape, and only one person after the second (different predator) and that person was a counselor in training. He was so visibly uncomfortable with my experience that I figured, guess no one wants to hear this and didn't go further. Reading some of these comments, it feels like folks still don't want to hear it. Unless they're bot generated, in which case, I'll breathe a sigh of relief for humanity. Otherwise, there's plenty of literature on trauma readily available for anyone who wants to genuinely understand.
Incorrect. In court, testimony IS evidence. It’s up to the jury to decide whether to believe it or not. But, it is considered evidence whether we like it or not.
I didn’t follow this trial but for as many criminals as LA let’s off right now there is definitely something more to this story. I’m not saying those women lied because they most definitely could have been raped and no one listened. Or the Church of Scientology wanted to cover it up. But was the conviction pushed because he was a Scientologist or rapist? Anyone who watches the news knows LA let’s people off for worse crimes. We likely will never know but at the same time maybe people will speak to Jessica because you have shown you do the work in your investigation and write things that they don’t want the public to read.
This is what I was thinking too. You took the words out of my mouth. Something doesn’t add up.
Unfortunately, two things can be true. He can be the wonderful guy described in the statements from friends and family, he can be a good father and husband, but he also could very well have raped these women. We’ll never know...
Hm. I’m just listening and following along and learning to ask better questions. I’ve been raped more than once , Ive lived with PTSD, I’ve healed, I’ve forgiven, And I’m confused and stunned by the 30 year sentence and where I stand on all of this. This makes my heart ache for many reasons. Grateful for these conversations that ask us to dig deeper.
thank you for responding with honesty and curiosity. I appreciate it. Xx
I'm not confused and would expect an army of Scientologist cult members to show up and make comments on this case. ✅
Or maybe he actually did exactly what he was just found guilty of doing....
I'm not understanding why you continue to ask "what evidence" when you included the judges statement:
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.”
A few interesting things not mentioned: When asking for leniency in sentencing why did his own lawyer say she would argue rehabilitation had already taken place if he’s supposed to be innocent? Why didn’t he testify? Perhaps because that would open the way for him to be questioned about his words in the internal Scientology documents from all those years ago, prosecution would have obliterated him. There’s no way the first trial could’ve been fair without the context of how the church handled him and the women. The judge walked a fun line and tried to keep it tight most likely with a view of appeal in mind. We’ll see about that but I think the real bombshells will be in the civil trial when all the documentation is out there and if everything on him can be seen.
Yessss all of this!!!!
He doesn’t have to speak in the trial. In fact, most people don’t. That does not mean he is guilty.
There must have been evidence that was strong that we aren’t privy to? After all there weren’t cameras in the courtroom, and I don’t believe all the details of the trial were released? I’m probably in the minority but I don’t like Danny Masterson, he just gives me an ick vibe, I’ve always felt that way, even before the charges came out. That’s just a gut feeling and it could be wrong, not all gut feelings are correct. I watched the documentary on Scientology and I wholeheartedly believe that they tried to suppress the alleged victims from coming forward.
Rapists are known to construct a false image to hide that dark side of themselves and victims of sexual abuse are often coerced into silence. Family, spouses, colleagues and longtime friends wouldn’t know about such transgressions. To my knowledge, rape cannot be ruled out just because of a romantic relationship status and SA victims often can’t backup claims. And lastly, the Church of Scientology is being exposed more and more for protecting sexual predators/abusers.
This is truly a difficult one for me personally because I know too many sexual predators walking free due to lack of evidence and coercion.
I do not believe he did it. I read tony Ortega’ said Substack daily for both trials and they were VASTLY different trials. I believe he may have been an arrogant asshole to his girlfriend and I believe he may have felt entitled at the time. When you know better, you do better rings so loudly to me in these stories. It seems like he was young, they were all drinking, they made bad decisions and didn’t like that he didn’t fall in love with them. I get it. I’ve been there. I’ve also had boyfriends that when we had sex it didn’t feel great and they thought only about themselves. I’ve woken up from a messy drunken escapade in my 20’s having slept with a friend and thinking we were going to fall in love and it would be magical and I’ve also woken up and thought oh bloody hell what did I do now? I’ve been embarrassed by an asshole or 10, and they’ve grown up and I’ve grown up and they don’t act that way anymore.
They just convicted a man of being an immature asshole 23 years ago. Watch your boys because apparently every mistake they make will haunt them for their ENTIRE life and they could die in prison for poor judgement and disrespecting someone years ago.
Absolutely teach your fucking kids that people. Your actions have CONSEQUENCES. THATS THE FUCKING POINT. TEACH boys about consent and then they won’t go to prison. Is it that hard?!?!
I’m so sorry for the things you experienced. This is clearly very personal and jarring for you and for that, I do feel deep sadness and empathy. I think what some are trying to relay, and Jenn Z got closest, is that 20 something years ago, as a 20-something, things were just “different”. Rape is never ok. It shouldn’t be swept under the rug. But also, back then, the definition of rape was “different” in culture at large. Date rape was only *just* being acknowledged as real. It was only in 1994 that my home state of Texas made marital rape illegal. It wasn’t until 2021 that California equalized penalties of “spousal rape” and “rape”. Keeping that in mind, rape between consensually dating adults 20 years ago would be viewed and experienced by both parties very differently.
