# Stephen Collins, say it ain't so! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [October 7, 2014, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654 "2014-10-07T14:44:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2014, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/161 "2014-10-10T22:37:57Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > I suspect a good portion of it is that there’s really nothing to argue about over Stephen Collins’ actions. Everyone’s pretty much on the same page about him being a shitheel. His ex wife’s actions are open to some interpretation, so here we are, four pages later. Indeed, we all want/expect him to get what’s coming to him and will probably be ticked off if at some point we get a “sorry, not enough/too long ago/too much publicity”. It’s the means by which he was exposed that became a matter of debate, with the corresponding gratuituous casting of aspersions, be they about vindictive bitches sitting on evidence or about insinuating that people who question the method have something to hide themselves. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2014, 11:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/162 "2014-10-10T23:06:58Z")
> [@Miller](#): > > I suspect a good portion of it is that there’s really nothing to argue about over Stephen Collins’ actions. Everyone’s pretty much on the same page about him being a shitheel. His ex wife’s actions are open to some interpretation, so here we are, four pages later. Is there a reason why you think there needs to be an argument? Even if I grant your point, which I don’t given what I have read in this thread, why must there be an argument as opposed to a discussion about the crime itself? Certainly we could be talking about how he blended in this long or something like that. Instead we are talking about how his wife is an asshole, as if that matters at all. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2014, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/163 "2014-10-10T23:08:15Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > Also, worth noting that she gave the tape to cops in 2012, shortly after she realized he was a pedophile. Really? As I posted above: > [@](#): > > In the alleged email to Collins, Grant recalled that, after the birth of their daughter, Kate, in 1989, he told her he had hoped it wasn’t a boy because he didn’t know if he could resist having oral sex with the child. “I should have followed my gut then … and kicked your a-- to the curb,” Grant wrote in the email, concluding that Collins’ alleged remark was “indication enough” that Collins was “sick.” Collins told her, in 1989, that if they had a son he would be able to resist molesting him…as she didn’t realize that he was a molester for another 22-23 years? Seems more like she gave the tape t the cops as divorce proceedings were imminent. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2014, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/164 "2014-10-10T23:13:45Z")
> [@Typo\_Negative](#): > > Collins told her, in 1989, that if they had a son he would be able to resist molesting him…as she didn’t realize that he was a molester for another 22-23 years? It’s certainly disgusting, but it’s not enough to go to the cops with so I’m not sure what your point is. That she didn’t divorce him then and there? Maybe she hoped he could be reformed. That optimism sounds like something you expressed a few posts ago. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2014, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/165 "2014-10-10T23:20:45Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > It’s certainly disgusting, but it’s not enough to go to the cops with so I’m not sure what your point is. That she didn’t divorce him then and there? Maybe she hoped he could be reformed. That optimism sounds like something you expressed a few posts ago. I was objecting to the ‘soon as he realized he was a pedophile’ part. She also had an anonymous letter to her in 2000 from a previous victim. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2014, 11:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/166 "2014-10-10T23:51:49Z")
> [@Typo\_Negative](#): > > Really? > > As I posted above: > Collins told her, in 1989, that if they had a son he would be able to resist molesting him…as she didn’t realize that he was a molester for another 22-23 years? Seems more like she gave the tape t the cops as divorce proceedings were imminent. Supposedly, those comments were a joke. But either way, I am not sure what your point is. I think it’s obvious there were signs and evidence before she “realized” he was a pedophile in 2012. The point is that many victims like Grant are in denial, and don’t fully recognize what is in front of them. Doubly so when it’s the person you love, and they deny your suspicions are correct. