Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The human mind is complicated... Harvey Weinstein has (had) a stunningly beautiful wife, it's unbelievable that he was not satisfied with that, yikes! I would rate her a 9+.
So, he had a super hot wife, loads of money, influence and fame. Something is surely mentally wrong with this man if all that isn't enough that he had to chase after and harass other women.
Location: The Land Mass Between NOLA and Mobile, AL
1,796 posts, read 1,663,643 times
Reputation: 1411
If there is probable cause, then he should be arrested. Folks should not be tried in the court of public opinion before the facts are presented. In this case, I'm defining a "fact" as something that can be corroborated and that would meet a standard of proof. Given the vagaries of civil and criminal law, what constitutes proof is a matter for lawyers to argue about, as well it should be.
Police do not make that decision, the District Attorney does. The DA has to have enough evidence to think they can convict. Boyce should get his butt chewed for making the statement.
Except, they may just be trying to put pressure on Weinstein, like the pimple that he is . . .
The police can and do make decisions to arrest based on whether probable cause exists that a crime has been committed. What they do not do is make an ultimate decision of whether to file charges/bring a case; that decision is made by the DA.
Salma Hayek wrote this story in the NY Times today regarding her problems with Weinstein leading up to her producing and acting in the movie Frida. This is one very sick man and I hope he and his company lose everything. Imagine all the other actresses that didn't stand up to him.
Weinstein will probably get away with it in the US due to the statute of limitation laws, just as Bill Cosby got away with it. The problem is that US States have a hotch potch of laws relating to statue of limitation and clever lawyers can get historical charges dropped.
However Weinstein and others may have problems if there is enough evidence to prosecute in relation to the 11 allegations made in London, as the United Kingdom has no statute of limitations (time limit) for serious sexual crimes unlike other European countries. Furthermore forcing someone to perform oral sex is deemed rape in the UK, indeed what constitutes rape has been extended in recent decades in the UK.
Don't you mean England? Last time I checked Scotland had its own sexual assault laws.
I think there should be a law that negates any non-disclosure agreement when the activity not to be disclosed is a felony act. In that way the perp cannot recover damages from the victim even if the victim signed a non-disclosure agreement.
I've never seen or heard of a non-disclosure agreement that would cover something like this, but even if one did it would be against public policy and unenforceable in most, if not all, states.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Harvey Weinstein Is My Monster Too - Salma Hayek
