Disciple of Fate wrote:
Again, for all we know the investigation could have consisted of them putting a guy on a spinning chair and then racing him around the office, this is a company with its own financial interests to protect, not an institution determined to find out the truth.

 Polonius wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
So hold on a minute, they investigated and he did not commit the crime to which he was accused and reinstated, how does that not make her claims false?

If I accuse you of something that is later found to not be true in an investigation, would that not make my original statement false?

So, while there is a huge gap between criminally filing a false report (which as all crimes involves intent, in this case to deceive) and a person not being guilty of a crime, the fact nobody actually filed a false police report really means that nobody is going to be prosecuted for filing a false report.

Further, the investigation was likely focused on three things:
1) did a crime occur
2) did abuse or harassment incompatible with the corporate image occur
3) did anything scandalous that's bad for the brand occur.

In an investigation like this, you need to get past the general or conclusory accusations (He emotionally abused me! He sexually assaulted me!) and look at the specific allegations. So, AMC may have decided that while she more or less accurately described his behavior (his actual actions), while she saw that as abuse/assault, they did not. They may also have determined that her report was not fully accurate. Or, they may have decided that her repot was accurate, and he in fact did abuse/assault her, but not to the level that will damage the network.

It's easy to blow off the internal investigation as being either kangaroo court or simply for show, but my gut tells me that they had a serious talk with Hardwick about the accusations, and about who or what could confirm the accusations. If they were satisfied that nothing terribly incriminating came up, and he didn't do anything they couldn't stomach, then clearing him makes sense.

Just because they dont' see the need to take action doesn't mean she was lying. In fact, it's unlikely that she is. That doesn't mean every detail she reported was accurate, nor does it mean we all have to accept her interpretation of those details.

 Formosa wrote:
So that brings me back to my original question.

Are the police not automatically called in accustation such as these, they must be called in the U.K., is it not the same in the US?

 Ustrello wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Again, for all we know the investigation could have consisted of them putting a guy on a spinning chair and then racing him around the office, this is a company with its own financial interests to protect, not an institution determined to find out the truth.

And why would they protect something if there was proof out there that could hurt them (the company)

 Desubot wrote:
I think it depends on the district but iirc they will only get involved if she actually reports it to them

if not since nothing was filed then no all of this becomes a private matter.

(but im not the law so i have no clue this is just my assumption)

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Again, for all we know the investigation could have consisted of them putting a guy on a spinning chair and then racing him around the office, this is a company with its own financial interests to protect, not an institution determined to find out the truth.

And why would they protect something if there was proof out there that could hurt them (the company)

Because if there was proof Dykstra would have come out with it? There is no conclusive proof hence him getting his job back. We have no idea if they took him back out of fairness or financial reasons.

 feeder wrote:

Spoiler:

DarkTraveler777 wrote:Yeah, I was surprised and happy with the outcome.

A lot of people are angry about AMC's decision, however.

These tweets sum up one aspect of the anger and I just can't understand their perspective:
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/kathy-griffin-dramatic-reaction-chris-hardwick-cleared-abuse-allegations-232025594.html

Khaleesi Griff
@keltothelean
wrote:The outpouring of fanboy/girl glee and triumph over Chris Hardwick getting his job back underscores the point that women have nothing to gain from coming forward. I expect Dykstra wrote her essay expecting Hardwick would suffer little to no consequences.

The Day Is My Enemy
@GreatDestroyer_
wrote:Honestly, I don't give a gak if AMC investigated Chris Hardwick and thinks he's innocent. That's believing the abuser and not the abused, and it's a real bad look for AMC to bring back the guy that just caused all the controversy recently.

One person's accusation with no real evidence makes Hardwick automatically an abuser in these peoples' eyes, and even after an investigation found nothing substantive to back up the accusers claim he is still guilty? Of what? Dykstra's bad opinion of their relationship? Just absurd. Dykstra claimed to have evidence to back up her accusations but never presented it. She never went to police with her claims of sexual assault (and even changed that phasing in a revision of the essay, then changed it back again after being called out on it).

So, no evidence is required for these people to paint Hardwick in a certain light as an abuser and perpetrator of sexual assault. However, when an investigation is done and nothing corroborates the claims made by Dykstra it is an example of systemic oppression of women and not believing their claims of abuse/assault? WTF?

All of this insanity over a single person's wild claims. This is not okay.

That is the echoes from the lunatic fringe. Twitter is the worst possible vehicle for public discourse. It amplifies the insane and outrageous.

