Harvey Weinstein sentenced to 23 years
https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/celebrity/weinstein-sentenced-to-23-years-for-sexual-assaults/ar-BB111rZq?ocid=spartanntp
NEW YORK (AP) — Harvey Weinstein was sentenced Wednesday to 23 years in prison for rape and sexual assault, a sight the disgraced Hollywood mogul's multitude of accusers thought they would never see.
Both women confronting Weinstein again in court Wednesday after their testimony helped seal his conviction at the landmark #MeToo trial.
Apparently there were as many as 90 accusers, with him being convicted on two counts of predatory sexual assault, while avoiding the more serious charge of 1st degree rape.
I expect to hear the trial and conviction becoming 'politicized' within a very short time; any thoughts or comments?
NEW YORK (AP) — Harvey Weinstein was sentenced Wednesday to 23 years in prison for rape and sexual assault, a sight the disgraced Hollywood mogul's multitude of accusers thought they would never see.
Both women confronting Weinstein again in court Wednesday after their testimony helped seal his conviction at the landmark #MeToo trial.
Apparently there were as many as 90 accusers, with him being convicted on two counts of predatory sexual assault, while avoiding the more serious charge of 1st degree rape.
I expect to hear the trial and conviction becoming 'politicized' within a very short time; any thoughts or comments?
Comments (7)
Nice. Sounds like justice was served... . An aside, isn't it funny how you can kind-of look at someone and suspect something just isn't right (viz heinous activity/nefarious behavior)?
Perhaps one should not judge a book by its cover. The package in which people come to us may be attractive or repulsive, but if we exert a little effort—like opening a book and browsing its contents before deciding whether to buy it—we can see past our visual biases to the truth. Maybe like good scientists, we should cling to our theories about people only loosely and always be willing to revise them in light of new data.
But boy, did that dude play the part or what!!?
Lol, are you suggesting that if he wasn't fat or ugly he wouldn't have been such a prime suspect?
Hahaha...I don't know, it's an interesting dynamic...or at least somthing to parse...philosophically. :brow:
I know...what are some of the lessons learned there....good point!
I've noticed over many years of news-media consumption that when the victims are girls their gender is readily reported as such; however, when they're boys, they're usually referred to gender-neutrally as children. It’s as though, as a news product made to sell the best, the child victims being female is somehow more shocking than if male.
Also, I’ve heard and read news-media references to a 19-year-old female victim as a ‘girl’, while (in an unrelated case) a 17 year old male perpetrator was described as a ‘man’.
I wonder whether the above may help explain why the book Childhood Disrupted (about adverse childhood experiences or ACEs) was only able to include one man among its six interviewed adult subjects, logically presuming there were very few men willing to come forward for the book?
Could it be evidence of a continuing subtle societal take-it-like-a-man mindset? After all, that relatively so few men (a ratio of 5:1 female to male) suffered high-scoring ACE trauma is not a plausible conclusion, however low in formally recorded number they may be. For me at least, it definitely was the book’s unaddressed elephant in the room.
(I tried contacting the book's author on this matter, twice, but received no reply.)
It could, indeed.