Yes, everyone should be raised to understand and respect consent. But THAT conversation simply didn’t happen in the 80’s and 90’s when we were growing up. The conversation was, “watch you drink, carry a rape whistle, use the buddy system, and don’t run at night (especially with headphones on)”. We simply can not forget what the culture and atmosphere was at the time of the events that transpired.
The issue at hand now is an incredibly unfair (in my opinion) sentence and that these now grown women are raping a child of her father. The narcissism is stomach churning.
Signed,
A rape survivor themselves (since you have been demanding we raise our hand)
Not demanding you raise your hand but I do appreciate you doing so. And I absolutely agree that it was different 20 years ago, but hiding behind that makes things worse. It was never okay for men to do this yet society makes excuses (not you, but society). Whether it happened in 1800 or 1950, 1993, or 1999 in my case, the way society speaks about rape victims, at any point in time for sure causes me to spiral. I should take a break from this case but it’s so freaking frustrating to me when people who haven’t experienced rape try to weigh in. A 30 year sentence is lenient in my comparison. Those victims will suffer for way longer than 30 years.
And his daughter will suffer for longer than all of them. As will her children. We can agree to disagree on the fairness of the sentencing. But a stronger victim would likely have asked for another sentence than to destroy a small girl’s world. They have only added to the burden they carry, not alleviated it. Again, only my opinion. I respect yours.
Just my two cents but this logic assumes he would never do it again and if he is truly guilty of raping these women, who is to say he wouldn’t again? It’s terrible his daughter has to suffer for this but if he truly did it, it was his own actions that will cause his daughter pain, not the women that came forward.
I feel horrible for his wife and child and family. If he were remorseful and admitted he wasn’t aware what he was doing was rape but has learned etc, I would absolutely ask for a lesser sentence. He’s denying the truth of others though, proving he’s still a danger to society.
Yes. Take a break. You’re definitely projecting your feelings on to others in this thread. Your experience is unique to you. I’ve had some of the exact experiences as these women stated they had. Woke up with bruises on my thighs from someone having sex with me in my sleep after being up for days on drugs. I don’t condone what they did but I also don’t feel that it was rape as I willingly had sex with them multiple times. And if I did I wouldn’t go after them now, 15 years later, because it serves no purpose. When you know better you do better and I believe the ppl that did that to me do better now. I’m sorry for what happened to you but just because that is your story doesn’t mean I have to bow down to your demands that he suffer. Sorry. Also, feel free to not comment on every single persons comment, opinion, or belief.
But you made the choice to be ‘up for days on drugs’ (not excusing that as a reason for rape someone) these women were drugged against their will by someone else with the soul purpose of having sex with them.
You can’t have it both ways. The victims of this trial also chose to be drinking, which we know leads to inability to make responsible choices. Was it the first drink of the night? The 4th? I don’t know that answer based on my limited knowledge of the case. But the question is, does it matter? If it doesn’t matter then your response about her choosing to be on drugs for days doesn’t matter. But it *does* do an excellent job of pointing out how juries can easily be swayed one way or another based on language allowed. And different language was allowed in this trial than in the first. Very important difference in the two trials. Language creates your reality, afterall.
Prove they were drugged please? I’ve seen NO EVIDENCE OF THAT
YES! THIS!
Most victims of rape and incest don’t come forward ... at least not right away. That is why there has to be extended statute of limitations.
These women were part of the cult of Scientology ... I believe them when they say they were threatened to keep quiet. They also faced expulsion from their cult, their families, their life long friends, the only way of life they have ever known...not much wonder they waited so long. The same type of expulsion can be faced by victims of incest - they can lose their entire family.
There may not be physical evidence but these women told people in their lives who could testify on their behalf. There often isn’t in people who report immediately as a persons first instinct is to wash the perpetrator off their skin.
People who have never experienced sexual assault, rape, incest etc themselves have no idea the way a person feels afterward; the PTSD they experience for the rest of their lives. If statistics are true, at least 1 in 3 women (or more) have been the victim of sexual assault, abuse, rape etc. The majority of them never come forward and many of the comments being made here are the reason why.
Personally, I am pleased to see that a rapist is getting a sentence commensurate with at least part of the number of years a victim deals with the after math of being raped.
This whole thing just gives me an icky feeling. I don't know what happened. Rape is so horrible. This sentence feels "off." I don't know why.
It probably feels "off" because our legal system lets most people get away with rape, or have very little consequence.
Boom
Maybe the feeling is that it's very likely an innocent man is now going to prison for at least 30 years and we're all just watching it happen. The jury pool is tainted by the media's biased reporting on Scientology and the prosecution leaned on it heavily.
This wasn't the prosecution of a man, it was the persecution of religion in the United States. Far more icky than a single sentence.
Yeah something just feels so off.
Scientology was a HUGE factor in the second trial where it wasn’t allowed to be admitted in during the first trial. Interestingly enough after he was not convicted the first time both the prosecution and defense get to talk to the jurors to find out what was keeping them from finding him guilty or what worked for the defense. Guess they got their answer and went harder on Scientology in the second trial. Religious beliefs and hatred of religion just cost someone their life and freedom.