OT Asia Argento accused of paying hush money to silence sexual assault allegations

[riverman]

You were still normalizing the behavior by stating you would love it. No different than me defending Weinstein by stating "girls use the casting couch to make their careers"

Not even close to a valid statement or comparison....I've said all those fuckers were evil...and I never said any of this shit was normal....I said I'd love to have had this happen with Sophia Loren....and that's the truth when I was 17....you aren't going to make me the scapegoat in this thread dude as much as you're trying....some pretty blanket assumptions on your part...I have empathy ...I don't promote or normalize abuse and actually resent the implication. I can however under this story question the circumstances. Not my problem.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

wow,...."evil manipulator"....because she got drunk and had sex with a boy.

...she won't be tried...because it cannot be proven...and because it was so long ago...and because she was "under the influence"...and because her lawyers can claim she was permanently scarred by Weinstein. The kid can claim "trauma" but Asia cannot claim "trauma" from Weinstein?...how's that work?

...is she a "hypocrite"?...probably, but that's not a crime...kinda like "collusion".



...I too am done with this topic.

The kid claims trauma from Asia. Asia can claim trauma from Weinstein.

The kid can't rape someone and blame it on Argento as his defense.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Not even close to a valid statement or comparison....I've said all those fuckers were evil...and I never said any of this shit was normal....I said I'd love to have had this happen with Sophia Loren....and that's the truth when I was 17....you aren't going to make me the scapegoat in this thread dude as much as you're trying....some pretty blanket assumptions on your part...I have empathy ...I don't promote or normalize abuse and actually resent the implication. I can however under this story question the circumstances. Not my problem.

That is the definition of normalization.

 

[CupWizier]

Pay me $595 an hour.

For your nterpretation of the laws? You don't even deserve a nickel.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

For your nterpretation of the laws? You don't even deserve a nickel.

Its not what you deserve, its what you can get

 

[riverman]

That is the definition of normalization.

hardly...but now you're just trollin..you should write your congressman and express your outrage

 

[MarAzul]

Maris and Marazul in 3...2...1

Did I miss my cue?

 

[CupWizier]

Its not what you deserve, its what you can get

oh, then I will rephrase it. You can get zero for your law advice. The only thing worse than no advice is bad advice.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

oh, then I will rephrase it. You can get zero for your law advice. The only thing worse than no advice is bad advice.

Its the right answer though

 

[yankeesince59]

The kid claims trauma from Asia. Asia can claim trauma from Weinstein.

I know I said I was done but I lied......don't look know but you contradicted yourself.

In post # 44 I said;
...."Asia Argento attorneys could probably argue that the root of the reason that prompted her to have sex with a 17 year old was that she was permanently "scarred and twisted" from being abused herself by,.........wait for it..........wait for it...............Harvey freaking Weinstein."

You replied:
"Any reasonable lawyer would make that argument inadmissible. It would give her carte blanche to do whatever the fuck she wants if she can always blame it on Harvey.

I then asked you on what grounds would a lawyer make that "inadmissible"?... and asked you to cite a legal precedent... but you could/would not.

In lieu of actually providing proof or citing a precedent, you instead replied;
"It happens all the time. Not relevant to the facts of the case, being that she had sex with a minor. Harvey Weinstein's existence has no bearing on this at all."





...Now you claim; '"Asia can claim trauma from Weinstein."

...like I said, you're simply trolling at this point and are talking out of your ass.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

I know I said I was done but I lied......don't look know but you contradicted yourself.

In post # 44 I said;
...."Asia Argento attorneys could probably argue that the root of the reason that prompted her to have sex with a 17 year old was that she was permanently "scarred and twisted" from being abused herself by,.........wait for it..........wait for it...............Harvey freaking Weinstein."

You replied:
"Any reasonable lawyer would make that argument inadmissible. It would give her carte blanche to do whatever the fuck she wants if she can always blame it on Harvey.

I then asked you on what grounds would a lawyer make that "inadmissible"?

You then replied;
"It happens all the time. Not relevant to the facts of the case, being that she had sex with a minor. Harvey Weinstein's existence has no bearing on this at all."





...Now you claim; '"Asia can claim trauma from Weinstein."

...like I said, you're simply trolling at this point and are talking out of your ass.

No contradiction at all. He said in all those posts that though conceivably both the kid and Argento can claim trauma, they can't use it as any kind of legal defense for subsequent bad acts. To wit:

The kid can't rape someone and blame it on Argento as his defense.

Completely consistent.

 

[Natebishop3]

The attitude that the kid was lucky to have sex with a moviestar when he was 17 is exactly the reason why male rape victims aren't taken seriously, and why female teachers who rape students aren't punished as severely as male teachers.

