Comments

1

Meinert’s public persona has always been of a self-righteous bully who can do no wrong. He and Trump are peas in a pod. I’m surprised more of his friends didn’t take him for the prick he so obviously is.

2

Also, stop running that fucking Comet ad!

3

Remember Kaitlyn Hunt? I do. (In case you don't remember, she was an 18-year-old high school senior from Florida who was accused of having sex with a 14-year-old girl back in 2013.) You went on a righteous tear about how she was being persecuted because she was gay, when, as it turns out, she was guilty as charged. (She'd been warned off seeing the girl she was accused of assaulting numerous times, and ended up being sentenced to jail, followed by house arrest and probation.)

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/kaitlyn-hunt-accepts-plea-deal-in-lesbian-statuatory-rape-case-6548273

I don't recall you ever walking that one back.

5

I’d really like to get Sydney’s take on how this story went down (and the circumstances of her leaving seem way too coincidental) at the Stranger. Because the “I recused myself” bullshit doesn’t wash in a postage stamp sized newsroom of the Stranger. This isn’t the Department of a Justice. You know god damned well just claiming you “recused” yourself doesn’t really mean much without a definition and statement of the people involved about what that looks like at an Alt Weekly that gets a shit ton of revenue from the accused rapist.

Sorry, Dan. This won’t end here. You’re going to have to better.

6

How many editors are there?

7

@5 - Simmer down Doc, The Stranger and Dan have no culpability here that anyone can derive from the unfortunately semantics of ‘recuse’.
The ads must run their contractural course, so no sense getting into a tizzy over my it.

8

@5: Yes! Everyone in the “accused are GUILTY!!1!” camp needs to turn on each other. Now. In public fora like this one. It’s a race to the bottom of the bucket filled with rumor, myth, smear, and other such delightfully-scented materials.

I have just two questions:

1) What took you so long?

2) Could you take just one minute longer? The instructions on the package say that’s how long the popcorn needs to be in the microwave.

9

Of course, friende should receive the courtesy of giving their side of the story before we come to any conclusions about them.

But we also have to confront the truth that all human beings this side of saintliness -- which includes our friends and us too -- have a shadow self.

This ego side may not express itself in outright sexual harassment or assault; but selfishness, opportunism or dissembling can be ugly enough and good reasons for us stop ignoring/excusing/enabling the "friend's" behavior.

10

Well, at least you addressed it, which is a step in the right direction. I'd also be interested in hearing Sydney's take, though I wonder if that's blocked from some sort of employment NDA. If there was any attempt to suppress this report, I have a feeling it would be devastating both to this paper and its readers.

Also, echoing #1, Meinert has always been a tremendous asshole and a bully. I'm surprised his close friends didn't know about this shit, especially since it involved the police. Friends usually talk to friends about that sort of stuff.

@8: What sort of enjoyment do you find in insulting these women? What's the point? What are you hoping to accomplish aside from hurting them even further? I feel like you didn't even read the report.

11

Has anyone else noticed that all of Mein Trumpfy's "closest friends" and apologists eerily resemble mafia dons? It's for a reason: they're all heartless crime bosses who don't care how many innocent people they hurt, screw, or murder. Treason? That's a men's locker room joke.

12

Jeffrey Lord--another pig who thinks he's God.

13

Dan, this all sounds good, but what does Sydney say about this story?

14

Well written.

15

@10: Who said anything about women? I was commenting on Dr. Z @5 and his castigation of Dan Savage. As far as I know, they are both guys.

16

@4
Really.
WTF does Jeffrey Lord have to do with Savage and Meinert?

18

I remember working with Meinert on a music project back in the early '90s. At the time, he didn't seem at all like someone who would be accused of doing terrible things, far into the future.

19

An honest reflection, Dan Savage. Good on ya, man. Thanks for writing it.

20

I'd rather hear Sydney's story. Period. This is a roundabout admission by way of patting yourself on the back that you developed a small bit of empathy. I'm sure Sydney might have something more interesting to say.

21

Some people are exactly who they are with everyone. We sometimes find these people irritating because they aren't always "nice" when in our presence. But at least their dark side isn't hidden and we know we have to take the bad with the good if they're to be in our lives. No hidden sacks of shit will be dug up.

Others strive to be different things to different people. They will show you what they've figured out you want to see and hear, and all you'll ever know of them is the facade they constructed for you.

I've known a few of the latter types in my life and have one in my own family. I know never to believe anything said or done is genuine because I've seen the person play the game with others far too many times.

I don't think anyone should feel bad for not seeing the darker side of someone. It might well have been carefully hidden from us and all we were ever shown was a well-constructed mask. I guess that fits in with the profile of a sociopath. Everyone is a victim of the twisted psychology, even if no direct harm comes to them or they see it being done to others.

22

Correction: Everyone is a victim of the twisted psychology, even if no direct harm comes to them or they NEVER see it being done to others.

Typing too fast and lost a word.

23

@20, I don't see this as self congratulatory. This is an 'I was wrong in the past but am working on it, don't be like past me' piece. Sure, if you wanted an apology, this is pretty weak, but if you regularly read the comments on this (or most) news sites, you can fairly conclude we don't really deserve that apology.