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2014, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/167 "2014-10-10T23:57:54Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > But confidential is confidential. There is no real difference between taping a confession and sharing it with the cops and listening to a confession and regurgitating it to the cops. If one is wrong, so is the other. > > So if you’re saying it was ethically wrong for her to tape the conversation, but it’s somehow not wrong to go to the cops with the claim that “my husband just confessed in therapy to doing X, Y, and Z”, then I’m struggling to understand why you think this. Like I said, all a tape does is corroborate a claim. It strengthens the credibility of what an accuser is claiming, not creating a claim out of whole cloth. Perhaps I should have made it clear that she shouldn’t have been talking about therapy sessions at all. > [@brickbacon](#): > > We already linked to this. Collins had no protection. Then consider my responses directed towards the state of therapy with no such protections > [@brickbacon](#): > > Yet, they are moved by examples of a wife not keeping her husband’s secret? They are most assuredly aware that a 3rd party has no obligation to keep their secret, so this outing should have no effect either. Was Collins aware? Lots of people aren’t aware of the specific case laws. Unless he said so specifically, I doubt he was aware. My response is assuming he thought he had confidentiality. And in answer to your question, no, we’re not talking about wives and husbands secrets. To me the relevant context is patient and doctor. > [@brickbacon](#): > > Which would be a stupid parsing of the fact given the actual takeaway (if there is one) is, “confessions in a doctor’s office can be disseminated BY ANY THIRD PARTY YOU WILLINGLY INVITE INTO THE OFFICE, therefore don’t talk to doctors and don’t confess WHEN OTHER PEOPLE WHO HAVE NO OBLIGATION TO KEEP YOUR SECRET ARE PRESENT”. Calm down, no need for the caps. That may be the law but I’ll wager not many people know the law. The context of his confession matters: if he thought, even wrongly, that the sessions would be private, and that session was made public, then yes it was his fault, but it also means that had he known about it, it may change his attempt at therapy. > [@brickbacon](#): > > Yet, police can surreptitiously record you when you admit to things in front of them. The police can, which is why most people know or are told to shut up when talking to them unless they have a lawyer. People don’t know or don’t expect that in a doctor’s office. But that is off topic. The point is that privacy is valuable and people will not willingly give it up. In this case, Collins ignorantly gave it up. Again, its his fault for not knowing the law, but it doesn’t mean that privacy isn’t a valuable commodity to be protected, perhaps with stronger laws after this case came to light. To truly understand what I mean, consider this: What if Collins went back in time and knew that he was being taped and that it was legal to spread those tapes to the public? Do you think he would have confessed then? If not, then you understand how the broken trust hurts the whole industry of therapy. That’s my concern. One pedophile is small potatoes, I want them all to be locked up or cured and Collins’ ex just made that harder > [@brickbacon](#): > > Then you basically wouldn’t be able to convict thousands of people. Do you really want to live in a world where “private” conversations between criminals cannot be leaked? I would like to live in a world where conversations with your doctor, your lawyer, your spouse, and some other people cannot be leaked except in rare cases because I believe holding those conversations as privileged contributes a greater benefit to society than not > [@brickbacon](#): > > Why? Is it your contention that society only benefits when people who are an imminent threat are arrested? Why should that be the standard? I can just imagine some fuckface saying, “Officer, why am I being arrested for those rapes I committed 5 years ago. It was FIVE years ago. I’m not an imminent threat. I am in therapy. Leave me alone.” First, your analogy needs work. Collins was not part of an open case where he was being sought after by police. Second, conversations with a cop vs. in a doctor’s office are different and require different reporting structures. Third, immanency is often a reason where doctors and others are moved by law to report. Without immanency, one could merely claim to be considering or thinking aloud of an illegal act. Arrest for that is too much like a thought crime. Immanency moves it from a thought crime to actual preventive measures of a crime about to happen. And last, its only in this particular case, where doctors and confidentiality abound, that society benefits. You can plug a dam way before it breaks or brace it in case of breaking, no immanency required there, but also no expectation of privacy either > [@brickbacon](#): > > Partly. That and he won’t be allowed to be around kids in all likelihood. You’re absolutely wrong. If he isn’t legally barred from doing that, he can still be around kids. There are people who will disbelieve the evidence, or hand-waved it away, or don’t know who Collins is. Time will pass, this case will be forgotten. Justice can only be done if he’s convicted and that’s what I want to happen. Being hated is a poor consolation prize > [@brickbacon](#): > > Fine. Why do you get to decide what is the “wrong” way. Why is it the “wrong” way despite being legal, ethical, and moral in the eyes of many? Especially, when it is likely the only thing that will allow his victims to get justice and prevent him from ever acting again. I’m merely speculating on what I think is the best way > [@brickbacon](#): > > Bullshit. The Church took most of the flak for not reporting these guys to the police. A lot of what the Church did was move priests to places or positions where they would not be around kids in a selfish and misguided effort to stop them from being able to act. That end result