- Joined
- Oct 21, 2018
Apparently their desire for “guilty until proven innocent” isn’t a meme, it’s an actual desire.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Apparently their desire for “guilty until proven innocent” isn’t a meme, it’s an actual desire.
So even if Vic is as bad as the #kickvic side claims, he still needs to win his case unless #KickVic are somehow sitting on a mountain of video of audio evidence that they are strangely not showing to the public. If he doesn't, SJWs will seize the opportunity to censor fucking everything to further the narrative to "always believe survivors".
So here's a question that I have never seen anyone bring up,
If hypothetically speaking, Vic did commit sexual assaults over the past twenty years and somehow managed to miss security surveillance and no police reports, should he still win his civil case?
If so, it would indeed be horrible and I would hope that they find proof of sexual assault eventually. Given this, however, we're put into a situation of which is the lesser evil. If we were to look at both sides, the facts come up that would still make Vic's side the lesser evil. On Vic's side, you have Vic committing sexual assault and a minority of annoying #IstandwithVic supporters. On the #KickVic side, however, you have this,
The reality is that in many cases, it is not a clearcut "good vs. evil" scenario. Sometimes, we have to side with the lesser evil in order to achieve a greater good. Miranda v. Arizona covered the case of Ernesto Miranda, a rapist and kidnapper, who was not told of his rights to have an attorney when convicted for it. This went all the way to the Supreme Court, resulting in a landmark 1966 ruling that requires law enforcement officers (Archive) to tell people that they have the right to an attorney and to remain silent under the Fifth Amendment.
- Slanders from Anime News Network Saucedo, Allison (can't remember her last name), Marchi, Rials, Toye, Winn-Lee, among others.
- Editing photos to falsify accusation of sexual assault on Facebook of all things
- Inoue-Hart, part of the internal investigation team at Funimation, falsifying a SWAT claiming it was from #IstandwithVic supporters
- A violation of the Fifth Amendment as shown by the #KickVic's side complete lack of respect for due process
- Blaming the fans, the people who support the Western anime industry
- Organized harassment campaign by #KickVic supporters on those who are pro-Vic and neutral on #AnimeGate
- Justin Sevakis, the co-founder of ANN, saying that they have even worse monsters hiding in the closet that they won't out because it won't get lots of page views
Assuming the sexual assaults allegations are true, the case to the public becomes less about salvaging Mignogna's career and more about the constitutional question of due process. What SJWs don't realize is that they aren't here to prove Vic was guilty of sexual assault in a criminal case, it's Vic who has to prove they are guilty of false allegations that fall under Texas's tortious interference laws in a civil case. As can be seen from the past two months, Vic has more than enough to go off to prove that his firing fell under that.
So even if Vic is as bad as the #kickvic side claims, he still needs to win his case unless #KickVic are somehow sitting on a mountain of video of audio evidence that they are strangely not showing to the public. If he doesn't, SJWs will seize the opportunity to censor fucking everything to further the narrative to "always believe survivors".
I was undecided on the Vic Mignogna situation for a month and a half (although to be fair, I didn't do a lot of research before this month since I wanted to avoid the situation, then got bored and read this thread) and even I was shocked when Kneon got called a Nazi by Mike Toole. I lost any respect I had for ANN in one swoop because of that since that essentially means he and Geeky, his wife, will never get invited to a con again. The #kickvic campaign is not just a defamation campaign against Vic, but against us.ANN's Mike Toole proved that they are willing to take it to that level by labeling Lost Pause's Noble and Kneon from Clownfish TV as "Nazis" and tried to flag them for removal on YouTube. For me, this was the straw that broke the camel's back. Before that, I was going to sit on the sidelines and "let the chips fall where they may." Toole's actions spoke louder to me as who needs to be watched and ANN's stance on the moral high ground was that of shifting sands. Reflecting back on the decision to be a bit more active against the greater threat of Censorship Based On Differing Opinions, I believe my current decision is justified.
Also, the fact that SJWs were actively in the #kickvic movement told me all I needed to know.
So here's a question that I have never seen anyone bring up,
I hate being that guy but dammit it's tortious, not tortuous.If the lawsuit includes Tortuous Interference
What's sad is if they did some minor research into stuff like this they would be amazed at what they will find. I mean look at the Jessie Ventura vs Chris Kyle case. Ventura took Kyle to court over him saying his chapter on Scruff Face in his book was Ventura on a radio show. And this was Kyle after the American Sniper book, after the Clint Eastwood Movie, all the TV appearance, War Hero, and death due to helping a Vet. And Kyle's estate still lost to Ventura even with all the appeals (Granted the extra damage money was appealed) but basically it boiled down to Chris Kyle lied. And like I said if these idiots would just do a bit of research they may realize how deep of shit they are in...but hey it may be fun watching them play chicken with the courts.Would he still win? Yes! The trial will not be Vic on Trial, should it get to Trial. Vic affirms that he is innocent under oath. One assumes he has already give a sworn affidavit to that fact to his lawyer as part of their planned filings. So the question will not be "is Vic Guilty", but rather "was what the defendant said defamatory? And was it said with Malice?" Truthfulness of the statement may be a defense. But that will be much harder to prove by the defense. The SJW's assume Vic has to prove he is innocent. Nope, the defendants will have to provide clear admissible evidence and testimony that what they stated is correct, true and factual. And even then truth isn't a defense for Business Defamation.
One of the idiots said a great STUPID thing on Twitter today. "If there are 50 accusers and 49 lied, if 1 told the truth Vic will still be found guilty!", yeah no. See it works the other way. Vic is not on Trial for Guilt or Innocence. If they claim 50 victims, and 49 are proven lies, even if 1 is true, that is 49 instances of defamation that the defendant will be liable for. If the lawsuit includes Tortuous Interference then truth is no longer a defense. It is simply did they interfere and result in the loss of the business relationship, contract and income?
Further it is likley that the defendants will not be able to bring anything other than what they brought into the Funimation "Investigation". They can't start pulling mysterious new victims out of thin air. They will be on trial to back up and defend the specific defamation that they made. Not create new ones.
I'm probably not saything this well? The defendants won't be able to bring new allegations. Just try to explain the truth of the defamatory statements they have always
Don't tell me, tell the bloody Auto-correct that keeps insisting tortuous?I hate being that guy but dammit it's tortious, not tortuous.
Confirmed Google conspiracy to prevent people to learn their legal vocabulary.Don't tell me, tell the bloody Auto-correct that keeps insisting tortuous?
Also... is it me or does Nick have mad dandruff?
Yeah, don't wear black Rackets.
View attachment 699510
I agree with most of what you say including this quote, but it's bound to be lowest for people that consider identity politics to be good/virtuous/necessary. I think it takes rejecting undue guilt to get there in the first place.
Yes, we are very lucky to have modern and progressive restrictions on fire-arms, that were first implemented due to foreigners doing terrorist attacks in trains in the 70s. As you can see it really limits shootings.
Yeah, don't wear black Rackets.
View attachment 699510
Something I found interesting. Do you guys think even if he wins his case they would still be salty about it and go after the next voice actor and cup and tea all over again? That would be fun.......