24

I’ve no idea who any of these men are, and I won’t be reading about them. Why is everybody mostly male bodies, so surprised? Women have been screaming about how they get treated by men forever. You think it was all hysterics. Now, they are talking specifics. Individual men are being spotlighted for what they did.
Why wait so long? Because women haven’t expected to be heard, their rapists get off because she wore a short skirt, was out alone after dark, she asked for it.
Unless you’ve been sleeping for the past year or so, many many many women have finally said, no more bud. Why do you think the #metoo movement took off like that, all over the fucking world.

25

@24 I don't know, this seems like a pretty regular story? Local guy is probably criminal with women, news at 11? I mean, beyond that, who's like "yep, I saw sexual assault coming from miles away"? This is a big story because Dave's a friend of many stranger staffers. I don't find that super compelling on its own. A kid from my high school completed a murder suicide with his girlfriend. I was cool with him in high school. I never felt any reason to answer for his crimes, personally, I don't think Dan had to answer for his friends here either. As a news person I think an explanation of how the story came out and was delayed due to quasi unique circumstances is necessary, but that's it.

26

@7 look dumbfuck the entire point is find out if there was ANY suppression of the original story.

This “friendship” Savage wants us all to admire is sheeps clothing for the god damned FACT Meinert was THE major advertiser for the Stranger. Savage doesn’t even really mention this. Why? Why is his friendship more important than the fact Meinert paid the Stranger a whole bunch of money?

And the writer who broke the story, investigated it for six god damned months, worked for the Stranger early on while she was investigating. And then was forced to leave. Why?

The fucking editor saying some shit about “recusing” is meaningless until we hear from the reporter herself. You don’t do that at a news paper if you expect to viewed as having any integrity. What does it MEAN? Brownstone should be given an opportunity to clear this cloud FIRST before the fucking editor.

This by all appearances looks like a desperate ass-saving attempt by Savage. And it’s weak. And he knows it’s weak. Ethical questions about this story are not going away. It needs to be cleared up.

We need to know if Sydney had an NDA about this story. We need to know why the Stranger DID’NT break this story.

And, BTW, I happen to know former and present staff at the Stranger. And NONE that I have spoken with are happy about how this story was dealt with and why Sydney left.

One way or another the Story behind the story will have to reckoned with.

27

@26: Well, you'll just have to accept that ambiguity. The Stranger has the prerogative of what to publish, when to publish, and who to employ. I suggest finding another issue to pout about.

28

Ms Lava - Surprised these things are happening, or surprised these things are being pinned on men from whom they wouldn't expect such misconduct?

I'd no more think anyone (of any gender) incapable of sexual misconduct than I would think anyone incapable of murder. Some perpetrators are more likely than others, unless one is ready to greet any and all accusations with total belief. Those don't seem irreconcilable to me.

29

This is Seattle's dirty little version of that thing where Clinton and Obama and the rest of the Democrap elite had their greedy tongues so far up Weinstein's ass they overlooked decades of rape.
Because Women's Advocacy and all.

30

Thank you for that, Dan. I don't live in Washington and don't know this man or the specifics of this case. But your overall point was well-written and should be well-taken.

32

@27 no. Man, you are stupid. This has nothing to do with ambiguity. There is no ambiguity. Right now the optics are the Stranger suppressed a story.

So, no, they don’t get to just sit there with mounting pressure to clear this up if they want to have a journalistic credibility.

Squelching a story about a major advertiser who committed multiple rapes is how editors get fired and, I might add, sued.

Now, I don’t know if that happened. Sydney could and would very well come along and clear everything up and that will be the end of it.

But it LOOKS like it did because of every dumb thing this paper is currently doing and they don’t exactly have a spotless record at this point.

I want a good robust local alt-weekly that does good local reporting. It’s cruicial to a healthy community. You don’t get that with linger doubts about a paper that sat on an important story because they were PAID to sit on it. See? Get it?

So. Let’s put those doubts to bed.

The whole point of editorial transparency, the sort of thing the Stranger vociferously demands of every other outlet constantly, is for times exactly like this.

And there is an ethical order to how you deal with these questions and the Stranger is either going to have to do that or be excoriated by every other outlet out there.

It’s not like Savage himself has gone around making friends in this town (that weren’t rapists, anyway). There are a number of fairly powerful people who just hate that guy and are just waiting for his popularity to slip.

But. Sure. Let them go in doing what they are doing in a cut throat climate where papers are going under left and right. That sounds super great and ambiguous.

33

@32: Careful, looks like you're salivating for a litigation orgasm.

34

FYI everyone. Sydney Brownstone briefly commented on Twitter. She posts a screenshot of Savage's post and says ”Ha. Well, this is some revisionist history". There's another post about how the trotting went down as well.

https://mobile.twitter.com/sydbrownstone?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

Anyway, it would appear that there is in fact more to this story, or at least Brownstone is claiming that there is. Given this guy's financial connections to the Stranger, the editorial staff definitely owes its readers more

35

"Reporting"... Not "trotting". Stupid autocorrect

36

“...a major advertiser who committed multiple rapes...”