is the BEST outcome when one of these pieces of shit goes to therapy. Now you can argue that actively acknowledging the issue and working through it via therapy is healthier than essentially ignoring it and moving the person to a place where they cannot act. However, the end result is basically the same; neither criminal will likely act again. The problem with both approaches is that it completely ignores the damage they have done with their actions, and the rights of victims to seek justice. You’re free to believe that > [@brickbacon](#): > > How does this reflect at all on the doctor? Did I say it did? > [@brickbacon](#): > > Please provide a cite that the above is true, and that it is a net positive for society? Are you seriously asking me to prove that people going to therapy for self-admitted crimes doesn’t constitute a benefit to society? > [@brickbacon](#): > > You are basing this on absolutely nothing. Fact: People think a lot of bullshit Fact: Some people thought that any doctor conversations are private Fact: Some people learned that some doctor conversations are not private Fact: Their behaviors will change ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 1:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/168 "2014-10-11T01:10:56Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Was Collins aware? Lots of people aren’t aware of the specific case laws. Unless he said so specifically, I doubt he was aware. My response is assuming he thought he had confidentiality. What do you think confidentiality means? It doesn’t mean a person can never tell, just that there may be professional or possible legal consequences for doing so, or that those comments would be inadmissible in court. It doesn’t require ANYONE to carry your secrets, so there is always a risk that something you tell someone else could come out. The idea that anyone would think their wife (or any third party) would keep such a secret is odd to say the least. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > And in answer to your question, no, we’re not talking about wives and husbands secrets. To me the relevant context is patient and doctor. Okay, but the doctor didn’t tell his secrets and did nothing wrong. How is this case related to that at all? > [@YogSosoth](#): > > The point is that privacy is valuable and people will not willingly give it up. Demonstrably false. Google and Facebook probably knows more about a person than their SO. This is because we willingly give up privacy. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > To truly understand what I mean, consider this: What if Collins went back in time and knew that he was being taped and that it was legal to spread those tapes to the public? Do you think he would have confessed then? Maybe, maybe not. I think we would all be worse off if he wasn’t taped. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > If not, then you understand how the broken trust hurts the whole industry of therapy. Because some idiot didn’t exercise basic common sense, the whole industry of therapy is hurt? What makes you think the average person has even heard of Collins let alone the details of how he was outed? And if someone one was so inclined to find out the details for self-preservation reasons, don’t you think they already researched the law? > [@YogSosoth](#): > > I would like to live in a world where conversations with your doctor, your lawyer, your spouse, and some other people cannot be leaked except in rare cases because I believe holding those conversations as privileged contributes a greater benefit to society than not Why? And what does “cannot be leaked” mean? How exactly can you prevent someone from repeating something you told them? How exactly would preventing wives from testifying to marital conversations work? Can the wife not testify when the husband beats the shit out of her and threatens her family? Can your doctor not report when you have a dangerous communicable disease or when you are knowingly infecting people with an STD? And why only those relationships? Can dads testify against their sons? What about two lesbians in a state that bans gay marriage? > [@YogSosoth](#): > > First, your analogy needs work. It wasn’t an analogy. It was a response to you implication that only people who are an imminent threat should be arrested or outed. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Third, immanency is often a reason where doctors and others are moved by law to report. Yes, but not the only reason. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Without immanency, one could merely claim to be considering or thinking aloud of an illegal act. Immanency doesn’t speak to whether one is thinking aloud. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > You’re absolutely wrong. If he isn’t legally barred from doing that, he can still be around kids. Yes, but no reasonable person will allow him to in an personal or professional capacity. More importantly, he will probably end up being prosecuted. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Justice can only be done if he’s convicted and that’s what I want to happen. Being hated is a poor consolation prize The only reason he is now being investigated is because the tape was released, and there is public pressure to see the criminal investigation through. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > You’re free to believe that What part is false or even debatable? > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Did I say it did? Basically. You said: > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Now pedophiles know that doctor’s can’t be trusted, even when confessions happen in the act of treatment. How does this situation speak to the doctor’s trustworthiness? > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Are you seriously asking me to prove that people going to therapy for self-admitted crimes doesn’t constitute a benefit to society? Yes. First, therapy doesn’t always work. Second, if it prevents more victims from getting justice, how is that ALWAYS a net positive? Third, the debate is not whether therapy is good, but rather if therapy rather than prosecution is better than the alternatives. > [@YogSosoth](#): > > Fact: People think a lot of bullshit > Fact: Some people thought that any doctor conversations are private > Fact: Some people learned that some doctor conversations are not private > Fact: Their behaviors will change That was not the logical interpretation of the statement you made. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/169 "2014-10-11T01:52:34Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Perhaps I should have made it clear that she shouldn’t have been talking about therapy sessions at all. So what you’re telling me is that if I go to therapy with a dirtbag husband and he admits to being a serial rapist/killer, I’m duty bound to carry this information with me to the grave? Giving me nightmares and ulcers and all kinds of psychological problems, all for the sake of looking out for his privacy? This is what I’m hearing from you. In just another thread in the Pit, there are people arguing it’s perfectly fine and legal that an innocent 18 year-old be jacked up against the wall and interrogated by gun-brandishing cops who’ve barged into his house on the weakest evidence imaginable that he’s a burglar, without so much as giving a courtesy knock first. But let Collins confess to sexually violating children in a therapy session with his wife, and somehow his privacy has to be protected at all costs? What is wrong with the SDMB this week? I feel like pulling one of [these](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UUBBVvfBUcM/T1t8Zi673mI/AAAAAAAAA0c/uEdZ-PA4IpI/s1600/homer-simpson-bush-gif.gif) right about now. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/170 "2014-10-11T02:09:10Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > So what you’re telling me is that if I go to therapy with a dirtbag husband and he admits to being a serial rapist/killer, I’m duty bound to carry this information with me to the grave? Giving me nightmares and ulcers and all kinds of psychological problems, all for the sake of looking out for his privacy? This is what I’m hearing from you. > > In just another thread in the Pit, there are people arguing it’s perfectly fine and legal that an innocent 18 year-old be jacked up against the wall and interrogated by gun-brandishing cops who’ve barged into his house on the weakest evidence imaginable that he’s a burglar, without so much as giving a courtesy knock first. But let Collins confess to sexually violating children in a therapy session with his wife, and somehow his privacy has to be protected at all costs? > > What is wrong with the SDMB this week? I feel like pulling one of [these](http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UUBBVvfBUcM/T1t8Zi673mI/AAAAAAAAA0c/uEdZ-PA4IpI/s1600/homer-simpson-bush-gif.gif) right about now. QFT ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/171 "2014-10-11T12:35:02Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > So what you’re telling me is that if I go to therapy with a dirtbag husband and he admits to being a serial rapist/killer, I’m duty bound to carry this information with me to the grave? Giving me nightmares and ulcers and all kinds of psychological problems, all for the sake of looking out for his privacy? This is what I’m hearing from you. > > In just another thread in the Pit, there are people arguing it’s perfectly fine and legal that an innocent 18 year-old be jacked up against the wall and interrogated by gun-brandishing cops who’ve barged into his house on the weakest evidence imaginable that he’s a burglar, without so much as giving a courtesy knock first. You have a continuing problem. You hear a claim that “X is constitutional,” and somehow your brain processes that as “X is perfectly fine.” I mean this in the most helpful sense possible: you should consider taking another look at any claim you’ve concluded represents someone’s argument that a tactic or behavior is perfectly fine. Might it be that the claimant is only making a constitutional claim? ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/172 "2014-10-11T13:13:50Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > You have a continuing problem. > > You hear a claim that “X is constitutional,” and somehow your brain processes that as “X is perfectly fine.” No one in that thread who expressed “X is consititutional” followed up that comment with “…but X is exactly what’s wrong with cops today and their behavior is symptomatic of an abusive, dehumanizing, and invasive police culture.” So I’m perfectly content in keeping my position. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 7:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/173 "2014-10-11T19:39:32Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > So what you’re telling me is that if I go to therapy with a dirtbag husband and he admits to being a serial rapist/killer, I’m duty bound to carry this information with me to the grave? Giving me nightmares and ulcers and all kinds of psychological problems, all for the sake of looking out for his privacy? This is what I’m hearing from you. If you released a tape with a confession of a murder or rape that would ruin your husband’s life but not result in his conviction, would that give you more peace? I’ve only seen this on TV, but it seems like the people who have done that had more psychological problems after they revealed the confession while they attempted to hide their identity and run for their lives from that person. You may or may not be held responsible for the breach of confidentiality, but that would likely be the least or your worries. Your analogy doesn’t bring out the issues in this case very well. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/174 "2014-10-11T20:20:37Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > If you released a tape with a confession of a murder or rape that would ruin your husband’s life but not result in his conviction, would that give you more peace? If it means it’ll be that much more difficult for him to rape and murder again, hell yeah that would give me more peace. Certainly more than doing absolutely nothing. I’m still not sure if I understand the point being argued here. Do you think me ruining my hypothetical husbands life by releasing his taped confession is an offense worse than all the rapes and murders he has carried out and will likely carry out? > [@](#): > > I’ve only seen this on TV, but it seems like the people who have done that had more psychological problems after they revealed the confession while they attempted to hide their identity and run for their lives from that person. I don’t buy this for a second. But even if it’s true–that taping someone is as psychologically traumatic as protecting someone’s ghastly secrets–it still doesn’t make it wrong to reveal someone else’s confessions. Depending on where someone’s loyalties lie, it could be easy or hard. It probably wasn’t that hard for the wife, if their marriage was rocky. But whose marriage wouldn’t be rocky if their husband was into fucking kids? If it’s true that Collins is a narcissistic sociopath (and I have no reason to doubt this diagnosis, do I?), then he felt untouchable and not subject to the same laws that govern lesser men’s lives. This is probably why he was able to confess in the first place. He didn’t think anyone would have the balls to punish him for it. In fact, I could see him actually daring his wife to go to the cops. There’s something awesome about her doing just that. I think some of yall are treating this man like a sympathetic figure for no good reason, and it’s clouding how you view the wife’s actions. > [@](#): > > You may or may not be held responsible for the breach of confidentiality, but that would likely be the least or your worries. Your analogy doesn’t bring out the issues in this case very well. What issues does my analogy miss? ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/175 "2014-10-11T21:26:54Z")
> [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > If it means it’ll be that much more difficult for him to rape and murder again, hell yeah that would give me more peace. Certainly more than doing absolutely nothing. I don’t buy that it will. Depending on why it happened before, the likelihood of it happening again isn’t necessarily diminished by telling more people. > [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > I’m still not sure if I understand the point being argued here. Yes. > [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Do you think me ruining my hypothetical husbands life by releasing his taped confession is an offense worse than all the rapes and murders he has carried out and will likely carry out? You can’t know how likely someone is to do something in the future. As for the past offenses, if he won’t be prosecuted for them, then releasing that information didn’t bring any justice. Whether it stops him for future actions is conjecture. The issue isn’t about ruining his life, it’s about breaching confidentiality which has a chilling effect of the future of the nature of confidential relationships. > [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > I don’t buy this for a second. But even if it’s true–that taping someone is as psychologically traumatic as protecting someone’s ghastly secrets–it still doesn’t make it wrong to reveal someone else’s confessions. Generally, it’s illegal to tape someone secretly. Whether it was legal or not in this case is what some of this thread is about. > [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > Depending on where someone’s loyalties lie, it could be easy or hard. It probably wasn’t that hard for the wife, if their marriage was rocky. But whose marriage wouldn’t be rocky if their husband was into fucking kids? > > If it’s true that Collins is a narcissistic sociopath (and I have no reason to doubt this diagnosis, do I?), then he felt untouchable and not subject to the same laws that govern lesser men’s lives. This is probably why he was able to confess in the first place. He didn’t think anyone would have the balls to punish him for it. In fact, I could see him actually daring his wife to go to the cops. There’s something awesome about her doing just that. You’re adding a LOT of conjecture that doesn’t have any evidence in this case so far. You don’t know how he felt or feels or thinks. You’re stereotyping based on a diagnosis that his wife revealed that may or may not be true. > [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > I think some of yall are treating this man like a sympathetic figure for no good reason, and it’s clouding how you view the wife’s actions. Nope. I don’t know him. I don’t have any reason to give him any more sympathy than any other stranger I don’t know. > [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > What issues does my analogy miss? Some of the issues in this thread were about the possible motivations of the wife in revealing the information. Because of the timing and the way it happened, her motivation didn’t seem to be in protecting people but to blackmail him to give her more money. ---