Slate Article wrote:Hardwick is also the host of the NBC game show The Wall; the broadcast network has yet to announce whether he will stay on. But Hardwick’s reinstatement at AMC may indicate that #MeToo oustings are more likely to take place if there are multiple accusers and if the alleged infractions happened in professional, rather than domestic, settings.

 Polonius wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
So that brings me back to my original question.

Are the police not automatically called in accustation such as these, they must be called in the U.K., is it not the same in the US?

Not at all, and even if a company were to call the police because they received a report, it still wouldn't be criminal.

So, if I accused somebody of a crime in an internal email, and the company called the police, unless I confirm that accusation in a signed statement to the police, I haven't actually filed the report.

 Ustrello wrote:
The #MeToo movement has turned ugly fast and in reality is causing as much harm as help. These people who file false accusations do more to hurt actual victims than anything else

Combine with how some of these federal programs work (like Title IX), I can see how some people are becoming jaded and starting to believe accusers less and less

 Ustrello wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Again, for all we know the investigation could have consisted of them putting a guy on a spinning chair and then racing him around the office, this is a company with its own financial interests to protect, not an institution determined to find out the truth.

And why would they protect something if there was proof out there that could hurt them (the company)

Because if there was proof Dykstra would have come out with it? There is no conclusive proof hence him getting his job back. We have no idea if they took him back out of fairness or financial reasons.

Finding a talking head (for lack of a better phrase) is easy, so my guess is fairness and they found her statement to be questionable and or false

 feeder wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
The #MeToo movement has turned ugly fast and in reality is causing as much harm as help. These people who file false accusations do more to hurt actual victims than anything else

Combine with how some of these federal programs work (like Title IX), I can see how some people are becoming jaded and starting to believe accusers less and less

To quote somebody or other: "That's just, like, your opinion, man."

Again: in this case, no accusation was filed. It was standard 'he said, she said', and AMC engaged in standard corporate CYA.

I might be mistaken, but from where I'm sitting it looks like some guys are projecting their own bias onto this case a wee bit much.

 DarkTraveler777 wrote:

 feeder wrote:

Spoiler:

DarkTraveler777 wrote:Yeah, I was surprised and happy with the outcome.

A lot of people are angry about AMC's decision, however.

These tweets sum up one aspect of the anger and I just can't understand their perspective:
https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/kathy-griffin-dramatic-reaction-chris-hardwick-cleared-abuse-allegations-232025594.html

Khaleesi Griff
@keltothelean
wrote:The outpouring of fanboy/girl glee and triumph over Chris Hardwick getting his job back underscores the point that women have nothing to gain from coming forward. I expect Dykstra wrote her essay expecting Hardwick would suffer little to no consequences.

The Day Is My Enemy
@GreatDestroyer_
wrote:Honestly, I don't give a gak if AMC investigated Chris Hardwick and thinks he's innocent. That's believing the abuser and not the abused, and it's a real bad look for AMC to bring back the guy that just caused all the controversy recently.

One person's accusation with no real evidence makes Hardwick automatically an abuser in these peoples' eyes, and even after an investigation found nothing substantive to back up the accusers claim he is still guilty? Of what? Dykstra's bad opinion of their relationship? Just absurd. Dykstra claimed to have evidence to back up her accusations but never presented it. She never went to police with her claims of sexual assault (and even changed that phasing in a revision of the essay, then changed it back again after being called out on it).

So, no evidence is required for these people to paint Hardwick in a certain light as an abuser and perpetrator of sexual assault. However, when an investigation is done and nothing corroborates the claims made by Dykstra it is an example of systemic oppression of women and not believing their claims of abuse/assault? WTF?

All of this insanity over a single person's wild claims. This is not okay.

That is the echoes from the lunatic fringe. Twitter is the worst possible vehicle for public discourse. It amplifies the insane and outrageous.

Yeah, that is a fair point, but I am seeing arguments like those not just on Twitter. The extremist view point behind those tweets seems to be leaking into more conventional media outlets.

I know Slate is biased and leans pretty heavily left, but they still published this:

https://slate.com/culture/2018/07/chris-hardwick-to-return-to-amcs-talking-dead-after-abuse-allegations.html

Bold emphasis is mine*

Slate Article wrote:Hardwick is also the host of the NBC game show The Wall; the broadcast network has yet to announce whether he will stay on. But Hardwick’s reinstatement at AMC may indicate that #MeToo oustings are more likely to take place if there are multiple accusers and if the alleged infractions happened in professional, rather than domestic, settings.