If it was a 17 year old girl and a 37 year old man, there wouldn't be anyone saying "well when I was 17 I would have been thrilled to sleep with a 37 year old movie star." People would be disgusted and they would demand blood.

Rape is rape. There can't be a middle ground. If there's a 17 year old kid who sleeps with a 37 year old, that's statutory rape. Doesn't matter if it's a boy or a girl. Whether or not we would have jumped on that scenario when we were 17 is irrelevant. It's against the law, and there simply cannot be a double standard on how we interpret the law.

And the heart of the issue is the perception by society that women can't be rapists, or abusers.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

It's not unheard of for victims of sexual assault to sexually assault others.

If the statute of limitations hasn't expired she should be prosecuted.

 

[yankeesince59]

No contradiction at all. He said in all those posts that though conceivably both the kid and Argento can claim trauma, they can't use it as any kind of legal defense for subsequent bad acts. To wit:

...no, that in itself is a contradiction, and you need to keep in mind that if there IS a trial it would be ...........................in California.

 

[yankeesince59]

It's not unheard of for victims of sexual assault to sexually assault others.

If the statute of limitations hasn't expired she should be prosecuted.

...perhaps, but she lives in Rome...and besides, it's obvious that the kid is looking for money, not a trial.

 

[CupWizier]

Its the right answer though

whatever you wanna think dude. It's apparent you're a bit light in the brains.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

The attitude that the kid was lucky to have sex with a moviestar when he was 17 is exactly the reason why male rape victims aren't taken seriously, and why female teachers who rape students aren't punished as severely as male teachers.

If it was a 17 year old girl and a 37 year old man, there wouldn't be anyone saying "well when I was 17 I would have been thrilled to sleep with a 37 year old movie star." People would be disgusted and they would demand blood.

Rape is rape. There can't be a middle ground. If there's a 17 year old kid who sleeps with a 37 year old, that's statutory rape. Doesn't matter if it's a boy or a girl. Whether or not we would have jumped on that scenario when we were 17 is irrelevant. It's against the law, and there simply cannot be a double standard on how we interpret the law.

And the heart of the issue is the perception by society that women can't be rapists, or abusers.

Even worse, this seemed pre-meditated.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

whatever you wanna think dude. It's apparent you're a bit light in the brains.

:MARIS61:

 

[SlyPokerDog]

.perhaps, but she lives in Rome

According to the IMDB she's got worked booked in the US.

 

[yankeesince59]

Even worse, this seemed pre-meditated.

...isn't it also possible that BOTH of them had agreed to this soiree beforehand?

 

[yankeesince59]

According to the IMDB she's got worked booked in the US.

...Oh I understand that,...but looking at all of what we know to date, do you really thing that she'll ever be indicted?
...I don't...this whole thing has nothing to do with justice, and everything to do with money.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

...isn't it also possible that BOTH of them had agreed to this soiree beforehand?

Underaged persons cannot consent.

 

[donkiez]

It's not unheard of for victims of sexual assault to sexually assault others.

If the statute of limitations hasn't expired she should be prosecuted.

This is pretty cut and dry.

Is she potentially a hypocrite? No.

Does this diminish what happened to her? No

Was she wrong for what she did? Yes

Should she pay for what she did? Yes

At this point Is he just looking to get paid? Maybe but beside the point.

Did he enjoy it? Probably

Was he taken advantage of? Yes

Am I jealous? Yes

 

[CupWizier]

Underaged persons cannot consent.

define underage person.

 

[donkiez]

define underage person.

The law does that pretty well. 17 doesn't make her a pedo in my book but I got to side with El Prez on this one. She was wrong and should have waited a year.

 

[Lanny]

Its a legal document she signed.

Pardon me. I see I'm going to have to get detailed with you.

It's not a criminal matter, it's a PUBLICITY matter. I hope that clears things up.

Any questions, any need for even more clarification?

 

[yankeesince59]

Underaged persons cannot consent.

...legally, yes....but it doesn't matter privately and if there is a trial the defense would argue otherwise...I agree that she was in the wrong but like I asked earlier, if there is a trial, and there won't be, what if she counter-sued and claim that he took advantage of her?...lawyers are good at that type of shit.

 

[Lanny]

The law does that pretty well. 17 doesn't make her a pedo in my book but I got to side with El Prez on this one. She was wrong and should have waited a year.

Pedophilia applies to victims younger that he was. We went through this with the Alabama Senate candidate, Roy Moore, incident.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

Pardon me. I see I'm going to have to get detailed with you.

It's not a criminal matter, it's a PUBLICITY matter. I hope that clears things up.

Any questions, any need for even more clarification?

I said legal, not criminal. The legal document was signed so as to avoid criminal liability had this story gotten out.

 

[EL PRESIDENTE]

define underage person.

Someone under 18.