Well now we’re getting into the proof realm, and unfortunately you’re the only person asserting anything that needs it. Got to prove Rekieta incited anything (harder than it sounds), and that Vic sexually harassed anyone. That’s a big ask, and otherwise you’re left with nothing.
-
-
Replying to @canceledyy @EmilyChan556 and
Because you made assertions with a material impact on someone’s life. You’re welcome to think Vic’s a scumbag personally, but if you have any logical consistency you’d want some kind of provable sequence of events if you think he deserves having his life ruined.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @canceledyy @EmilyChan556 and
I don’t blame you for thinking that way, but this lawsuit, especially if it goes Vic’s way, might serve as a good lesson for all of us (myself included). Our bar for thinking somebody is scum should be way higher than what’s conventionally accepted as true on Twitter.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @canceledyy @EmilyChan556 and
Those numbers sound bad, but if you went through them one by one (as they’ll do in court) I strongly doubt many of them will rise above “well that was awkward.” That’s the problem the defendants now face - it’s not one instance that has to be harassment/assault, it’s all of them
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @canceledyy @J_Weenus and
No he’ll have to prove 100/100. 10/100 still equals defamation and is still chargeable. 99/100 is still defamation. Like I said, it’s not a criminal case.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like
No, she's pointing out that each claim (over 100 according to Soye) has to be proven and there isn't even one single credible story. That's a tall mountain to climb
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.