You don’t know that. You just think you do, because of a story where one reporter claims to speak for multiple women. A reporter who may have advanced false claims of rape right here in The Stranger. A reporter who blithely described false claims of rape as “exceptionally rare” when they are, in fact, not rare at all:

“You've probably already heard that they're exceptionally rare, comprising somewhere between two and 10 percent of rape accusations.”

https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2017/11/20/25575322/what-we-know-about-false-rape-accusations

The real story here is trials-by-media of allegedly serious crimes, where the entire narrative is controlled by self-appointed prosecutors who answer to no public accountability, and where the accused never, ever gets a chance to clear his name.

Maybe it did indeed all go down the way you believe it did. But at this moment, you have no way of knowing, and you shouldn’t pretend you do.

37

@33 sigh. What the fuck is wrong with you? Seriously? Are you cognitively challenged? Is it Alzheimer’s? Your comments don’t even connect to what’s being discussed.

Most of the non-Troll comments in here have been asking for editorial clarity from the Stranger in serious ethics questions.

This is precisely to avoid a situation where our only Alt-weekly ends up crippled by law suits.

This is so the potential victims of alleged rape and alleged perpetrator can all get fair reporting and justice.

It’s FINACIAL ties that cause the serious conflicts of interest not “friendship.” As long as those ties remain unexplained and unexamined this paper cannot report on this story in good faith and every report that doesn’t disclose these ties distracts from the important process of fairness and justice.

The Stranger needs to clear this up. Pronto. If the story was suppressed then Savage needs to resign. If he doesn’t then maybe there will be law suits. Or maybe they will lose more advertising.

Nobody who wants a healthy local paper wants that. But a paper ISN’T healthy or trustworthy that covers this shit up.

And IF that’s the case then yes. I would want the Stranger to go under. And then maybe a paper with actual integrity can rise in its place.

But I think there is a ways to go and the first step as MOST people here have said is that Savage and Keck need to stop the bullshit and let Sydney comment.

As it is, unlike you, I have life live. So i’m Going on with it now.

39

I don't think there are many people who put doing the right thing (or believing a bad thing) over the close bonds of friends and family. David Kaczynski was one of those people, and I've always admired him for that.

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2016/feb/07/unabomber-ted-kaczynski-brother-david-kaczynski-every-last-tie-book

In the book, David admits he hasn’t heard from his brother once since he was arrested. He recounts, third hand, Ted’s reaction at hearing that it was David who had identified him for the FBI. “That’s impossible,” Ted was reported to say. “David loves me. He’d never do that.”

40

Where Sportlandia @25, did I say you had to answer for anyone else’s crime? Nowhere did I say that. Just answer for your own, if you have any.
A lot of men charged with assault, probably behave like angels in public.

41

@37: Let's just review just a couple of your hyperbolic flame throws:

"This is precisely to avoid a situation where our only Alt-weekly ends up crippled by law suits."

A disingenuous statement. Index newspapers is a private enterprise - not a coop or PBS affiliate. There's plenty of media and news outlets to choose from. It was never meant to be a "healthy" community forum. Also your concern about lawsuits is later washed away by "And IF that’s the case then yes. I would want the Stranger to go under." Isn't there a more applicable SJW cause you can pounce on?

"This is so the potential victims of alleged rape and alleged perpetrator can all get fair reporting and justice."

No commentary needed for that one. It's a classic. If you're confused, re-read @36.

43

@28, Mr Venn. Surprised anyone is surprised. And oh look, I’ve started reading Sydney’s piece, and what do you know. A woman saying he raped her, discounted by prosecutors. And some apologists here, this is why it becomes trial by media because these women’s cases don’t get sorted. The accused abuser sends investigators to pick up dirt on these women’s lives. Why would he need to do that, if he wasn’t guilty as hell.

44

36/tensor: A reporter who blithely described false claims of rape as “exceptionally rare” when they are, in fact, not rare at all:

Brownstone: “You've probably already heard that they're exceptionally rare, comprising somewhere between two and 10 percent of rape accusations.”

*

A few comments...

. what is considered "rare" or "exceptionally rare" is going to differ from person to person. If false claims of rape are closer to two percent of rape accusations then, in my opinion, I'd say that borders on "exceptionally" rare. However, if they are closer to 10 percent, then I'd say that's not "exceptionally" rare (and I'm not sure I'd even consider 1 out of 10 to be "rare"...but others might.)

. Since you said you don't believe false claims are rare at all, do you think they're higher -- perhaps even much higher -- than that upper limit of 10 percent that Brownstone mentions? Or do you feel that 10 percent would qualify as "not rare at all"? How about if false claims were five percent?

. I'm on another online forum which is frequented by a lot of conservative and libertarian guys. They seem to feel false claims could be as high as 50 percent. I think that's ludicrous, but do we really know what percentage of rape accusations are false? Is ten percent truly the upper limit?