From my reading it seems the author is disappointed by not only AMC's decision, but that #MeToo "oustings" can't happen with a single, unverified source. That is scary to me, and seems indicative that this viewpoint has roots deeper than the Twitter fringe.

Even the title of the article, "Chris Hardwick to Return to Talking Dead After 'Careful' AMC Review" tips the author's hand that the piece disagrees with the outcome of the event. Why put the word careful in shudder quotes? It suggests that the author believes the review is suspicious, yes? The AMC statement even had the words "careful" and "review" right next to each other, so arguing the author/editor was simply quoting AMC's release doesn't exactly fly when the title doesn't include review in those same quotes.

"Chris Hardwick to Return to Talking Dead After 'Careful Review' by AMC" has a very different reading than what Slate went with.

I dunno, maybe I am seeing crap that isn't there, but what started off as a positive movement (MeToo) has turned into (at least for some people) an ugly lynch mob looking to "oust" whomever they can.

AMC Networks have completed their investigation of Talking Dead host Chris Hardwick, ultimately leading to a decision which reinstates his role within the network.

“Following a comprehensive assessment by AMC, working with Ivy Kagan Bierman of the firm Loeb & Loeb, who has considerable experience in this area, Chris Hardwick will return to AMC as the host of Talking Dead and Talking with Chris Hardwick," AMC Networks said in a statement. "We take these matters very seriously and given the information available to us after a very careful review , including interviews with numerous individuals, we believe returning Chris to work is the appropriate step.”

 Ustrello wrote:

 feeder wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
The #MeToo movement has turned ugly fast and in reality is causing as much harm as help. These people who file false accusations do more to hurt actual victims than anything else

Combine with how some of these federal programs work (like Title IX), I can see how some people are becoming jaded and starting to believe accusers less and less

To quote somebody or other: "That's just, like, your opinion, man."

Again: in this case, no accusation was filed. It was standard 'he said, she said', and AMC engaged in standard corporate CYA.

I might be mistaken, but from where I'm sitting it looks like some guys are projecting their own bias onto this case a wee bit much.

No not really just my opinion. It is one also shared by women I know who were sexually assaulted and harassed, but that is just like your opinion man

 Formosa wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

 feeder wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
The #MeToo movement has turned ugly fast and in reality is causing as much harm as help. These people who file false accusations do more to hurt actual victims than anything else

Combine with how some of these federal programs work (like Title IX), I can see how some people are becoming jaded and starting to believe accusers less and less

To quote somebody or other: "That's just, like, your opinion, man."

Again: in this case, no accusation was filed. It was standard 'he said, she said', and AMC engaged in standard corporate CYA.

I might be mistaken, but from where I'm sitting it looks like some guys are projecting their own bias onto this case a wee bit much.

No not really just my opinion. It is one also shared by women I know who were sexually assaulted and harassed, but that is just like your opinion man

I’m with you mate, pol just explained to me that police are not automatically called when an accusation is made, the medium does not matter here, if you make an accusation in the U.K. be it in a book, email whatever, the police get involved straight away and investigate, but apparently not in the states, it goes a long way to explain how people keep getting away with both the attack and false accusations ... it’s bloody mad!

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

 feeder wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
The #MeToo movement has turned ugly fast and in reality is causing as much harm as help. These people who file false accusations do more to hurt actual victims than anything else

Combine with how some of these federal programs work (like Title IX), I can see how some people are becoming jaded and starting to believe accusers less and less

To quote somebody or other: "That's just, like, your opinion, man."

Again: in this case, no accusation was filed. It was standard 'he said, she said', and AMC engaged in standard corporate CYA.

I might be mistaken, but from where I'm sitting it looks like some guys are projecting their own bias onto this case a wee bit much.

No not really just my opinion. It is one also shared by women I know who were sexually assaulted and harassed, but that is just like your opinion man

I’m with you mate, pol just explained to me that police are not automatically called when an accusation is made, the medium does not matter here, if you make an accusation in the U.K. be it in a book, email whatever, the police get involved straight away and investigate, but apparently not in the states, it goes a long way to explain how people keep getting away with both the attack and false accusations ... it’s bloody mad!

But again, how would you prove the allegations are false when there are no witnesses? You can't just throw everything that can't be proven on the false allegation pile, that would lead to an incredible amount of 'false accusation' cases given how many (or should I say few) of these sexual assault cases actually end up in court.

