dude is a creepy MFer
People defending their friends are now “creepy.” The internet has ruined people’s brains.
When your friend is a rapist, yeah that’s fucking creepy, and it’s creepy you don’t think so.
If I found out tomorrow that my best friend was a rapist, not only would I be speaking out against him, he’d no longer be my friend.
What if you believed your friend?
It’s not the “defending their friend” thing people are upset with, I think you know that. Using reductionism to try and make people you disagree with look like they’re sticks in the mud “for just defending their friend!” instead just makes you look deranged for apparently glossing over or completely not caring about the “leniency for rapists” bit.
Bro they wrote character letters for a sentencing.
That’s literally why people are mad.
Yes, they said good things about a rapist’s character so now their character is in question
People need to lighten the fuck up.
People also need to not support rapists. I mean, give him.support as a friend while clearly letting him know he was wrong. But, to try to ask for leniency minimizes the rapist actions, ignoring the victims.
Well, now because of everyone’s outrage- a good and charitable man has stepped down.
Hope everyone is happy.
A charitable man. Good man is in question. People are complex. Nobody is all good or all bad. That’s children’s stories. He likely say the good in his friend. But his friend did evil things that hurt multiple people.
a good and charitable man
Was he though? I don’t know anything about him, nor do I have strong feelings about his letter because I know there’s a chance he was threatened by the most dangerous and litigious cult on the planet to write it.
I’m sure if he’s truly good and charitable as you say, that he will be free to continue those habits without bringing unnecessary controversy to an anti-sex abuse organization of all things. His letter directly opposes what such an organization stands for.
Maybe look him up before you cast judgement first. He has helps thousands upon thousands of women and children through his charity.
I specifically stated that I’m not casting judgement on him.
I think it’s quite clear if this passes the BS test or not by simply asking what do you think his organization that he’s the front man in the eye had been approached by the 2 women(possibly more) Masterson raped to help them? Do you think he would of helped them prosecute Masterson based on his letter?
No good and charitable man has stepped down.
I don’t know much about the case. What was the proof used to convict Danny Masterson?
Enough to convince a jury of his peers. Good enough for me.
People need to “lighten the fuck up” about rape?!
Misinterpret much?
Turns out that being against rape in 99.9% of cases isn’t good enough.
Correct.
The fact that Ashton was not aware about the numerous sexual assaults coming from the church of scientology is really damming. Sure, he can be biased about long term friend/coworker, it’s messed up to write charcter letters after the victim testimony when the went in to the details of what Masterson did, but to turn a blind eye to scientology? And you care about victims? About. trafficking? About SA? Fuck off.
Clearly they were never serious about Thorn and was likely only a PR move. At least Debra Jo Rupp and Kurtwood Smith haven’t spent the last couple years telling people to believe victims. Still gross, but Ashton put him self on this pedestal. Kunis to a lesser extent, since she wasnt a founder. But I am just so disappointed at all of these people.
I do believe in innocent until proven guilty, but Ashton publicly crucified and called every person arrested by thorn a trafficker and rapist, before they had their day in court. Yet when it’s his friend, even after three verdict, he’s still defending him. It just makes all his work with thorn look self serving, and makes me wonder if he’s doing it to throw people off the scent, considering he bedded a 14 year old.
makes me wonder if he’s doing it to throw people off the scent, considering he bedded a 14 year old
Wait what??
When he and his wife met, she was 14. He claims that he did absolutely nothing with her until she turned 18, but considering the stuff that’s come out about them in those days recently, I don’t believe him
Ashton’s first wife was 15 years older than him? And when he married Mila she would’ve been 32.
I guess they did meet on set when Mila was 14 but like she didn’t start dating him until she was in her late twenties and it looks like she was dating Macaulay Culkin before then.
I have no dog in this fight really… I don’t have any particular feelings for Ashton; but that doesn’t really hit me as the moves of a predator. By her late twenties Mila surely was old enough to make her own choices, no? And she was clearly with someone else for a long time, no?
It occurs to me that Kutcher and co might not have had access to the court proceedings, testimony, and evidence, but might have had a lot of access to Masterton’s side of the story.
It also occurs to me that being friends with people is complicated and that bad people emotionally loan shark a lot - maybe they felt obligated to send letters of support because they were being guilt tripped about all he’d done for them or because they think being a good friend is supporting no matter what (aka being an enabler).
All that said, Kutcher’s a grown up adult who should have been able to predict that supporting a sex abuser is going to conflict with being involved in an anti-sex abuse organization.
