She changed “sexually assaulted” to “violated” in her essay and then changed it back again.
So, that would be another one for the “life not ruined by just an accusation” column, then.
I dunno. Some people around here still believe her, meaning he’s guilty of everything she accused him of. Some people will always believe he’s guilty no matter how innocent he actually is. It’s pretty hard to fully recover from a false accusation, so no, your minimizing the experience is pretty heartless.
Look, here’s the tiny violin I’m playing for the Chris Hardwicks of the world. Can you hear it?
But yeah - this is fun, how the target moves - “Oh, no, false accusations are the worst thing ever - they’ll totally ruin this poor innocent guy for life” “But he got his show back” “Nope, ruined for life - never fully recover”
And exactly what impact will it have on his life if a lot of strangers believe her? He’s very wealthy, it won’t impact him economically. He has his show back. In the internet era, even racist Nazi bastards have a platform. He’s married, so it won’t impact his ability to pick up women (I assume his marriage is monogamous).
He might not sit on as many convention panels, but conventions have their own problems with both diversity and misogyny, so if he doesn’t, it may be Comic Con deciding that they want fewer white men on panels.
He lives a public life. I don’t like Julia Roberts because of her actions towards her now-husband’s wife when he was still married to her. Doesn’t impact her life at all.
What new information has been revealed so far to suggest she wasn’t telling the truth?
From the blog post:
You have no concept of the meaning of pride or honour.
How about AMC would likely have sided with her if their investigation suggested she was telling the truth. A well regarded and female lawyer and investigator, one with much experience in he entertainment realm, where false allegations can run rampant, didn’t find her story to be credible.
Your point? She admitted she changed it.
Bullshit. There was no verbiage on the credibility of Dykstra’s story in AMC’s statement.
Do not personalize your arguments in this fashion. If you feel you must, the Pit is right around the corner.
On a side note, has this thread about run its course? It’s already been bumped the requisite one time, and barring new information, it does seem like a lot of talking past each other.[/moderating]
She admitted she changed it but was happy the changes didn’t go through. When the changes went through, she changed it back. So my point was she has stayed mostly steady on her story. What was your point again?
I beg your pardon?
Bullshit yourself. If AMC would have found Chloe’s story credible, Chris wouldn’t have got his job back.
No offense, Bone, but I think you should let people speak. It’s how ideas develop.
Somebody wanted to know if her story changes at all and the answer is yes, yes it did. Changing it back means it changed twice.
You seem to be saying because Chris Hardwick got his job back there was no harm done. I’m calling bullshit on that. As evidenced by this very forum, even if you’re innocent some people will still think you’re guilty. It’s not about money FFS. It’s about pride. It’s about honour.
Says you. AMC didn’t say that.
That’s a load of crap. While changing “assault” to “violation” may have some differences in the legal world it’s not remotely a change in her story. Are you saying honestly that an accusation of sexual violating is any different than an accusation of sexual assaulting in normal English?