 Formosa wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

 feeder wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
The #MeToo movement has turned ugly fast and in reality is causing as much harm as help. These people who file false accusations do more to hurt actual victims than anything else

Combine with how some of these federal programs work (like Title IX), I can see how some people are becoming jaded and starting to believe accusers less and less

To quote somebody or other: "That's just, like, your opinion, man."

Again: in this case, no accusation was filed. It was standard 'he said, she said', and AMC engaged in standard corporate CYA.

I might be mistaken, but from where I'm sitting it looks like some guys are projecting their own bias onto this case a wee bit much.

No not really just my opinion. It is one also shared by women I know who were sexually assaulted and harassed, but that is just like your opinion man

I’m with you mate, pol just explained to me that police are not automatically called when an accusation is made, the medium does not matter here, if you make an accusation in the U.K. be it in a book, email whatever, the police get involved straight away and investigate, but apparently not in the states, it goes a long way to explain how people keep getting away with both the attack and false accusations ... it’s bloody mad!

But again, how would you prove the allegations are false when there are no witnesses? You can't just throw everything that can't be proven on the false allegation pile, that would lead to an incredible amount of 'false accusation' cases given how many (or should I say few) of these sexual assault cases actually end up in court.

Proof is in the pudding deciple, British system actually works, it’s not perfect but it seems to be a lot better than the American one... actually the whole UK police system is better than theirs, but that’s a different discussion.

As to proving the allegations are false, that’s what the police are for, they investigate and have a hell of a lot less bias than a company who is paying the person, just look at this thread alone, because the company did it in house some of you are hinting at a possible cover up, while others are saying that she lied and made false accusations.

Had the police been involved like they should have been, we would (possibly) have a definitive answer.

 Formosa wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Formosa wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

 feeder wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:
The #MeToo movement has turned ugly fast and in reality is causing as much harm as help. These people who file false accusations do more to hurt actual victims than anything else

Combine with how some of these federal programs work (like Title IX), I can see how some people are becoming jaded and starting to believe accusers less and less

To quote somebody or other: "That's just, like, your opinion, man."

Again: in this case, no accusation was filed. It was standard 'he said, she said', and AMC engaged in standard corporate CYA.

I might be mistaken, but from where I'm sitting it looks like some guys are projecting their own bias onto this case a wee bit much.

No not really just my opinion. It is one also shared by women I know who were sexually assaulted and harassed, but that is just like your opinion man

I’m with you mate, pol just explained to me that police are not automatically called when an accusation is made, the medium does not matter here, if you make an accusation in the U.K. be it in a book, email whatever, the police get involved straight away and investigate, but apparently not in the states, it goes a long way to explain how people keep getting away with both the attack and false accusations ... it’s bloody mad!

But again, how would you prove the allegations are false when there are no witnesses? You can't just throw everything that can't be proven on the false allegation pile, that would lead to an incredible amount of 'false accusation' cases given how many (or should I say few) of these sexual assault cases actually end up in court.

Proof is in the pudding deciple, British system actually works, it’s not perfect but it seems to be a lot better than the American one... actually the whole UK police system is better than theirs, but that’s a different discussion.

As to proving the allegations are false, that’s what the police are for, they investigate and have a hell of a lot less bias than a company who is paying the person, just look at this thread alone, because the company did it in house some of you are hinting at a possible cover up, while others are saying that she lied and made false accusations.

Had the police been involved like they should have been, we would (possibly) have a definitive answer.

 Polonius wrote:

 Desubot wrote:
I think it depends on the district but iirc they will only get involved if she actually reports it to them

if not since nothing was filed then no all of this becomes a private matter.

(but im not the law so i have no clue this is just my assumption)

Filing a false report, as a crime, is really treated as a form of perjury. Which means its not so much making a false statement, as making a knowingly false statement while under an obligation to tell the truth.

 Formosa wrote:
Historical sex crime proof, now that I think of it there is no reason why you would know what I’m talking about.

For example Katie price wrote about a sexual assault in her book, she didn’t call the police but they got involved as soon as they were aware and investigated.

Then in the US we have the mattress girl scandal, a woman lied and practically ruined a young mans life with nothing more than an accusation, you also have the rampant problem on university campuses where they don’t follow due process and as crazy as it seems some feminist extremists were advocating expelling people on an accusation alone... insanity.

