Support NeoGAF

[thief183]

]
Im sorry what? Are you saying its ok to groom
someones daughter as long as they don't rape them?

For sure it is not the same thing so using the same word is totally wrong.

 

[clarky]

For sure it is not the same thing so using the same word is totally wrong.

Not im my book. If your messing around with girls/boys far younger than yourself then your a weird cunt, theres no grey "ok" area.

 

[near]

I don't understand if we are talking about the morality or the legality of the fact.

It is pretty clear at this point that legally no wrong doing has been done, so why are we still arguing?

Morally speaking everyone has his own opinion a noone has the same, you can judge something morally but you can't condemn someone because YOU feel what he has done is immoral, who decide what is immoral? What everyone think is totally different from each other and that is why we have law to judge ppl.

An example, for me is morally wrong to tell ppl that being fat is acceptable, is it illegal ? Nope so who wants can keep doing it cause we all know that there are a lot of ppl pushing for body positivity.

I repeat if he had done something illegal he wouldn't be streaming again.

It's not so much a morality vs legal topic. For most people, the allegations exhibit the type of behaviour they'd associate with a predator, so while there has been no legal wrong doing, it's still unacceptable. Let's just say for argument’s sake that the Twitch user was 20, and Doc was actually flirting with this individual with intent. Doc is almost 40. Society does not deem that to be normal behaviour. Most people would view him as a creep, while still acknowledging that it is perfectly legal. If Doc was genuinely flirting with the individual, then I don't even think morality is even worth discussing. It's suspect behaviour, period. Given that, it is highly likely that they were 16-17. Personally, I think it's inexcusable that he was talking to the individual in the first place regardless, he should've known better. BUT, having said all of that, we cannot put him in that bracket when we don't really know the context of their conversation. He genuinely may have had zero interest in this user at least to the described nature, there is no evidence to suggest he was.

 

[Bojji]

Not im my book. If your messing around with girls/boys far younger than yourself then your a weird cunt, theres no grey "ok" area.

So 50yo messing with 25yo is a pedo too?

Do you think late teenagers and young adults are compeltly incapable of thinking for themselves? Usually no one if forcing them to engage in conversations/relationships with older people.

 

[reinking]

Doc is playing with semantics...

 

[MostlyPeaceful]

you are 40

40 year old

40 year old

Just for the sake of consistency and accuracy - which I believe matters - however does not make a huge difference in the morality of the subject

Doc was 35 at the time of the incident.

 

[Topher]

So 50yo messing with 25yo is a pedo too?

He said "girls/boys".

Do you think late teenagers and young adults are compeltly incapable of thinking for themselves? Usually no one if forcing them to engage in conversations/relationships.

You are talking about the most vulnerable time in a young person's life when it comes to relationships with others my man. Often times, they lack the maturity and experience to deal with many intimate situations, much less a case where we have a minor who has gained the attention of an incredibly charismatic celebrity.

I'm not saying he should be called a "pedo", but I also have a hard time faulting clarky 's zero tolerance on the matter.

 

[Topher]

Just for the sake of consistency and accuracy - which I believe matters - however does not make a huge difference in the morality of the subject

Doc was 35 at the time of the incident.

Good to be accurate, but yeah, like you say, doesn't really change much.

 

[G-DannY]

Just for the sake of consistency and accuracy - which I believe matters - however does not make a huge difference in the morality of the subject

Doc was 35 at the time of the incident.

and for the sake of consistency and accuracy, this is what HE SAID yesterday in a stream, live, in front of anyone, taking his responsibilities on ANYTHING he said (if later found lying...)

(reporting it, not my work cherrypicking)

-There was no sexting or pictures sent or received

-The person was over the age of consent he also said the person was not a minor and he was just using it as bait?

-He never met up or had any messages regarding meeting up at twitchcon or anything

-Law enforcement never cared or did anything after receiving the messages

-Twitch employees internally admitted that the messages were not sexting or sexual in nature. No photos or anything was sent/received. They admitted it was inappropriate jokes taken out of context.

-The person he talked too never made any allegations against doc. Never complained or felt uncomfortable or anything.

-Twitch never had a legal analysis done on the messsages

-Doc fired his partner manager who was not helping him in any way

-Two months later that partner manager was directly involved in getting the doc banned.

-The ex partner manager was pushing the person he talked to too report doc but she didn’t want too as nothing was wrong.

-The ex partner manager pushed the person to file a report. Once they got the report twitch investigated the messages and saw nothing wrong with the messages.

-The ex partner manager then messaged his friend at twitches legal team. He cherry picked messages and sent them to his friend who was on vacation at the time looked at the cherry picked messages and banned him while on vacation. They never investigated it properly at all and besides… the messages were already looked at and there was no issues.

