Posted on 09/07/2023 2:19:40 PM PDT by Jonty30
A judge sentenced That '70s Show star Danny Masterson to 30 years to life in prison Thursday for the rapes of two women two decades ago.
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Charlaine F. Olmedo handed down the sentence to Masterson, 47, after hearing statements from the women about the trauma they experienced and the suffering caused by the disturbing memories in the years since.
The actor, who has been in custody since May, sat in court wearing a suit. He watched the women without visible reaction as they spoke.
"When you raped me, you stole from me," said one woman who Masterson was convicted of raping in 2003. "That's what rape is, a theft of the spirit.
"You are pathetic, disturbed and completely violent," she said. "The world is better off with you in prison."
The other woman Masterson was found guilty of raping said he "has not shown an ounce of remorse for the pain he caused." She told the judge, "I knew he belonged behind bars for the safety of all the women he came into contact with. I am so sorry, and I'm so upset. I wish I'd reported him sooner to the police."
(Excerpt) Read more at cbc.ca ...
It sounds like regret sex to me. Something just does not sit right with me on this.
I said his picture looked black...That’s all...
Statute of Limitations Ping.
30 years means 15 years. He’ll probably get out in 12.
One of them was reported in 2004
He took up for justice by questioning your certainty
And there are questions
20 years after the fact of 2 of 3
And had been in a relationship with 2 of 3
The second judge admitting unproven allegations about drugging is highly unusual
And no accusations since comes to my mind
Hollywood rape is hugely political now
Fair people would like to see the actual evidence beyond simply the hidden accusers claims
Nobody says he’s innocent but 30 years is a helluva bit
Yeah, this seems excessive. Normally they reserve punishments like this for serious crimes, like pushing over a fence in Washington DC.
Fwiw
One of my best pards is a conservatarian in Los Feliz who produces movies and a few documentaries and who has clashed himself brutally with Scientology ten years ago when they disapproved of a documentary he did on someone they were protecting
His exact words :
“ Mixed feelings- the church needs to be shown they aren’t invincible but no evidence and 20 years later… I’m
Not sure how I feel about that”
There you go
PS Scientology tried to ruin him and cost him millions
I also said that Scientology being a cult does not make Danny Masterson guilty of rape.
He's probably a liberal @$$hole in real life and he may very well have done it, but this thing doesn't smell right to me.
The why is the politicians got on the "Me Too" bandwagon and passed unconstitutional laws allowing for charges to be brought even after the Statute of Limitations.
This was pure vote buying and not the carriage of any type of justice.
Decades ago and all of it behind the wall of the Scientology cult. With the Me Too laws it was easy to hurt someone and get stupid judges and jurors to finally convict even though there really is just the he said, she said stuff.
FYI, i know virtually nothing about this case, but just a comment that in today’s day and age, cultural climate if you will, i am skeptical about any scales of justice being thumb-weighted in one direction or another.
With so very many criminals getting a hall pass, and less criminal sentenced to ridiculously long prison sentences, there is no justice.
I find the whole circumstance to be very disheartening.
Id agree
My wife and I discussed this at length with coffee and my stogie this morning
She thinks approx like us over it
+1.
Seems to me that the “Church” is the reason it took so long to finally prosecute him.
Does the "church" control the police? I don't know why the cops would refuse to investigate such a serious crime.
The "Innocence Project" specializes in cases where men have been convicted of crimes, and then the DNA from the crime scene reveals they didn't do it because it's *NOT* their DNA!
Two members of O.J.'s Dream Team were founding members of The Innocence Project. They would be Barry Scheck and Peter Neufeld. At the O.J. trial they destroyed the evidentiary value of the DNA evidence used at that trial.
Allowing the witness to say "he drugged us" when they previously only testified "we felt woozy after drinking" is a quantum difference, and without proof, the judge shouldn't have allowed such a prejudicial statement.
At first trial the witnesses were not permitted to state they were drugged. At second trial they were permitted. The change in rulings does not impute aznything to the witnesses. Perhaps the judge was working on avoiding a second hung jury.
It might be good for an appeal and mistrial.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.