Kevin Spacey found not liable in civil trial

[AndrewX]

If you haven't seen the Usual Suspects with Spacey, its a great movie.

Kevin Spacey was found not liable in $40 million civil trial after jurors reached a verdict Thursday. Accuser Anthony Rapp brought the case against him.


Kevin Spacey was found not liable in a civil sexual misconduct trial Thursday following more than an hour of deliberations by a jury in a New York federal courtroom. The lawsuit sought $40 million in damages.

"Mr. Spacey is grateful to live in a country where the citizens have a right to trial by impartial jurors who make their decision based on evidence and not rumor or social media," Spacey said through his lawyer Jennifer Keller in a statement to Fox News Digital.

"He is deeply thankful to this particular jury. This was a highly educated group of six women and five men, all except one college graduate and most with graduate degrees. Their verdict was swift and decisive. Justice was done today."

Jurors reached the verdict shortly before 4 p.m. ET in the civil lawsuit. The former "House of Cards" actor was accused of assault, battery and emotional distress stemming from an incident against Anthony Rapp in 1986 when Rapp was 14 years old.

"We're very grateful that this American jury saw through these false allegations," Keller said shortly after the verdict was read. "Spacey is deeply grateful. What's next is Mr. Spacey is going to be proving that he's innocent of anything he's been accused of."

"There was no truth to any of the allegations," Keller said. "This was a highly intelligent, highly educated jury. They're very, very bright people."

Richard Steigman, Rapp's lawyer, told Fox News Digital, "For myself, Anthony told his truth in court. While we respect the jury's verdict, nothing changes that."

Rapp initially made the accusations against Spacey in a Buzzfeed interview five years ago, to which Spacey issued a statement saying he didn't remember the encounter, but also apologized for the incident.

Kevin Spacey declares 'justice was done' after being found not liable in Anthony Rapp sex abuse lawsuit

Kevin Spacey not liable in Anthony Rapp sexual abuse lawsuit. New York jury dismisses $40 million civil misconduct suit Thursday following three-week trial.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Knuckle Ball]

I’d like to know more about why the jury did not believe Rapp’s allegations.

When Johnny Depp was suing Amber Heard for defamation the case went viral on social media; all of AH’s lies and BS finally caught up with her.

In this case, though, I had not heard a thing about any of this until I read this article.

Anyhow, if these accusations are indeed unfounded (as appears to be the case) I am pleased that Spacey has a chance to clear his name.

 

[AndrewX]

I’d like to know more about why the jury not believe Rapp’s allegations.

When Johnny Depp was suing Amber Heard for defamation the case went viral on social media; all of AH’s lies and BS finally caught up with her.

In this case, though, I had not heard a thing about any of this until I read this article.

Anyhow, if these accusations are indeed unfounded (as appears to be the case) I am pleased that Spacey has a chance to clear his name.

I'm sure we'll find out more soon, but his work as an actor maybe over, who knows.

 

[Vera.Reis]

Friendly reminder that not being convicted is not proof that you did or didn't commit the crime. Evidence in sexual assault cases are particularly difficult to prove. Just bcz a civil court found him not guilty, doesn't mean he didn't do it, it just means there was insufficient proof to find him guilty. Which is not surprising given how long ago the allege situation occurred.

 

[Vera.Reis]

Not guilty is not the same as innocent, it just means that there isn't enough proof for the government to sanction him in some way. Conflating being found not guilty with innocence is a step too far.

 

[Soccersweeper]

Not guilty is not the same as innocent, it just means that there isn't enough proof for the government to sanction him in some way. Conflating being found not guilty with innocence is a step too far.

Yes and no. There is no way to legally prove innocence. So if you're not guilty you should get the benefit of the doubt. In this case it was a civil, not criminal trial, so the standard was easier for the accuser to meet, yet failed. Here you just gave to prove it was 51% likely Spacey did it.

 

[Vera.Reis]

Yes and no. There is no way to legally prove innocence. So if you're not guilty you should get the benefit of the doubt. In this case it was a civil, not criminal trial, so the standard was easier for the accuser to meet, yet failed. Here you just gave to prove it was 51% likely Spacey did it.

Civil is on the balance of probability, but the accusations are 40 years old, obviously evidence would be difficult to gather.

No one has to give him the benefit of the doubt based on a trial, only the government. Despite some opinions, the rest of us have no obligation to treat you as innocent just because you were found not guilty. The only thing you're owed for that is the government not being able to sanction you.

 

[Soccersweeper]

Civil is on the balance of probability, but the accusations are 40 years old, obviously evidence would be difficult to gather.

No one has to give him the benefit of the doubt based on a trial, only the government. Despite some opinions, the rest of us have no obligation to treat you as innocent just because you were found not guilty. The only thing you're owed for that is the government not being able to sanction you.

Incorrect. It is standard morality to treat people as innocent until proven otherwise. The courts took this from morality, not the other way around. This is why people don't typically accuse people of things without proof. Our ethics are based on morality, not what the government says.

I always thought the accusations against Spacey seemed implausible and am happy to see him prevail. Any sex assault is difficult to prove because there is almost no physical evidence, with the only evidence being he said / she said, or in this case he said / he said. With other crimes there is usually objective evidence. If someone is murdered there is a body to examine. If there is theft the item is there or it isn't, and there may be video. There's rarely video of sexual assault. It should not be easy to convict someone and take away their freedom based solely on a good story. You wouldn't want to live in a society where people make wild accusations and people accept it as fact. See East Germany.

 

[Vera.Reis]

Incorrect. It is standard morality to treat people as innocent until proven otherwise. The courts took this from morality, not the other way around. This is why people don't typically accuse people of things without proof. Our ethics are based on morality, not what the government says.