I’m somewhat familiar with the case as I follow an ex-scientologist dude on yt (youtube.com/@GrowingUpInScientology) who was present in the court and reported on all nuances. According to him, Kutcher knew about Masterson’s drugging raping habit, also personally knew one of the women named in the case that prosecuted him (she was also present when Kutcher, upon finding her murdered girlfriend, instead calling 911, called his agent and Masterson).
Said letter’s general purpose to the judge is to ask for a lighter sentence in light of the jury decision, and they try to make him look like the nicest person ever walked on earth, always respecting woman and against all drugs that quasi questions the sentence as is. They deserve the backlash.
Nuance is dead, unfortunately.
It is a pattern, he had done the same thing before.
From Wikipedia:
“In November 2011, Kutcher received heavy criticism for his tweet in response to the Jerry Sandusky child sexual abuse scandal, calling the firing of Penn State football coach Joe Paterno “in poor taste”. Kutcher subsequently turned over management of his Twitter account to his team at the Katalyst Media company.”
Edit:
The more I read his past I find more disturbing statement that shows red flags.
“Bixler and others have cited additional ways in which Kutcher showed questionable behavior in the past, specifically pointing to a 2003 video of the actor speaking on his MTV show “Punk’d” about actress Hilary Duff. In the video, Kutcher says Duff, who was a minor at the time, is “one of the girls that we’re all waiting for to turn 18. Along with the Olsen twins.””
Back then, that was a pretty damn normal thing for people to say. It’s really awful that that it was so normal, but hopefully most people regret saying things like that now.
It was not normal for a lot of people. But those people were silenced. I’m kinda tired that people are using era as an excuse. What it was is a strong, few influencers allowed assholes to fly their asshole flag out in the open. They encouraged it. It was called edgy. It was called bold. It was called confidence. It was called a lot of things that were all considered positive attributes. Even funny. And a lot of that is how the media back then promoted ideas.
Meanwhile the people who weren’t assholes were called ‘pussies’ by the assholes. In todays world, the ‘pussies’ of yesterday are what we consider normal people today. The people who were stomped on, shut up and quiet. Now that they are allowed to freely fly their ‘we don’t have to shit on others’ flag,
we’re assuming way many people changed. When it’s really just a tip of the balance on who’s collective ideas are more fit for the current time.
We still have the assholes of yesteryear snowflaking they are the victims of the media and complaining about ‘PC’ and cancel culture, balking at the mere idea of consequence for words and actions. These people didn’t collectively change with the times. They’d crawl back to the yesteryear in a second to be celebrated as an asshole if they could.
Sure, Some people may have grown and changed from being the asshole. I have a small handful of relatives that cringe at who they once were, who’s ideas they once followed and they’ve grown as people. But I have enough relatives who also complain about the change and mill on about the good ol days where they could silence everyone who they didn’t agree with/escape culpability.
don’t be fooled for a second that there isn’t still a lot of people who are assholes. We’re just celebrating a different set of rules now to ethically follow now since the metoo movement made its debut and the once quiet people are safer to speak up. Those quiet people aren’t silenced anymore. They just get called PC instead of pussy by the assholes now. That’s as far as the assholes have evolved in today’s world.
It was absolutely normal lol. It was also clearly a joke.
That’s why you won’t find a single contemporary piece freaking out about an episode of Punk’d.
I know you weren’t born yet at the time, but some of us were adults then.
I’m probably older than you. You clearly make a lot of assumptions to make yourself feel right. Nice, pompous, bad faith way to engage people.
There is no way you’d not have memory of this time period as a Gen X or older person. Times are indeed changing. Society is indeed improving.
You must be some kind of mind reader because otherwise your post would just be a bunch of smug assumptions. It’s important to allow people to grow. If you only ever judge people by where they were at their worst, then no one will want to change and the only people you’ll judge to be good are the people you didn’t know about when they were at their worst.
Sure, Some people may have grown and changed from being the asshole. I have a small handful of relatives that cringe at who they once were, who’s ideas they once followed and they’ve grown as people.
danny was already convicted of the rapes when kutcher wrote the letter, saying that danny was an outstanding citizen.
The 8 people that downvoted you are the type of people that love cancel culture.
Ashton was shitty defending his friend. Ashton does not deserve the backlash he is receiving for the exact reasons you describe.
Then again, Lemmy was up in arms over the LTT situation, and all of my comments saying “hey, lets wait to hear both sides” were HEAVILY downvoted.
