re: Danny Masterson Sentenced To 30 Years In Prison After Rape Convictions

quote:

---

what evidence was presented at trial?

---

The evidence was almost entirely testimonial. Given the time lapse between the dates the incidents are alleged to have occurred and the first trial (Nov. 2022) there was basically no physical evidence to bolster the claims. Jurors deadlocked in the first trial, which was ultimately declared a mistrial. The jury vote had to be unanimous to convict, and I think when jurors were polled after less than 1/2 felt he was guilty.

A retrial/second trial was then had in April. It appears the biggest difference between the two trials was the judge allowed prosecutors in the second trial to make direct arguments/statements that Masterson drugged the women before raping them. The women had alleged that in the first trial, but because there was no physical evidence (such as a toxicology report) beyond just the women's testimony, prosecutors were not allowed to directly argue in the first trial the women were drugged.

The second big difference is that the judge allowed expert testimony regarding Scientology to be introduced in the second trial. (At least) two of the women had claimed the church of Scientology acted to suppress their allegations and investigations thereof closer to the time when the incidents allegedly happened. It appears those aspects of testimony swayed the jury the other way in the second trial (at least with respect to 2 of the 3 women).

My initial thought is the rape is a heinous crime second only to murder. I can't imagine the hurt a woman feels and lives with for the remainder of her life after such a violation of her humanity.

However, it seems like we have to juxtapose that with a me too culture that now demands society to "believe all women". That mindset is the COMPLETE antithesis to our criminal justice system which mandates the accused is innocent unless proven guilty. A cry to "believe all women" based upon nothing more than an initial allegation seems to potentially create very dangerous societal climate. One where the accused is seemingly forced to overcome a societal mindset that all women should be believed without question, rather than the cornerstone of our justice system where the state has the burden to prove the accused is guilty.

One could also argue the "me too" movement has created a cultural climate where it is almost seen as virtuous to be a "victim". While certainly that has probably led to a lot of long time scumbags/criminals finally getting a just punishment for their actions, it's hard to argue it hasn't also led to a lot of women using such allegations as a "sword" to attack men they feel have wronged them. For example, what may have been completely consensual sex 15 years ago may now be viewed in hindsight as "rape" through the perspective of a scorned ex. And when such allegations are made 15, 20, 25 years after the alleged event, the only evidence often lest is the testimony of the parties involved. It's not like murder, or other physical crimes which are investigated soon after the event and physical evidence is quickly gathered. Here you have situations where people (generally always men) may face decades in prison almost SOLELY based upon if the jury likes the accuser. It is a very, very scary prospect to think a scorned lover or someone with a grudge can completely and totally unexpectedly destroy your life 20 years after one sexual encounter that seemed to be consensual at the time.

If the "me too" climate has caused women to be less fearful and ashamed of reporting they were raped immediately after it occurs, that is a good thing. But destroying lives based upon alleged decades old acts with scant evidence outside of mere allegations should be a very big concern as well.