I always thought the accusations against Spacey seemed implausible and am happy to see him prevail. Any sex assault is difficult to prove because there is almost no physical evidence, with the only evidence being he said / she said, or in this case he said / he said. With other crimes there is usually objective evidence. If someone is murdered there is a body to examine. If there is theft the item is there or it isn't, and there may be video. There's rarely video of sexual assault. It should not be easy to convict someone and take away their freedom based solely on a good story. You wouldn't want to live in a society where people make wild accusations and people accept it as fact. See East Germany.

No, i have no obligation to live by your moral standards. If someone was accused of rape, I'm staying away from them, I'm allowed to put my safety first and fuck their feelings about it. If someone is accused of theft, I don't want them in my home or near me. I'm allowed to decide for myself if I think accusations are credible enough for me to take measures to protect myself.

The last part you are correct, the government shouldn't be able to take away your freedoms without proving you guilty. Only the government owes you innocent until proven guilty.

People really try to push the governments obligations to individuals in the charter on to the rest of us, I'm not the government, I don't owe you Charter rights!

 

[jcpro]

Good. Maybe he can start making movies again because he's one helluva actor. Shipping News was a really great flick.

 

[Vera.Reis]

Let's not forget he was accused of, and found guilty of, sexual misconduct on house of cards set and had to pay over 30M for it. He's also facing multiple charges in the UK from different victims. He's never coming back to acting, and I hope the other victims get justice and drain him.

 

[Insidious Von]

Good. Maybe he can start making movies again because he's one helluva actor. Shipping News was a really great flick.

House of Cards fell through the Crust of the Earth when he was written out of it. I'm streaming it now, I may not even bother with S6.

Like I said in the "human dear tick" thread, the only item that Kevin Spacey is guilty of is being a sloppy drunk. He's, by far, the best character actor since Alec Guinness, we need him back.

 

[Insidious Von]

 

[Soccersweeper]

No, i have no obligation to live by your moral standards. If someone was accused of rape, I'm staying away from them, I'm allowed to put my safety first and fuck their feelings about it. If someone is accused of theft, I don't want them in my home or near me. I'm allowed to decide for myself if I think accusations are credible enough for me to take measures to protect myself.

The last part you are correct, the government shouldn't be able to take away your freedoms without proving you guilty. Only the government owes you innocent until proven guilty.

People really try to push the governments obligations to individuals in the charter on to the rest of us, I'm not the government, I don't owe you Charter rights!

If you're not going to play by common morality you're in for a rough time. The Charter came from morality, not vice versa. It reflects how most peopke govern themselves. Good luck if you're ever accused of something you didn't do. It's reliably estimated about one third of peopke in jail are actually innocent. And that's with having to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Imagine how many more people lose in civil court on the lower standard.

 

[Scholar]

Not guilty is not the same as innocent, it just means that there isn't enough proof for the government to sanction him in some way. Conflating being found not guilty with innocence is a step too far.

So what is your stance on people who make false allegations? If someone proves that they didn't do something and are found not guilty, what should happen to the person who accused them of wrong doing? There should be some consequence for them as you are proof that at least some segments of society will always treat you as if you are guilty regardless of the outcome at trial.

I'm only asking because you seem to think that being found not guilty, or having charges withdrawn I will assume, does not prove innocence. So in your mind, again I'm assuming, being accused of something equates to you probably having done the deed?

 

[mandrill]

Friendly reminder that not being convicted is not proof that you did or didn't commit the crime. Evidence in sexual assault cases are particularly difficult to prove. Just bcz a civil court found him not guilty, doesn't mean he didn't do it, it just means there was insufficient proof to find him guilty. Which is not surprising given how long ago the allege situation occurred.

OTOH, he won his case at the lower civil law standard of "balance of probabilities". So that suggests that the plaintiff may have had some real credibility problems with the jury.

 

[Insidious Von]

So that suggests that the plaintiff may have had some real credibility problems with the jury.

Anthony Rapp has credibility problems with everybody, I didn't brand him "the human deer tick" without reason. Watching him act is like eating a slice of Wonder Bread, or as Sergeant Schultz would say, "flat as a pancake". He launched this lawsuit to avoid getting written off ST - Discovery.

I'm hoping that Spacey will be forgiven, he has too much talent to quit.

 

[Vera.Reis]

So what is your stance on people who make false allegations? If someone proves that they didn't do something and are found not guilty, what should happen to the person who accused them of wrong doing? There should be some consequence for them as you are proof that at least some segments of society will always treat you as if you are guilty regardless of the outcome at trial.

I'm only asking because you seem to think that being found not guilty, or having charges withdrawn I will assume, does not prove innocence. So in your mind, again I'm assuming, being accused of something equates to you probably having done the deed?

Again, I'm allowed to make my own risks assessments as to whether or not I found the accusations credible and proceed accordingly. There are times when I'm like, yea those accusations seem like bullshit and there are others, usually in cases where there have been multiple accusations by various people, as with Spacey (who was found guilty in another similar case), where I'm like mm, probably not that innocent.

 

[Vera.Reis]

OTOH, he won his case at the lower civil law standard of "balance of probabilities". So that suggests that the plaintiff may have had some real credibility problems with the jury.

OTOH he was found guilty in another case and has multiple other accusers.

 

[Insidious Von]

Again, I'm allowed to make my own risks assessments as to whether or not I found the accusations and proceed accordingly. There are times when I'm like, yea those accusations seem like bullshit and there are others, usually in cases where there have been multiple accusations by various people, as with Spacey (who was found guilty in another similar case), where I'm like mm, probably not that innocent.

Ce caspita dice? Spacey was never found guilty of anything. The plaintiff in the first case decided not to testify after discovery. If Spacey has a drinking problem he should go to AA meetings, apart from that he should be forgiven.