. My personal guideline is that I'm not going to assume any individual allegation of rape MUST BE TRUE ("women don't lie" is as ludricrous as the belief that 50 percent of accusations are false.) However, if the upper limit of false claims is, indeed, around ten percent, then the odds are that an individual allegation of rape is LIKELY true.

45

@38, and an apologist for mothers grooming their sons. Nothing to see here, says he.

46

31
Guys and Gals, sport.
Lots of women say thru Hillary's hypocritical bullshit.
Better luck next time...

47

Roma @44, haven’t you noticed. Nobody believes one woman, unless she’s torn to bits and bleeding. No, only when a few women come forward.. can’t be all liars surely.. that maybe perhaps is there video, they are believed.

48

@39 Roma,
Excellent observation. I completely agree. Pretty rare behavior. Ted Kaczynski's reaction is classic.

@42 blip,
You too, have a good point. Ms. Brownstone must do her homework well. She and KUOW are held accountable. They are both quite vulnerable if they don't do sound reporting. The Rolling Stone magazine/University of Virginia Fraternity alleged rape scandal/story comes to mind.

49

You made a point to note that Ed Murray is no longer your friend. Is Meinert? Your staff is screaming to not make room for shitty people! Do you? Or is your business relationship too valuable.

50

This is similar to what I long ago coined as “but (s)he's nice to me” syndrome.

People, even adults, expect those that they like or even befriend to be devoid of severe character flaws and as “nice” as or even nicer than they perceive themselves to be. The truth is that rarely is anyone 100% evil (eg, cartoon villain Snidely Whiplash). Most “evil” humans are “nice” to someone or something. We have just got to be willing to accept that some people have unacceptable beliefs and/or engage in unacceptable behaviors, regardless if we “like” (or previously liked) AND must reject them as friends. It is not a character flaw to have had a friend prove him/herself to be not deserving of our friendship/admiration. It is, however, a character flaw to keep them as a friend once we know the truth.

51

What a sleaze ball this guy is. I’ll have to read Sydney’s article in sections. Well done to her. And brave. Love seeing these strong women pushing back.
What is the politics/ commercial situation here Dan, as it seems suspicious this writer left and no one else at Stranger picked up the ball.
Whatever. This guy’s life is now in the trash, where it should be. Entitled mongrel.

52

47/LavaGirl: "Nobody believes one woman, unless she’s torn to bits and bleeding."

In an ideal world, we could believe all accusations -- not just about rape, but anything -- because no one would lie. Unfortunately, we don't live in that world. We live in a world where people lie.

Brownstone had written that false claims of rape are "somewhere between two and 10 percent of rape accusations." Assuming the "truth" is somewhere in the middle, let's say six percent, then, while it's very likely an individual woman's claim is true, it's certainly not a slam-dunk given.

53

48/lark, good to see you here. I always found you to be one of the most civil and thoughtful people here.

Thanks. I remember that Kaczynski situation well because it (in my opinion) is so rare. Most of the time, loved ones and friends will claim "Oh, so-an-so couldn't possibly have done that!" and circle the wagons around them.

54

Of course Roma. I understand that and agree. There are women who will lie to punish a man.
Why even bring this up on a thread where it’s obvious this creep did it.
Why would a respected business woman ever speak out, and tarnish her reputation.
She did nothing wrong. Half asleep and frozen. And she waited nearly two decades to disclose it, because of his standing in the community. And back then, it would have got how far? It’s because women are speaking out after the USA picked an alleged rapist as their President.

55

So what ever happened about Aaron Salazar, the Portland student injured on Amtrak?

56

54/LavGirl, "it’s obvious this creep did it."

I haven't read any of the details about what Meinert allegedly did. If I had to put something on the line regarding my opinion as to whether or not he did what a woman (or women) allege he did, I'd be willing to bet money that he did. But, would I be willing to bet my life? No.

It sounds like you have such absolute certainty that you would be willing to bet your life.

57

Did you read Sydney’s article, Roma? And you have doubts. All these women, still scared to give their names, and you don’t believe them. Wow.
And his little communications thru email with the business owner. Didn’t alert you that this awlful man, wasn’t terrified his actions would become public. After all, today’s climate re businessmen’s etc behaviour is very different to seventeen years ago. And the woman suffering PTSD, that didn’t enrage you. Right. Now you see what women are up against.

58

WaS terrified.

59

57/LavaGirl: "Did you read Sydney’s article? "

If you're referring to an article about the allegations against Meinert, no. I said in the post right before yours that I haven't read any of the details about what he allegedly did.

"and you don’t believe them"

I believe what they're saying VERY LIKELY happened. I don't believe it with such ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY that I would literally bet my life on it. It you wish to construe that as "not believing them", that's your call.

60

You should read the reviews of the cream of mushroom soup at Lost Lake on Yelp. Meinerts worst reviews yet.

61

I believe these women with absolute certainty Roma. And how about making your mind up, after you read the article.
Most women have tales of either rape or sexual assault or some guy forcing a tongue kiss, etc etc. Entitled men, who are not called to account because of other entitled men doing the same thing. Most of you don’t even know you’ve done anything wrong, because it may be a minor violation of a woman’s autonomy. And hey, we’re trained from birth to accept mens’ insensitive and brutish behaviours.