-They then sent the messages to law enforcement and law enforcement found nothing and never followed up with the doc or the person he talked too. No interviews were ever done with any of the parties involved

a bit of benefit of doubt should be granted, at least to who put his face on it

 

[Joshmyersbv]

Do we know that the person he communicated with lives in the US? We know the age of consent is vastly different in other countries and it seems we're just assuming they live in the US.

 

[Bojji]

He said "girls/boys".



You are talking about the most vulnerable time in a young person's life when it comes to relationships with others my man. Often times, they lack the maturity and experience to deal with many intimate situations, much less a case where we have a minor who has gained the attention of an incredibly charismatic celebrity.

I'm not saying he should be called a "pedo", but I also have a hard time faulting clarky 's zero tolerance on the matter.

He was also saying about large age difference in general.

I won't say that young people are smart, no - they are dumb as fuck, I remember how dumb I was when I was 20 even.

Problem is that in USA you can be 16 and be able to drive a car, you can potentialy kill yourself with it and/or many other people (including children). At the same time we treat 16 year olds as dumb fucks who can't even say no to a person online. Not mentally retarded people should fully know about pedophiles, groomers and all possible problems that can come from sex at the age of 16.

With large differences in age both parties seek benefits for themselves. Man have a young body to fuck and young woman can have a sponsor and financial security (even get away from poor/patological family), sexes can be changed and it all works the same (including gay people).

I don't think anyone sane on this forum would defend actual pedophiles, people (they aren't) that force themselves on the most innocent humans - children, that are completely not interested in anything sex related and totally can't defend themselves. But teenagers aren't innocent anymore, that's why age of consent is set to 15/16 in most of the world.

 

[Topher]

He was also saying about large age difference in general.

I won't say that young people are smart, no - they are dumb as fuck, I remember how dumb I was when I was 20 even.

Problem is that in USA you can be 16 and be able to drive a car, you can potentialy kill yourself with it and/or many other people (including children). At the same time we treat 16 year olds as dumb fucks who can't even say no to a person online. Not mentally retarded people should fully know about pedophiles, groomers and all possible problems that can come from sex at the age of 16.

With large differences in age both parties seek benefits for themselves. Man have a young body to fuck and young woman can have a sponsor and financial security (even get away from poor/patological family), sexes can be changed and it all works the same (including gay people).

I don't think anyone sane on this forum would defend actual pedophiles, people (they aren't) that force themselves on the most innocent humans - children, that are competently not interested in anything sex related and totally can't defend themselves. But teenagers aren't innocent anymore, that's why age of consent is set to 15/16 in most of the world.

I do not think he meant differences in ages for fully matured adults.

Age of consent does not require society to turn a blind eye to creeps with bad intentions with 16 year olds. That's why DrD is simply de-monetized and not in jail. To me, that's how it should be.

 

[Bojji]

I do not think he meant differences in ages for fully matured adults.

Age of consent does not require society to turn a blind eye to creeps with bad intentions with 16 year olds. That's why DrD is simply de-monetized and not in jail. To me, that's how it should be.

To be honest we don't even know his intentions because unlike Mr. Beast case there are no leaked conversations. Most of this stuff is "I heard that he...", he should sue all of those leakers if they weren't telling truth.

As we can see he is being punished for his behavior but comparing him to actual pedophiles is a "bit" too much (some people ITT do that).

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

To be honest we don't even know his intentions because unlike Mr. Beast case there are no leaked conversations. Most of this stuff is "I heard that he...", he should sue all of those leakers if they weren't telling truth.

As we can see he is being punished for his behavior but comparing him to actual pedophiles is a "bit" too much (some people ITT do that).

And he could have ended it all by releasing the chat logs but I have a feeling he doesn’t want people seeing those

 

[Bojji]

And he could have ended it all by releasing the chat logs but I have a feeling he doesn’t want people seeing those

Yes, that would clear things up. So far it's lack of evidence on both sides.

 

[Topher]

Yes, that would clear things up. So far it's lack of evidence on both sides.

Except for DrD's admission

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Yes, that would clear things up. So far it's lack of evidence on both sides.

Thing is his own studio conducted its own investigation and cut him loose fast with some pretty harsh wording

I guess the question is did they see chat logs or just go by the word of some Twitch staff

 

[FoxMcChief]

Except for DrD's admission

 

[Stooky]

The accusations hes facing are very serious and damaging to his reputation and his name. If there was even a chance the logs would exonerate me of inappropriately interacting with a minor, you'd best believe I would send those out to the public regardless of what else is in there. In any case scenario why would he admit to this charge before doing so? He's not just doing this out of some macho act of rebellion. He's got nothing to lose here that isnt lesser than what he's currently being grilled for. For whatever reason he doesn't want us to see those messages to the point where the chance they'd clear him isnt enough to justify releasing them.

you put too much trust in the public, you know how this goes. it’s too big of a gamble.