Fake internet points don’t matter anyways
Didn’t say they do. Stop trying to undermine my comment by replying about something unrelated.
This is typical garbage. You’re literally imitating the townspeople from the “change the racist flag” episode of South Park.
Isn’t he part of the illegal alien and sex traffic problems from Hollywood?
Quite the claim to not post any evidence of outside of a letter written to the judge from a friend which might stop his friend from spending the rest of his life rotting in jail instead of getting rehab like the rest of the world does
Wow, there a a lot of people here defending a rapist apologist.
Disappointing.
People are complicated. We can say he did good things for kids while also doing bad things like defending Masterson. We can admit it must be hard for him to condemn his friend while also still saying he still needed to.
People can do both good and bad things, we can say the good things he did are good while also saying he shouldn’t have done bad things.
He could have not written a letter of support or condemnation. Sometimes no comment is the right way.
*Topher Grace has entered the chat
I thought he kicked himself from the server though?
I mean I feel one thing overweights the other… Like it was a fucking piece of paper…yeah he shouldn’t have done it. But I feel like whatever the org did matter more that a stupid written paper.
The org you speak of has lobbied heavily against end to end encryped communication. Their efforts are much more anti sex work than actual human trafficking and they sell tracking tools to police.
Exactly this. There was some good coverage in the German podcast Logbuch Netzpolitik. Ashton is also involved in companies selling software to “solve” the CSAM issue with methods the scientific community says will not solve it and most likely will make everything worse, not only in the topic but also others like privacy overall.
Did he actually do good though? Or did you assume?
Whether you like it or not Kutchers childrens charities do in fact help kids. Their software helps identify children who are being abused online and also help create tools to detect and block CSAM. But don’t take my word for it, here’s their 2022 impact report. https://www.thorn.org/impact-report-2022/
So yes. Turns out he’s not literal Satan and he has done good things and bad.
People like you are not good for my pitchfork and torch business.
I wonder how many others were raped by Danny but didn’t get their day in court?
That’s the real question, highly likely there’s others.
I don’t get what they were thinking, how could they write a character letter for a convinced rapist? “Ya but he never raped us!”
I knew a guy, generally a good guy, and he helped me out when I was young.
Anyways, he made some bad choices (namely cheating on his fiance with his childhood bestie), knocked said girl up, they got married… they had another kid… a few years later this relationship turned sour, and I was rarely hearing from him. I later learned he was living out of his car at times.
At one point during this mess he told me his soon to be ex wife invited him over one night, they slept together, then he woke up with the cops in his face and her accusing him of raping her last night.
I didn’t know what to think of it at the time, and I still don’t. The person I thought I knew never would’ve cheated on his fiance… surely he wouldn’t have raped someone.
Unlike this story, the charges for the guy I know were dropped and he wasn’t prosecuted, let alone convicted. Maybe it was just a ploy for a better outcome in the divorce? That seems to be the conclusion the police drew. If it had gone to trial and he’d been convicted… I probably wouldn’t have written a similar letter? But also maybe it would’ve been in some ways good for the judge to see not just this person at their worst moments but at better moments? What if the evidence wasn’t strong? What if I hadn’t followed the case closely?
I haven’t heard from this guy in years at this point, hence why I’m avoiding the word friend. However at one point, he was a friend … and I don’t find it so easy to reconcile the “person you know” with the “person you’ve been told you know”
I think it’s more about that difficulty reconciling, than “he never raped me.” If they weren’t lying in their letters as well… maybe this should just be considered part of the process? Like, yes Masterson committed the crime, now who else was he? Did he contribute nothing to society except for being a vicious Hollywood predator? etc.
The scientology thing adds a whole other angle here…
Anyways, the point is it’s easy to not understand why someone would do something, but that doesn’t mean it’s not understandable (it doesn’t mean it’s justified either).
All the letters have one thing in common though: they’re overly saccharine and suspiciously dodgy (actually that’s two things, sorry). It’s like they’re trying to describe a modern-day Beaver Cleaver.
But he mentors other actors! And he doesn’t take drugs anymore!
I really don’t know what either of them were thinking. Rapists don’t need leniency, especially in this situation.
They likely assumed it wouldn’t get out. They were banking on being able to use their celebrity to try and influence the outcome.
Someone in a comment a few days ago, who was themselves asked to write such a letter for someone they knew who was charged and ultimately convicted, made an excellent observation:
Defense attorneys are very likely to have requested those character reference letters way before the case even made it to trial. So it’s entirely possible that Kutcher and Kunis wrote those letters long ago, based on information they had at the time, probably thinking the charges were unfounded.