62

@53 Roma,
Thanks. I also recall the Parkland, WA killings of police officers by Maurice Clemmons in 09'. People forget he was on the run for a few days aided and abetted by family and friends. I believe a relative of Clemmons did prison time for that. So, you are right to point out the rare and brave behavior of David Kacynski. Situations like Meinert's are indeed, stressful to his friends and family.

I trust you are well.

63

I would bet every penny I have in the bank that every faux white liberal on this site has a racist friend that they look the other way for, and even excuse as "a good guy" or "shes actually really nice to her friends". People are assholes. None of you are exceptions, Seattlites.

That friend you have that doesnt let her exhusband see his kids out of spite: asshole.

That friend you have that acts frightened around black people and will go out of his or her way to avoid even being around a black person: asshole.

Your friend who doesnt wash his or her hands after using the restroom: asshole

Your parents/uncle/aunt/neighbor who openly supports Trump and has a rant for every demographic her or she thinks is ruining America: asshole.

There are no high horses here.

64

@59

Excellent concern trolling.

65

@42: “Until meinert and murray bring it to court there is no reason to question her reporting...”

I gave several reasons @36 to question her reporting on this topic. Your belief that we must ignore these reasons until and unless the subjects of her reports sue her (!) is utterly ridiculous — as is your attempt to hand-wave away the reasons I gave. I’ll take your failure even to mention those reasons as your tacit admission you can’t argue with them.

@44: I think we can agree that diamonds are rare exactly because they comprise nowhere near 2% of the rocks in the earth. Brownstone went even further, using the phrase “exceptionally rare” to describe a possible 10%. This was simply an abuse of language on her part, and one which we should consider most carefully when we decide whether we believe a report in this topic which has her as the sole named source.

66

61/Lavagirl, unless there are, say, eyewitnesses cited in the article, I'm not going to have 100% certainty after reading it. If you have that level of certainty fine, You shouldn't expect every person to see things the way you do.

I'm sure that many women do "have tales of either rape or sexual assault or some guy forcing a tongue kiss, etc etc." Does that mean that every allegation a woman makes against a guy must be true?

62/lark, I remember that horrific shooting of cops by Clemmons, and also remember what you mentioned, about him being aided and abetted by family and friends. I remember his death particularly well because he was discovered by a cop in Rainier Valley (not far from where I llve) and had been driving a stolen Acura Integra (my Integra has been stolen five times...recovered each time.) In that case, 100% certainty that he was the guy who murdered those four cops.

68

Ms Lava - Ah. I fear that prosecutors, at least the high fliers, are primarily motivated by winning. I am constantly seeing prosecutors running for elected office and touting a 100% conviction rate. I don't think I'd vote for anyone who never lost a case, but other people like that sort of thing.

It's a pity you didn't read for the Bar. I think you'd make an excellent prosecutor. If I were to cast Rumpole from among the assembled company, you'd be on the short list for Hilda.

69

64/seatackled, my apologies. Forget everything I wrote earlier.

Meinert is obviously guilty of all accusations. No one should have any doubt that all accusations are true because (a) many people to seem to feel that Meinert is a slimeball and, more importantly, (b) none of the woman accusing him would have any reason to lie. Because there is absolutely no doubt that all accusations are true, if charges were to be brought, there would be no need to waste time and money on a trial to determine his guilt or innocence.

There. I'm sure that's much more to your liking.

70

Roma keeps bringing logic, reason into this in well laid out arguments

71

@67: Thank you again for paying me the compliment of avoiding the reasons I gave @36 for doubting Brownstone’s reporting. Your appeal to authority adds to the compliment — you do know that you’re engaging in logical fallacy, not argument, correct? Please tell us you do.

“No offense but I don’t take the word of anonymous internet commenters...”

As I didn’t offer my word as proof, your grand refusal to take something you were not actually offered comes across as more than slightly amusing, my fellow pseudonymous internet commenter. The points I raised @36 stand on their own. Absent proof that Delvonn Heckard ever met Ed Murray, Brownstone’s advancing of Heckard’s rape claims means she may have advanced false claims of rape. Likewise, her contra-statistical words about the supposed exceptional rarity of false rape claims are entirely her words, not mine.

Please feel free to learn how appeals to authority and personal attacks are not valid arguments, but indicators of the absence of same.

73

@69

Don't know if it's to my liking, since I don't really find much value to your content. Did you at least focus on the allegations themselves, rather than on whether Ms. Lava is being overly credulous in accepting them as true? If so, then sure, whether or not I agree or disagree, I would probably consider them more to my liking, at least in the sense that they would be on topic.

75

@38: Care to inform us as to just exactly how much time you spend on fantasizing about the sadistic mutilation of anyone who dares disagree with you? Because revealing the amount of time you expend upon such a healthy and commendable pursuit could really add weight to your other claims. (Trust me on this.)