So basically in the U.K. we have a small minority of false accusations, where in the US you have a cultural movement that advocates removal of due process and false accusations.

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Formosa wrote:
Historical sex crime proof, now that I think of it there is no reason why you would know what I’m talking about.

For example Katie price wrote about a sexual assault in her book, she didn’t call the police but they got involved as soon as they were aware and investigated.

Then in the US we have the mattress girl scandal, a woman lied and practically ruined a young mans life with nothing more than an accusation, you also have the rampant problem on university campuses where they don’t follow due process and as crazy as it seems some feminist extremists were advocating expelling people on an accusation alone... insanity.

So basically in the U.K. we have a small minority of false accusations, where in the US you have a cultural movement that advocates removal of due process and false accusations.

Surveys show that only 1 out of 6 rapes in the UK get reported to the police and out of those 1/6 on average 1/8-1/10th makes it to trial (CPS statistics combine with police data on rape or attempted rape reports). This is broadly in line with the overall US average and that in many European countries.

The US has a small minority of false accusations too, the few there are get blown out of proportion. The UK has a false report rate of about 3-4%, the US has roughly 5%. Its really splitting hairs here. Really, on the whole the UK system makes little difference on the total number because false allegations are a fraction of those reports that even get anywhere.

This is all just based on media perception of what is coming out of the US and enlarging the extremes.

 Ustrello wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:

 Ustrello wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
Again, for all we know the investigation could have consisted of them putting a guy on a spinning chair and then racing him around the office, this is a company with its own financial interests to protect, not an institution determined to find out the truth.

And why would they protect something if there was proof out there that could hurt them (the company)

Because if there was proof Dykstra would have come out with it? There is no conclusive proof hence him getting his job back. We have no idea if they took him back out of fairness or financial reasons.

Finding a talking head (for lack of a better phrase) is easy, so my guess is fairness and they found her statement to be questionable and or false

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
I read it, but like I said, a lot of this stuff are the extremes that get broad attention in the media and the internet, if you google you can find cases like that in the UK (like the student who had to wait for a trial for two years and then just got resolved because the police handed over 'new' evidence) but they just get less media attention because the political landscape isn't as polarized in those aspects. Honestly these sorts of witch hunts happen over everything in the US (remember the woman who got fired and threatened for flipping off Trump or just this week Gunn?), its nothing really relegated to this specific aspect of society. But no worries, Betsy DeVos is working on sexual assaults on campus, so yeah that's going to be a trainwreck.

Honestly, situations similar to Hardwick have happened in the Netherlands too and have been big on a national stage, but nobody hears of it outside of our own country.

 Ustrello wrote:

 Disciple of Fate wrote:
I read it, but like I said, a lot of this stuff are the extremes that get broad attention in the media and the internet, if you google you can find cases like that in the UK (like the student who had to wait for a trial for two years and then just got resolved because the police handed over 'new' evidence) but they just get less media attention because the political landscape isn't as polarized in those aspects. Honestly these sorts of witch hunts happen over everything in the US (remember the woman who got fired and threatened for flipping off Trump or just this week Gunn?), its nothing really relegated to this specific aspect of society. But no worries, Betsy DeVos is working on sexual assaults on campus, so yeah that's going to be a trainwreck.

Honestly, situations similar to Hardwick have happened in the Netherlands too and have been big on a national stage, but nobody hears of it outside of our own country.

The Title IX system is already kinda a trainwreck, I mean you look at the case in USC where they were purposefully trying to get rid of a student before doing an investigation and they had to pay out a couple hundred thousand dollars for it. Plus it is super easy to take advantage of, if you are the first to report/accuse in a situation nothing can be done to you by the school or the person you are accusing. So you are having people who have had drunken sex and the dude/girl will go to the title IX office and say he was sexually assaulted, even if it isn't true and it turns out he sexually assault the women and or other dude they school nor the other person can do anything about it legally or through the school.

 Ustrello wrote:


The Title IX system is already kinda a trainwreck, I mean you look at the case in USC where they were purposefully trying to get rid of a student before doing an investigation and they had to pay out a couple hundred thousand dollars for it. Plus it is super easy to take advantage of, if you are the first to report/accuse in a situation nothing can be done to you by the school or the person you are accusing. So you are having people who have had drunken sex and the dude/girl will go to the title IX office and say he was sexually assaulted, even if it isn't true and it turns out he sexually assault the women and or other dude they school nor the other person can do anything about it legally or through the school.