Now, obviously, the easy solution to that would be if they were to come out now and tell whether that happened or not, and make clear what they think now. Which is what I would do, but I’m also not a Hollywoo celebrity with publicists and handlers and lawyers.
You’re lying or spreading incorrect information.
If you’re doing it maliciously: stop it.
If you’re just an idiot, stop it.
I saw that comment too. It shed a lot of light on a topic that I personally don’t know much about.
On the other hand, sometimes people can get weird about sticking up for their friends under any circumstances. My parents and brother are weird that way. One example - they know a rich white kid who killed an entire family by driving drunk. The kid’s own family disowned him. They didn’t help with his legal support, his twin brother cut ties with anyone who supported him, and he did time in the state prison. I don’t know the details about the crime, but he had graduated from a flagship state university and was from a very wealthy family. Not “paid for a wing at the local hospital wealthy” but definitely, “has a regulation size basketball court in their basement” wealthy. He absolutely fit the profile of Brock Allen Turner (the rapist).
He still got 5-10 years in state. It must have been bad. My family stepped up to support this asshole.
My brother routinely visited him in prison and gave him a job when he got out. I don’t really fault my brother for that. (OK - I judge him a bit. The kid was always an asshole and he killed people. But he did his time.)
On the other hand, my parents have nothing but good things to say about this guy and generally act like he was the victim of a huge conspiracy by the state. They were also offended that their own personal friend “Stanley” was sent to old people prison (nursing home) for “no reason” after he threatened to shoot his nephew. It was a credible threat, too. Stan is very well armed and had been going off his rocker for more than a few years.
tl/dr - my family are assholes but if they decide you’re a ride or die friend it doesn’t matter what you’ve done
I don’t think that’s weird. Your family are just assholes sticking together with another asshole.
Not commenting is also an option for you, just for future reference.
Because God forbid we try and understand?
If I’m not mistaken, Kutcher’s letter actually referenced the verdict.
Oh well fuck him, then.
Right?! There has to be missing info.
Why would someone take a stand against abuse, but defend an old friend found guilty of that offense.
Also- why should Ashton resign? If anything, he should redouble his efforts. Smells of cowardice.
I’m gonna rely on my tried and true method of “take the good and leave the bad”. Rich/famous folk live in a different world that I’d rather not spend too much time thinking about. I will continue to appreciate power being used to benefit the entirety of this world, though. Greedy people like rewards as much as or probably more than peasants like me.
deleted by creator
The thing you don’t want to admit is that Kutcher doesn’t actually consider being a serial rapist a deal breaker for his friends.
“Also- why should Ashton resign? If anything, he should redouble his efforts. Smells of cowardice.”
A spokesperson who is now the lightning rod for an issue that will detract from the message the organisation is trying to espouse, is a bad spokesperson.
Bristol Palin the national spokesperson for teen abstinence. 🙄
She’s actually not at all. But you might in fact be the spokesperson for misguided pregnancies.
As to why he would defend that, it’s just simple relationship bias. We’ll hesitate a hell of a lot more if it’s someone we like or think we know.
You should have seen the irrational tenacity with which one of my parents stuck by a pedophile, right up until their first few nights in prison, simply because they were dating. Even if it meant losing everyone around her. She was the only person under god who couldn’t see this a mile away. His own kid was his first accuser, but surely not, right?
What kind of thing could your best friends do that you wouldn’t initially defend them over?
These two have known each other for literal decades. I’m not too surprised he would refuse to accept it from someone he’s been friends with for that long.
I am shocked that he would choose to step down entirely over it. I could see the question presenting itself to him, since it’s…not wonderful PR…but I would have thought the cause itself would have been more important to him. He’s between a rock and a hard place.
Yeah my understanding was that these were post conviction. And if that were the case why weren’t there a bunch more letters from all the other cast members. Unless they knew. I bet Topher knew…
I mean…
If he wasn’t found guilty, who would see the letter?
This makes sense and it’s kind of what I thought has happened. No one could really be that unaware as to write a character reference for someone convicted and not expect backlash. But why wouldn’t they just say that then ? Why not make a statement saying the reference was old, and they’re shocked and disappointed someone they trusted could do such a thing.