@45: Commenter LateBloomer explained how humiliatingly wrong you were, back in that original thread. Since you missed it, here’s the link to his comment. Enjoy!

https://www.thestranger.com/savage-love/2018/01/24/25741451/savage-love/comments/351

76

@74: I mentioned reasons we might not want to accept Brownstone’s reporting on this topic at face value. You’re free to ignore or disregard those reasons, as you will; you have yet to engage them.

You’re the one who claimed we simply must accept her reporting unless a target of it filed suit against her. No one else is required to accept this stricture.

Have a good day.

81

Late Bloomer had his point of view @75, no where did he show I was wrong to point out the truth. And it was you who tried to put a mother seducing her adolescent son in a casual ex lover category, defending such abusive behaviour. Had a few of us convinced you were the LW.
@79, please don’t say things like that to people.

82

Five women come forward Roma @65, and you still need witnesses. Well, once you bother to read the article, you will see there are people the women told and other incidents pointing to this man being guilty. One woman tried to charge him with rape, but the time limit had passed. Also, why would an innocent man get an investigator to look into a woman’s life if he wasn’t guilty as hell.
Mr Venn @68, I’ve often thought I’d have enjoyed doing Law. Who is this Hilda chick, and why can’t I be Rumpole. Just a female version.

83

So there’s Dan and Sean.

Frizelle is the print editor, and I assume that has more to do with Pagemaker or something and whatever goes into the print version after it’s been through the wringer.

Anyone, or just crickets?

84

@77-79: All other believers in Brownstone’s reporting must be envious of your intellectual brilliance.

@80: Thanks again for your validation in not engaging my points @36.

@81: Please read LateBloomer’s comment again, and address any disagreements you might have to him.

86

@84, you are a joke. You brought Late Bloomer into this, it was you who adamently defended that mother’s behaviour. That the man who had been sexually groomed by his mother as a teen didn’t feel any guilt about it was not the point. His marriage blew up, his friends now would know what transpired. A real motherfucker, I’d say by now, his feelings would be very different. Are they?

87

@tensor

You made 3 points in comment 36.

Is 10% rare, exceedingly rare, or simply uncommon?
That's just nitpicking. Nobody cares.

You suggested Brownstone may have made false allegations in past articles.
Do you have any proof?
If so please provide it, if you do not then that is just your opinion, and nobody cares.

Now onto your third and final point.
"The real story here is trials-by-media of allegedly serious crimes, where the entire narrative is controlled by self-appointed prosecutors who answer to no public accountability, and where the accused never, ever gets a chance to clear his name."
There are libel laws in this country, and when the media breaks those laws they can be held accountable by the people or institutions that they have liabled.
Reporters/media Outlets can be held accountable, and those who have been defamed have the opportunity to clear their name.
All that is required is a court case.
Just like convicting a rapist.

I've engaged your points, and I have found them all to be nonsense.

Are you satisfied now?

88

@blip

Feel free to copy, paste and repost my comment #87.
Then he can't pretend you didn't address his points anymore.

89

@tensor

"Commenter LateBloomer explained how humiliatingly wrong you were, back in that original thread."

Late Bloomer did not say she was wrong, he disagreed with the way in which she had come to her conclusion, which is quite a different thing.

"I guess what I’m saying is, I’m sticking with my conviction that you can’t tell one way or the other from the letter what shape the letter writer is in. Too much depends on what was said how and in what circumstances, as well as a better knowledge of the players involved."
LateBloomer #362

Does this mean that you were "humiliatingly wrong"?

90

@86, cont: not that a victim of sexual abuse should ever feel guilty. The perpetrator, in that instance the mother, all guilt lies with her.

92

I try to think of it like this. Imagine you are a parent, you raise your kid and there are no warning signs(this is important), but when the kid is 40, you find out the kid is a murderer. From your perspective, the kid is still the 8 year drawing pictures for the fridge, crying over a lost stuffed animal, etc. But to the rest of the world your kid, the one you saw at Christmas, the one who made you that lumpy coffee mug at camp, is a murderer.

What do you do? You never saw any of this. You can't picture your kid doing this. Everyone is telling you it happened, your kid has confessed, but you can't reconcile both sets of truth. And that's the thing. The kid is both a horrible murderer and the loving baby you raised. Your instinct is to defend that baby, and that is completely understandable.

I'm not going to get mad or upset at you because you are defending the baby you raised. I'm not going to get mad because you don't phrase everything exactly perfectly when the talking heads on cable go after you.

Doesn't mean I'm not going to hold the murderer accountable. It just means that I understand how difficult it is to reconcile two different parts of a person's personality when you have only ever been exposed to one half. Having sympathy/empathy/understanding for you as a parent is different than excusing the actions of the kid.

93

Meinert and Murray were known to be very unpleasant by many people lower in the food chain long before they were outed.

94

@84 (and @36 and @i-lost-track-jesus-christ-you-have-a-lot-of-time-on-your-hands) - I looked up Jeff Simpson, since your dismissal of Sydney Brownstone’s reporting seems predicated on a single detail in her reporting about him. You think she didn’t do enough to check his story? His story has since been validated by multiple other victims. Your objection, near as I can tell, amounts to a petty quibble. She was covering his life and his claims, and the substance of those claims has proven to be valid.