**Author:** ![brickbacon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/898d66/32.png) [@brickbacon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/brickbacon)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/176 "2014-10-11T21:50:59Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > I don’t buy that it will. Depending on why it happened before, the likelihood of it happening again isn’t necessarily diminished by telling more people. Sure it is. He was recently fired from multiple projects, some of which he would have had access to kids, and he resigned his post at SAG. He is basically a pariah at this point, and almost no one would willingly leave kids alone with him. Additionally, he may be prosecuted. Something which may only happen because he was outed. > [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > You can’t know how likely someone is to do something in the future. If you believe that, then you cannot simultaneously argue it will have a measurable chilling effect on others seeking therapy in the future. > [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > As for the past offenses, if he won’t be prosecuted for them, then releasing that information didn’t bring any justice. Justice isn’t measured only in time behind bars. There is some measure of justice in making sure everyone knows this guy is guilty. > [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > Whether it stops him for future actions is conjecture. The issue isn’t about ruining his life, it’s about breaching confidentiality which has a chilling effect of the future of the nature of confidential relationships. First, there was no confidentiality. Two, I think your conjecture regarding this minor case having a chilling effect is nonsense. Will you hesitate telling your friends, family, SO, or therapist information because of this case? Of course not. Any pedophile seeking therapy already knows the law regarding third parties, so this case isn’t going to alert them to something they didn’t realize could happen. > [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > Generally, it’s illegal to tape someone secretly. Not really. There are so many exceptions to this that I don’t think it’s a true statement. > [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > Whether it was legal or not in this case is what some of this thread is about. It was legal, and that fact has been cited multiple times. > [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > Nope. I don’t know him. I don’t have any reason to give him any more sympathy than any other stranger I don’t know. But you have at least a few reasons to NOT grant him any sympathy. > [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > Some of the issues in this thread were about the possible motivations of the wife in revealing the information. Because of the timing and the way it happened, her motivation didn’t seem to be in protecting people but to blackmail him to give her more money. What timing? She didn’t release the tape as far as we know, and that would be perfectly in keeping with logic and common sense. We know she gave the tape to police in 2012. The idea that she would or could use it to extort him now, or to make him look bad makes no sense. If she was wanting a big payout and alimony, it doesn’t help to make the target unemployable. If she was just seeking revenge, she could have released the tape when they first filed for divorce. Sure, she could have done it. But it would make little sense for her to do so given the expected backlash. Given that several LE had access to the tape, it makes much more sense for one of them to leak it. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/177 "2014-10-11T22:17:15Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > I don’t buy that it will. Depending on why it happened before, the likelihood of it happening again isn’t necessarily diminished by telling more people. I’m not sure what you mean by “why it happened before”. What is “it”? Him molesting the kids he molested? If so, then the “why” for that isn’t mysterious. He had the opportunity and the desire. That was “why”. None of us but him know whether he’s at risk for molesting more kids. Just like my hypothetical husband is the only one who can control whether he rapes and murders again. But if you don’t think informing the public about Collins’ pedophilia won’t substantially interfere with his access to kids–thus, making it more difficult for him to offend–then that implies you don’t really think releasing his confession has a tangible impact on his life. It somehow “ruins” him without having any effect on his opportunity to offend. That is implausible. > [@](#): > > You