The next dam to break? Kevin Spacey and child sex abuse.

The fact that he allows it may have happened, tells me he believes it wouldn't have been out of character for him. If someone accused me of that, even drunk, I can tell you 100% it would not be true. There would be no doubt in my mind, as there seems to be in his. It reads a lot like the Bush apology. They knew it was possible Mr. Bush did behave that way, although they couldn't remember the exact incident. The only leeway I allowed in that incident was the possibility of dementia. Drunkenness does not deserve such leeway. 

Does he believe it could have happened or was it his way of avoiding calling his accuser a liar?
Just because someone doesn't go all out and deny it happened doesn't mean it did. Saying "I honestly do not remember the encounter, it would have been over 30 years ago."   It came across to me as he can't remember the event, the party, the date of the alleged offence, even actually meeting him or anything about the occasion.  How can he deny something that he can't remember anything at all about?

The drunken behaviour "excuse" didn't come across to me as an excuse either but  more in line of what Rapp had described him at the time of the event. Rapp said his initial impression when Spacey came in the room was that he was drunk. Spacey comment on this was
 "But if I did behave then as he describes, I owe him the sincerest apology for what would have been deeply inappropriate drunken behavior"     that, in no way, makes it an excuse on Spacey's part.  IF he had done this then he agrees it would be deeply inappropriate behaviour.   There's that big IF in there that casts doubt in Spacey's mind of the validation of the offence IMO.

Another question that casts doubt on this whole saga is, if Rapp arrived at that party as he said he did, where, in his own words, he knew no one and got bored then why did he not leave rather than go into the bedroom to watch television? He arrived there on his own so there was no reason for him not to leave on his own, he did eventually.

I make no excuses for Spacey IF all of it is true, but it seems to me as if social media has acted as prosecutor,judge and jury in all of this on the say so of one person and the onus is on the " guilty" to prove his innocence rather than being innocent until proven guilty.

I guarantee that if Spacey had been someone's husband,son, uncle, nephew or a good friend of anyone on this forum then the thread would have taken a totally different route than it has on this.

I think this is the lesson that we all need to take away from where we are w/sex and consent and powerful people (men, imo, more so than women as women seem to have less of a sense of entitlement to other's bodies);

In the past, when being gay was almost always a secret, when women had to pretend that they weren't sexual, man felt the need to MAKE THE ADVANCE. And the advancer couldn't tell until after the advance was made whether it would be WANTED or not.

That is the problem w/living in hypocrisy. Rather than acknowledging that homosexuality exists or that women have and want sex sometimes, we had to live in a world where everything was "signals".

I think the world our kids inhabit has much more honesty and openness when it comes to sexuality in all its forms.

I hope that means we can move past the past and all its "signals" and pretending and focus on the most important factor in sex - clear CONSENT and then focus next on health and safety.

I just think it's wrong and very scary for people to automatically jump to the conclusion that Spacey is guilty. And I mean JUMP- not enough facts. None of us were there. This seemed to happen so fast! The sanctimony of this board really annoys me sometimes.

I did read the article (as well as a few others) and posed 6 questions. What is your point?

Except KS has made an official social media statement and it was a non-denial. That's what's feeding the frenzy and that's why KS defenders are playing semantics.

No, not playing semantics either--there are those who are simply stating that proof/facts matter and it is very troublesome that social media has become judge and jury.

In KS's statement, I read that he stated he did not remember the incident happening--that appeared to be a denial. He then stated that IF it did happen then he gave a heartfelt apology to the accuser.


Funny thing in that was that most who are "reading between the lines/inserting what they think they read" about KS's "guilt" didn't think that hey--the accuser never approached KS before about this, that he's possibly finding out about this claim by social media/all over the Internet!


I don't give 2 hoots about KS--really cannot stand him.

I do care that social media has become something that destroys people.

You think The accuser should confront the person who assaulted them?

The person who was assaulted doesn't need to be kept quiet because someone may lose their job. Why should a victim of a sex crime be told to be quiet because of the trickle down effect.?

.

Not sure who Jeffrey Epstein is. That said, I've heard rumours about Spacey and younger men for years. Didn't realize any were underage.

My anger is also about the fact that in outing out that statement, Spacey contributes to the myth all gays - ok, specifically gay men - are predatory pedophiles.

OK we're now playing a language game. He did not say he didn't remember the incident happening......an instance of something happening.( the assault)


What he did say was he didn't remember the encounter ....an unexpected or casual meeting with someone .( meeting Rapp at that particular time)

So you expect every well known person out there to consult with a PR firm before they actually make a statement about anything just to make sure they have the right words? They're not in a court of law but it does seem that they are in a court of public opinion far too often these days and that court of public opinion is capable of tarring and feathering anyone they choose on any particular day and possibly ruin someone's life in the process.

They've already decided to end House if Cards because of the allegations, and one other project is either cancelled or in jeopardy. I suspect Peabsby is correct.

It's not admitting he did it either. Would he be guilty if he didn't respond? That's also saying nothing.

You are assuming quite a bit here, which was my point of my posting anyway--social media has become judge and jury---proof be damned.

And you seem to be overly dramatic and guilty of changing words/meaning here--

First, KS did not say he "didn't recall" as you wrote--he stated that he did not remember (and IF he was drunk, may explain why he did not remember anything--let alone remember something, while possibly being drunk--30 years ago). His response did not invalidate the accusation by the accuser.

Do YOU remember everything you did 30 years ago? While possibly inebriated?

Secondly, I did not say that social media was destroying society--I stated, and fully believe because I see it happening, that it is troublesome that social media has become judge and jury.

One would think that "someone who works in an environment where social media is important, PR is important..." would realize that words matter and twisting them to suit your point of view invalidates what you do say.

HOC was already going to finish, not due to this furore.