Zak Smith is suing his accusers

[Arnwolf666]

I’ve seen too many friends and family members dragged through family courts to judge based on accusations. It destroyed them. So I don’t judge. When one is handcuffed and taken from their homes and children for what they didn’t do one stops assuming.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Umbran]

You didn't have to be a russian agent to get blacklisted, you just had to be a communist sympathizer or a member of the CPUSA, and such people did indeed exist...

And not a one of them was a Communist agent of any threat to the US. As I said - nobody had done anything wrong.

 

[Sacrosanct]

These scenarios are always messy. Every accuser should be taken seriously, and every accused should be given at least some due process. And as a society, we do neither. We entrench on one side or the other, especially when the people involved are so polarizing. I wonder what Chris Hardwick's opinion on this would be.

 

[Gradine]

So, please notice that we are now debating the finer points of McCarthyism instead of talking about anything actually related to the issue of Zak Smith's abuses and the further pain (emotional and financial) being caused by this lawsuit. This is not an accident. This was by design.

When you lower yourself to debate arguments that are being made in bad faith you not only give them legitimacy they don't deserve, you allow the conversation to be steered away from what actually matters (which is very much intentional), and, board rules being what they are, far more likely to get shut down entirely, which is exactly what these individuals want in the first place.

The fact that this thread has gone on for eight pages (which are double the length they used to be, mind you) and have more posts discussing the finer points of the red scare than statements of support for the brave women who are being financially harassed for having the audacity to accuse their abuser in public speaks to just how successful these tactics are at controlling the conversation.

 

[Sacrosanct]

So, please notice that we are now debating the finer points of McCarthyism instead of talking about anything actually related to the issue of Zak Smith's abuses and the further pain (emotional and financial) being caused by this lawsuit. This is not an accident. This was by design.

Let me be clear. I'm not defending Zak. I personally don't like the guy based on his behavior from more than a decade ago, and certainly haven't been following him since then. But what else is an accused person supposed to do, if they were falsely accused? you're arguing that they can't sue for damages? No matter my personal feelings about Zak, I really disagree with the position that an accused has no legal recourse but to just take the accusation. If Zak has been falsely accused, this is exactly the recourse he should be taking.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I have similar fears for my wife - as she likes to run and we live in a country far more dangerous than the USA.
But I'm curious - why do you have fears of a cop pulling her over - I mean that is listed within your top fears presumably? Are there many instances of male cops taking advantage?

Cops are not the good guys in the US.

Aside from the story about the NYPD, there is the fight to make it explicitly clear in the law that sex with someone being detained or arrested cannot be consensual. It’s a fight because police departments campaign against changing the law in this way.

And the NYPD story is far from singular. I personally know several women who have been harassed or assaulted by cops. 3 separate women tried to report, and were physically intimidated by other cops in the police station until they left without reporting.

Can’t go any further into it than that, because it’d have less and less to do with sexual assault and thus the thread topic, but yeah, any interacting with police is cause for worry.

Oh, last thing. The dynamic where women aren’t believed and get nothing but further suffering when they report? That’s even worse when the perpetrator is in law enforcement.

 

[Gradine]

Let me be clear. I'm not defending Zak. I personally don't like the guy based on his behavior from more than a decade ago, and certainly haven't been following him since then. But what else is an accused person supposed to do, if they were falsely accused? you're arguing that they can't sue for damages? No matter my personal feelings about Zak, I really disagree with the position that an accused has no legal recourse but to just take the accusation. If Zak has been falsely accused, this is exactly the recourse he should be taking.

One: The likelihood that Zak has been falsely accused is so small at this point as to not be worth entertaining. You can argue this point, but you'd be wrong.
Two: The point of this kind of lawsuit is not to sue for "damages", it's to cause damage. Win or lose, these women are going to have to pay hand over fist for legal fees that they will not get back. The point is not recoup professional losses; it's to silence them, and anyone else in the future who might consider calling out their more powerful abusers in public.
Three: How do I know point two? Because there is basically zero chance that Zak does not land on his feet very shortly after all this blows over. Even if it never actually does blow over (which would be nice, but is a pipe dream at this point) there are more than enough people who would more willing to support Zak by buying his products over this that he isn't going to have to worry about it. Because there are a lot of people who really, really, suck. And whole hell of a lot more people who just don't care. Which is almost more tragic.
Four: Meanwhile, SLAPP suits such as these tend to either financially ruin people or force them to back down. Either way they lose. These women are having their lives ruined when there's at least, charitably, a 90-95% chance they've been telling the truth the entire time and warning the community about a known abuser. You're telling me you're okay with that?

 

[CleverNickName]

I believe Mandy. I believe she told the truth, and now Zak is making sure she gets punished for it.

It's appalling how many people choose to believe that Zak is the real victim here because his terrible reputation and seedy personal history are being tarnished further, instead of believing these victims of alleged abuse at the hands of a man with such a terrible reputation and seedy personal history.

If you are about to go to great lengths to defend him or his actions (Communism, seriously?) you don't really need to. We get it. You live in fear of being "falsely accused" of abuse, of having someone else's account being taken over your own. You need to know that this could never happen to you, and if it ever does you will have a safe means of recourse. You need your words to outweigh your reputation. And you have your reasons.

Bit of advice: don't use Zak S to build your argument against "false accusations." Find someone of higher repute to be your flagship.

 

[Sacrosanct]

One: The likelihood that Zak has been falsely accused is so small at this point as to not be worth entertaining. You can argue this point, but you'd be wrong.
Two: The point of this kind of lawsuit is not to sue for "damages", it's to cause damage. Win or lose, these women are going to have to pay hand over fist for legal fees that they will not get back. The point is not recoup professional losses; it's to silence them, and anyone else in the future who might consider calling out their more powerful abusers in public.
Three: How do I know point two? Because there is basically zero chance that Zak does not land on his feet very shortly after all this blows over. Even if it never actually does blow over (which would be nice, but is a pipe dream at this point) there are more than enough people who would more willing to support Zak by buying his products over this that he isn't going to have to worry about it. Because there are a lot of people who really, really, suck. And whole hell of a lot more people who just don't care. Which is almost more tragic.
Four: Meanwhile, SLAPP suits such as these tend to either financially ruin people or force them to back down. Either way they lose. These women are having their lives ruined when there's at least, charitably, a 90-95% chance they've been telling the truth the entire time and warning the community about a known abuser. You're telling me you're okay with that?

I'm sorry, but this is speculation. None of us knows for certain what happened. So you're making an assumption, and arguing that an accused should have no recourse, even if they were falsely accused. All you're doing is guessing. Just like the people who were certain that Chris Hardwick committed sexual assault when those accusations first game out.

It might be possible Zak did these things. It might even be probable. But unless it's certain without a shred of doubt with evidence, you can't deny him (or any accused) the right to legal recourse to defend him/her/themselves. No matter what your (general you) personal feelings are. That's not how the legal system is supposed to work.

Edit and no, I am not OK with victims being attacked again. I'd ask you to refrain from such accusations about my position or motives. I actually volunteer work in domestic violence groups, so I take this very seriously, and do not appreciate your implication that I'm OK with victims being continued to be victimized. All I'm arguing is that even accused are afforded some legal rights, and unless you were there and saw firsthand yourself, neither you or I know exactly what happened. And we don't deny rights based on our personal feelings about that person. These accusations are very serious, and yes, the victims should be given full attention and taken seriously. But that doesn't mean anyone accused has no rights, or the people you personally don't like shouldn't have rights.