Not condoning rape here but given that the courts have done their job and the rapist is seeing justice, can we leave it at that?
The need to cancel by further and and further levels of abstraction is toxic to society. Justice (such as it is) is served. We should move on. If you feel a call to activism then seek out help and care for survivors. Seeking to further punish is going to rot you up inside.
He point of giving letters to the court of character is to try to reduce the sentence. If people are able to give statements with no cost, irrespective of truth or repurcuasions, then they become pointless as all would be glowing and positive. Anyone giving such a letter should be able to stand by it. If they can’t they shouldn’t give one.
I haven’t read his letter, but I assume it talks about his time with him filming when he was younger. It doesn’t seem relevant of it’s about his character, aside from rapes. So, what’s the point of providing it? If it is relevant, then we should question the relevance and motive and veracity of the whole purpose is to reduce the sentence of a convicted rapist.
People will all move on. However, moving on does not mean ignore and forget.
In rape cases there can be a bit of she said he said and such testimony can be important. However, it’s up to the jury to decide how much weight they attach to such a letter.
If one of my close friends was accused of rape and I never got any signals that she/he was capable of doing such a thing, I think I should be allowed to be heard. And if I was falsely accused I expect those that know my character to offer the same.
If I ever get the request from someone I have any doubt about they’re getting the polite middle finger. But if I’m 99% sure they wouldn’t do such a thing I guess I at least owe them to share my pov with the jury. Up to them to weigh everything.
In this case the actor who portrayed Mr. Red has shown he’s a bad judge of character but it shouldn’t stop us from using the character of the show to make cheff’s kiss memes (not this one though)
These letters were after conviction, for sentencing.
Yes, there can be he said, she said. A jury convicts only if convinced beyond all reasonable doubt. They did so on multiple counts. One of the alleged victims, there was sufficient doubt. He was not convicted on that count. So it wasn’t just he said, she said.
I agree, red likely made an error of judgement. It’s not tantamount to rape, but he’s still advocating for a rapist with the intent of reducing the sentence.
You’re completely missing the point of these letters though. The jury had already found the accused guilty. These letters were for the judge, after conviction. In order to lighten the sentence of a convicted rapist.
Not condoning rape here but given that the courts have done their job and the rapist is seeing justice, can we leave it at that?
The need to cancel by further and and further levels of abstraction is toxic to society. Justice (such as it is) is served. We should move on. If you feel a call to activism then seek out help and care for survivors. Seeking to further punish is going to rot you up inside.
He point of giving letters to the court of character is to try to reduce the sentence. If people are able to give statements with no cost, irrespective of truth or repurcuasions, then they become pointless as all would be glowing and positive. Anyone giving such a letter should be able to stand by it. If they can’t they shouldn’t give one.
I haven’t read his letter, but I assume it talks about his time with him filming when he was younger. It doesn’t seem relevant of it’s about his character, aside from rapes. So, what’s the point of providing it? If it is relevant, then we should question the relevance and motive and veracity of the whole purpose is to reduce the sentence of a convicted rapist.
People will all move on. However, moving on does not mean ignore and forget.
In rape cases there can be a bit of she said he said and such testimony can be important. However, it’s up to the jury to decide how much weight they attach to such a letter.
If one of my close friends was accused of rape and I never got any signals that she/he was capable of doing such a thing, I think I should be allowed to be heard. And if I was falsely accused I expect those that know my character to offer the same.
If I ever get the request from someone I have any doubt about they’re getting the polite middle finger. But if I’m 99% sure they wouldn’t do such a thing I guess I at least owe them to share my pov with the jury. Up to them to weigh everything.
In this case the actor who portrayed Mr. Red has shown he’s a bad judge of character but it shouldn’t stop us from using the character of the show to make cheff’s kiss memes (not this one though)
It’s up to the judge. The letters were just used for sentencing, NOT for the verdict, which is the responsibility of the judge, not the jury.
Ok then I stand corrected.
In that case I might be sending a letter how they betrayed my trust & to not go too light on the sentence
These letters were after conviction, for sentencing.
Yes, there can be he said, she said. A jury convicts only if convinced beyond all reasonable doubt. They did so on multiple counts. One of the alleged victims, there was sufficient doubt. He was not convicted on that count. So it wasn’t just he said, she said.
I agree, red likely made an error of judgement. It’s not tantamount to rape, but he’s still advocating for a rapist with the intent of reducing the sentence.
You’re completely missing the point of these letters though. The jury had already found the accused guilty. These letters were for the judge, after conviction. In order to lighten the sentence of a convicted rapist.
What a horrible take.