In relation to this story, you keep saying that we haven’t heard from five women, just one reporter. That’s how reporting works, and libel law is what keeps journalists from making stuff up. You keep saying the guy is innocent until proven guilty. By that same token, Brownstone is innocent of the crime you’re alleging - libel - until proven guilty.

You’re also overlooking the fact that Meinert has released a statement. He didn’t say: “This is false.” He said he’s been pushy and handsy. He released a set of deceptive polygraph tests. That all but validates the fact that these incidents are real - it doesn’t leave much room to claim what you seem to be claiming - that nothing Brownstone puts into writing can be trusted. I agree - he’s not guilty of anything in legal terms until he is charged, tried and convicted. I disagree that these allegations don’t belong in public reporting. He’s a public figure. Multiple women claim he’s acted inappropriately. That’s news.

I used to think you were trying to create constructive, fact-based dialogue here on Slog, but whenever I dig into the substance of what you’re saying, it winds up being really flimsy.

You act like every post you create is authoritative and researched, but I think you just want to boss people around and shout your feelings on certain submects over other commenters. You don’t like the homeless, you don’t like Charles Mudede, you don’t like Sydney Brownstone (or you identify with Meinert - it feels like a toss-up as to your motivation).

It’s disillusioning. What are the comments for? If it’s just a bunch of jackasses beating their own personal dead horses, we should all just stop commenting.

95

94: "He said he’s been pushy and handsy. He released a set of deceptive polygraph tests. That all but validates the fact that these incidents are real"

You mob mentality people are nuts! I'm glad you're not on MY jury, not thay I'd even get a trial in your world of court of public opinion

96

@95 - Mob mentality? Ha hah ha. My comment was really mild, and I’m taking his own statements into consideration. A mob mentality would sound more like this: “Filth like Dave Meinert don’t deserve freedom. He needs to be locked up and have his balls chopped off, not necessarily in that order. He needs to be ass-raped and then maybe he’ll understand the trauma he caused those women. I don’t care what he says!”

Got it? Me saying: he has confirmed that incidents took place and that he was inappropriate and therefore Syndey Brownstone is not full of shit = NOT a mob mentality. Me advocating for Dave Meinert to be physically punished = mob mentality.

However, if those two things sound the same to you, you might want to consider what that makes your mentality.

97

There are many of us who have known Dave and worked with him throughout the years; who are not shocked by these allegations. We did not know they were happening of course, but other characteristics of his lead us to not being shocked.

These events are quite tragic for many. Especially the victims. Yes, I said 'victims' as I believe their telling of the alleged events. This is also tragic for Dave's family and those in the various communities he has propogated who rely on him for much. Truly sad.

Bill Cosby's legacy of similar behavior I think is an appropriate analogy. He was a pillar not only the African American community and a stalwart of the Civil Rights movement (he actually provided many of the financial resources that enabled MLK's famous 'I have a Dream' speech on the National Mall), he put many through college, enriched children's lives and was generally recognized as an upstanding father and friend to many.

It is possible for these two contradicting persona's to exist... The cause of understandable confusion, anxiety, frustration and justified anger.

Sunshine is indeed the best disinfectant in these circumstances and it is right this is coming to light. I think Sydney's reporting has been professional and thorough.

My heart goes out to those who have suffered and hope this 'sunshine' mends wounds and changes horrific behavior.
To those who doubt the allegations, I can understand not wanting to believe this. It's awful. Especially to all who have benefitted (not exploitively) by Dave's influence and friendship.

But again, for what it's worth - I sadly believe this to be true.

98

@97: Nicely put.

99

Ms Lava - Hilda, Rumpole's wife, a.k.a. She Who Must Be Obeyed, is much better suited to your character. Rumpole trades in doubt, and always defends (in his one prosecution, entered into only because Hilda's visiting friend Charmian Nicholls finds it pitiful that Rumpole can't afford to buy Hilda a Crock-a-Gleem dishwasher, he realizes in the middle of his cross-examination that the defendant was too tall to swing a Zulu knobkerrie over his head in a low room and gets him off. Besides, Hilda dominates Rumpole in a way it's impossible to picture anybody doing to you.

100

Dr Zaius off their meds again :( get them some help plz.

101

"Just because these things didn't happen in my presence doesn't mean they didn't happen."
I am sure that Bill Clinton's long list of victims will agree.

102

Occam’s Razor. It is far more likely that one person is lying, than 5 people lying about the same exact thing. The odds of the former are probably less then “rare occasions”.

103

I meant, odds of the latter

104

Love the people who say "Why did they wait till now to say anything?". What you really mean to say is "Victims should just be silent".

105

@3: Consensual sex, legal or not, is a radically different thing than rape.

@63: "that every faux white liberal on this site has a racist friend that they look the other way for, and even excuse as 'a good guy' or 'shes [sic] actually really nice to her friends'."

Well, sure, because you defined the people who actually hold others to account out of you group of consideration with the qualifier "faux". Disingenuous argument.