That’s what I don’t understand
Oh mah gerd did you just assume Kutcher is just as bad as Masterson?!?? REEEEEE!!! INTERNET DOESN’T UNDERSTAND NUANCE!! /s
But for real, I think announcing support for a rapist is different than feeling sympathetic for an old friend. Many idiots on this thread seem to not understand the difference and it’s infuriating. If Kutcher would’ve just said, “Hey, he’s an old friend and I hope he gets the help he needs ASAP” I don’t think many people would care. But obviously, that wasn’t the case and some people can’t seem to understand that very basic concept.
But for real, I think announcing support for a rapist is different than feeling sympathetic for an old friend.
In this case, it’s actually not.
I’m sure that’s not what was in his letter.
If your question is merely about public relations, sure it’s a terrible move. But I think there’s actually a more meaningful question underlying all this furor; what are the limits of friendship or love? What is one supposed to do when someone close does something horrible? Cast them aside? Pretend you never knew them?
Kutcher must have had some idea of the risk he was taking, but he did it anyway. I find that striking. For some people friendships can be like family. I feel like this is an older sentiment that doesn’t find expression often today. Would you find it appalling if Masterson’s mother spoke on behalf of his character, or should she likewise keep her distance?
I don’t know. It all just seems more complicated and tragic than the typical social media mob can process.
If Masterson’s mother ran a non-profit that helped rape victims it would be a conflict of interest for her to write a character reference for her rapist son.
As it was here for Kutcher and it damaged his reputation badly.
Otherwise appreciate your post. There are a lot of interesting questions in it about human nature.
Personally, I think the church of scientology black mailed him into writing this. That Masterson spilled some dirt to his cult.
Ashton plays an idiot on tv but I don’t think he’s that dumb in real life. So my bet is blackmail.
I don’t know a lot about the guy but his involvement with that organization was probably the only thing I respected about him.
Do you know anything about the charity? Or just what his PR team sold you?
Fair question.
Why was he running a sex abuse organization that was specifically anti-child in the first place?
deleted by creator
I mean wouldn’t it be better that they don’t want children in their sex abuse organization?
Life sentences are inhumane
I wonder how Masterson feels now when he looks at his young daughter and knows that there are people like him in the world.
What he did to those girls, someone could do to his. I hope he spends all his time in jail thinking about that.
I also hope that nothing bad ever happens to her, just for clarity.
I always thought Masterson seemed like a creep, so I didn’t pay much attention to this case when I heard about it.
Just read the article and another one it linked to regarding sentencing. It sounds like most of the jury voted for acquittal but it wasn’t unanimous so the judge declared a mistrial and then retried him.
Anyone know how this isn’t considered double-jeopardy? It sounds like the very definition of it to me. He was put on trial. The prosecutor was unable to secure a conviction, so the judge gave them another chance?
But weeks after the trial finally started in late 2022, the judge declared a mistrial after the jury remained deadlocked. Jurors in last year’s case had leaned in favor of acquittal on all three counts against him – voting 10-2 on one count, 8-4 on another and 7-5 on the third, but were unable to reach a unanimous decision, leading to the mistrial.
US Fifth Amendment excerpt:
nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb
A mistrial is not a definitive outcome. Not-guilty or guilty would be the definitive outcome.
Mistrials don’t incur double jeopardy, they invalidate the trial as if it didn’t happen. It’s how the law works.
That’s how a jury trial works. You need all 12 to agree, otherwise it is a hung jury and declared a mistrial. It is then up to the prosecutor to retry the case if they want to.
It isn’t double jeopardy because the trial didn’t come to a decision. If all 12 jury members agreed, one way or another, that is the end of it. At least for that/those counts.
A split decision sounds like a decision to me. The prosecutor failed to convince a jury of the defendant’s guilt. I wonder how many times someone can be tried as long as the prosecutor is able to seat at least one sympathetic juror.
I could understand retrying the case if it was found out one of the jury was on the take, but this sounds exactly like the kind of thing the 5th amendment is supposed to stop.
Oh, we didn’t pick a good enough jury to convict him this time. Let’s try again.
It has to be unanimous. A split decision is not an acquittal anymore than it’s a conviction.
That makes sense, but the 5th amendment doesn’t mention conviction or acquittal.
Seems plain and clear that a retrial is being put in jeopardy a second time. Even my former justification of jury tampering doesn’t seem to hold up to that measure.
He can appeal based on these grounds.
Rather or not he wins would depend on how reasonable it was for the judge to declare the first mistrial.
Anyway, a mistrial does not apply to the fifth amendment. It’s not double jeopardy if the first trial is declared void.
In other words, a mistrial is not a trial. It’s a dud and everyone is allowed to start again.
deleted by creator