can’t know how likely someone is to do something in the future. As for the past offenses, if he won’t be prosecuted for them, then releasing that information didn’t bring any justice. Perhaps not legal justice. But if the person who released the tape (and we don’t know who did) has a good reason to believe Collins is still victimizing children, then one could say there is justice in bringing this confession to light. > [@](#): > > Whether it stops him for future actions is conjecture. The issue isn’t about ruining his life, it’s about breaching confidentiality which has a chilling effect of the future of the nature of confidential relationships. It’s already been pointed out, though, that husband and wife communications aren’t confidential. People may want them to be treated confidentially, but legally they aren’t. Whether a conversation should be treated _like_ its confidential depends on the content of that conversation, IMO. My older sister has discussed with me things that she and husband have talked about during marriage counseling. A lot of it is TMI and is not flattering to her husband, but she is not breaking any rules by sharing this information with me. If this was truly confidential, she’d be wrong just by telling me they were in counseling. What if my sister learned in counseling that her husband admitted he was attracted to babies and had actually molested their daughters in infancy? According to your view, not only would it be wrong for her share this info with the cops but she couldn’t even tell me. Her sister. Does this make sense to you? > [@](#): > > You’re adding a LOT of conjecture that doesn’t have any evidence in this case so far. You don’t know how he felt or feels or thinks. You’re stereotyping based on a diagnosis that his wife revealed that may or may not be true. Actually, I’m not making any assumptions. All I know is that Collins confessed to molesting children and may have been diagnosed as a narcissist sociopath. Everyone else who have focused on his wife seem to be working off facts that aren’t evident here like this: > [@](#): > > Some of the issues in this thread were about the possible motivations of the wife in revealing the information. Because of the timing and the way it happened, her motivation didn’t seem to be in protecting people but to blackmail him to give her more money. Which to me is weird fixation. Who cares if she was trying to blackmail him or not? You have no way of ascertaining her motives. It’s just as easy to concoct a narrative that casts her as a good, heroic character as it is to imagine a scenario which stars her as a scheming harpy shrew. Maybe you’re reluctant to demonize Collins. Fair enough. But demonizing his wife implies you know something about Collins that justifies seeing him as a sympathetic person. I’m not seeing any reason to see him sympathetically. Like at all. ---
**Author:** ![you\_with\_the\_face](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/ecccb3/32.png) [@you\_with\_the\_face](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/you_with_the_face)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 10:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/178 "2014-10-11T22:20:24Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > If you believe that, then you cannot simultaneously argue it will have a measurable chilling effect on others seeking therapy in the future. The more we post in the same thread, the more we catch the same inconsistencies. Funny huh? ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/179 "2014-10-11T22:42:28Z")
> [@brickbacon](#): > > Sure it is. He was recently fired from multiple projects, some of which he would have had access to kids, and he resigned his post at SAG. He is basically a pariah at this point, and almost no one would willingly leave kids alone with him. Additionally, he may be prosecuted. Something which may only happen because he was outed. That just keeps him away from those particular children. As has been pointed out, it isn’t possible for someone not to have access to any unattended children at all times and not everyone will have seen this controversy. If he’s prosecuted, that’s a different situation. > [@brickbacon](#): > > If you believe that, then you cannot simultaneously argue it will have a measurable chilling effect on others seeking therapy in the future. You’re right. You and **you with the face** have the opinion that releasing the tapes will deter future crimes. I disagree. I have the opinion that it will have a chilling effect on others’ willingness to be open in therapy. You disagree. Neither of us can tell the future. Our opinions differ. We’re at an impasse. > [@you\_with\_the\_face](#): > > The more we post in the same thread, the more we catch the same inconsistencies. Funny huh? Not so coincidental. Both of your arguments are based on outrage. The arguments will look alike. ---
**Author:** ![joyfool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/df788c/32.png) [@joyfool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/joyfool)\ **Post date:** [October 11, 2014, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654/180 "2014-10-11T22:49:58Z")
I’m just wading in now, but would like clarification on one point, please… has it been duly established, or is it pure conjecture, that _she_ released the tape? If it’s the latter, that’s really all I need to know. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/stephen-collins-say-it-aint-so/700654.md?page=10)