@95: We're not anyone's jury in this context, hence the not-legally-binding speculation (some of it more reasonable IMO, but that's just one more internet stranger's opinion). Sadly, I never get selected for juries because I tend to not project and don't read into what people say but instead deal with denotation, which can be very different from intended meaning.

@102: Thank you for a bit of reason, which actually leads me right into


The rape/assault apologists here are ridiculous. They can categorically fuck off.

The people decrying the horror of our society not immediately accepting an isolated claim of wrongdoing are ridiculous. Human probability assessments are Bayesian - we use our knowledge of prior probabilities, which are very much informed by both our experiences with a given behavior in general and a given person's behavior specifically, to inform our assement of probability once new evidence has been considered. We also, ideally, apply Occam's Razor, as Little brown bag suggests, and while any random person can lie (and will, sometimes for no obvious reason), multiple people lying about the same thing, with similar details and no obvious means of coordination, is SUBSTANTIALLY less likely. So of course multiple people (women, in many cases, boys/men in Murray's case) accusing someone of assault or rape are substantially more credible. Of course people find claims consistent with their personal experience, of which they have direct knowledge (if unreliable knowledge, but most people don't question the reliability of their own perceptions, despite the fact that none of us are reliable witnesses), more credible than those that contradict their experience.

This isn't a bug, it's a feature: on average, it leads one to correct beliefs more than incorrect beliefs, though it is confounded in particular classes of cases by systemic bias that prevents one from having relevant knowledge about actual frequencies/probabilities regarding specific sets of occurances from personal experience. I'm sorry about the unhappiness that this precipitates for a lot of people, but it's a fact of material reality, so I suggest developing a coping mechanism. Likewise, people in any/all social positions should go out of our ways to learn the perspectives of people in different situations to fight that systemic bias.

106

You’re kind of stepping on Maher’s own response here. He’s said it more than once to his guests. He said it to Geraldo -‘No, what you mean is that he just hasn’t done it to YOU.’

107

@87: “Is 10% rare, exceedingly rare, or simply uncommon?
That's just nitpicking.”

Wrong. Words mean things. We call a diamond “rare” exactly because we know far, far fewer than one out of ten rocks will contain a diamond.

“Nobody cares.”

Wrong. Multiple commenters in that thread, myself included, disagreed with Brownstone’s use of the word.

Words mean things. When a reporter starts saying her words mean whatever she wants them to mean, she’s waving a huge red flag to tell you her words are more likely to be propaganda than fact. You should be very cautious of anything else she tells you.

“You suggested Brownstone may have made false allegations in past articles.
Do you have any proof?”

Um, the allegations of rape against Murray have never been validated in any court. Therefore, anyone who makes or repeats them may be spreading false allegations of rape. Brownstone has done this. You’re welcome.

“There are libel laws in this country, and when the media breaks those laws they can be held accountable by the people or institutions that they have liabled.”

So, you and blip live in a world where lawsuits do not cost money, they do not prolong the pain of the wrongly-accused, and no lawsuit means no foul. What is the color of the sky in your world?

“I've engaged your points, and I have found them all to be nonsense.”

You’ve waved your hands and proven nothing. Thanks for playing.

108

I will now play the part of my one-time hero, tensor:

“Uh, guys, in our system, you are innocent until proven guilty, and this protection must be respected in journalism, as well as the courts. No allegation can be published unless a man is tried and convicted. Please - no rush to judgment. A man’s reputation is at stake!”

So what about Sydney Brownstone?

“She is a lying bitch who should not be listened to. I have found her guilty of libel.”

Got it, everyone? Tensor has spoken. His word is final.

109

Get some help tensor, you’ve obviously got Big issues with women and trust.

110

@109 - I have to respectfully disagree. Every tensor comment is documented and well reasoned. He knows how to post links to the Poppe Report! That’s how you know he is Objective(tm). He says serious things like, “Ed Murray never had his day in court.” How could you mistake his attitude towards Brownstone for virulent misogyny? If anything, Brownstone owes HIM an apology for ever accusing Murray, Meinert or any other man not convicted of a crime of ever doing anything wrong.

111

And I’ll just add - I hope tensor chimes in from vacation one last time. Not enough threads end on a tensor comment. He really should always have the last word, because he knows so much, contributes so constructively, and doesn’t just come in here to disagree.

112

@107 you are worthy.

114

@113 - tensor is the worst kind of commenter. Thinks he’s on a mission to introduce fact and reason to the Slog just because he read a report or two and can copy/paste a hyperlink, but he’s just a troll - when checked, his positions crumble in a dust of fallacy and false equivalence. I realize I have now sunk to his level, but I hope it helps him see himself for what he really is: one of the multitude of people who ruin fora like this for other users, especially when he presumes to tell people when they can/cannot comment or when they have or have not made a valid argument. He also dominates the end of every thread, as if he who comments last, wins. He who comments last needs to get a grip. I know I do!

115

113: Oh....hadn't thought of that. All is explained. You'd think, not being mayor anymore, that he'd be getting more relaxed, not "tens-or".


    Please wait...

    Comments are closed.

    Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


    Add a comment
    Preview

    By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.