 

[FoxMcChief]

.

 

[MostlyPeaceful]

I don’t think we should assume that “releasing the chat logs” is legally as simple as just
…releasing the chat logs.

- someone who wants to see the chat logs just as much as anyone else here

 

[NecrosaroIII]

Do we know that the person he communicated with lives in the US? We know the age of consent is vastly different in other countries and it seems we're just assuming they live in the US.

Still a felony if in the US to fuck with a minor who lives in a jurisdiction that has a lower aoc

 

[Joshmyersbv]

Still a felony if in the US to fuck with a minor who lives in a jurisdiction that has a lower aoc

Oh ok so it must have been someone from the US

 

[Barakov]

Thing is his own studio conducted its own investigation and cut him loose fast with some pretty harsh wording

I guess the question is did they see chat logs or just go by the word of some Twitch staff

I don't remember the exact timeline for this situation but I think the fact that he came out and admitted it was all the evidence they needed to cut him loose. PR trumps everything in things like this.

 

[Diddy X]

In on 100 page thread full of pedos.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

I don't remember the exact timeline for this situation but I think the fact that he came out and admitted it was all the evidence they needed to cut him loose. PR trumps everything in things like this.

Pretty sure his studio cut him loose the day before his statement

I think he only made his statement after sponsors started dropping him

The wording from his studio was pretty harsh too

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Well said imo

 

[notseqi]

In on 100 page thread full of pedos.

i read this page only and hory shet is there a lot of juggling going on
honk honk

 

[NecrosaroIII]

Oh ok so it must have been someone from the US

Not necessarily. He is a US Citizen. Lives in California, so the Age of Consent is 18 for him. He cant go to another state or country where the age of consent is say 15 and engage with them. Like wise if he lived in a state where age of consent was 16, he couldnt bring in someone who was 17 but lived in a state where aoc was 18 to his state.

{Chapter 117, 18 U.S.C. 2423(b)} forbids traveling in interstate or foreign commerce to engage in "illicit sexual conduct"

Chapter 117, 18 U.S.C. 2423(a)} forbids transporting a minor (defined as under 18) in interstate or foreign commerce with the intent of engaging in criminal sexual acts

So any talk of the victim being 16 or 17 is moot.

 

[Joshmyersbv]

Not necessarily. He is a US Citizen. Lives in California, so the Age of Consent is 18 for him. He cant go to another state or country where the age of consent is say 15 and engage with them. Like wise if he lived in a state where age of consent was 16, he couldnt bring in someone who was 17 but lived in a state where aoc was 18 to his state.

{Chapter 117, 18 U.S.C. 2423(b)} forbids traveling in interstate or foreign commerce to engage in "illicit sexual conduct"

Chapter 117, 18 U.S.C. 2423(a)} forbids transporting a minor (defined as under 18) in interstate or foreign commerce with the intent of engaging in criminal sexual acts

So any talk of the victim being 16 or 17 is moot.

Wow thanks for the detail. I didn't know that.

 

[clarky]

So 50yo messing with 25yo is a pedo too?

Do you think late teenagers and young adults are compeltly incapable of thinking for themselves? Usually no one if forcing them to engage in conversations/relationships with older people.

Young girls coming of age should not have their heads fucked up by 40-50 year old blokes. Stop defending this twat. My daughter is 17 if a 40 year old bloke was dropping her off from school id kick him down the road. Its wrong.

 

[Yamisan]

Do we know that the person he communicated with lives in the US? We know the age of consent is vastly different in other countries and it seems we're just assuming they live in the US.

Because when traveling overseas our USA age of consent laws still apply to us, this is why people can't travel to hook up with kids legally. People who do if caught are charged when they come back to the usa.

 

[clarky]

In on 100 page thread full of pedos.

Unbelievable isn't it? If you look back at my post when the news broke i was firmly in the camp of "show me receipts" until he put out that statement and admitted basically grooming. In England you get sent down for this shit.

 

[RJMacready73]

]
Im sorry what? Are you saying its ok to groom
someones daughter as long as they don't rape them?

Don't be a dick

 

[Yamisan]

In on 100 page thread full of pedos.

And you're probably the biggest one.

 

[near]

Looks like this thread is going down hill. Collect yourselves, it's just a discussion.

 

[buenoblue]

The guy admitted in his own statement that he inappropriately messaged a minor. How can people defend him when he admitted it?

If it didn't happen, as he is now saying then we need to see receipts at this point. End of.

 

[buenoblue]

Unbelievable isn't it? If you look back at my post when the news broke i was firmly in the camp of "show me receipts" until he put out that statement and admitted basically grooming. In England you get sent down for this shit.

Yeah good point I'm in England too and this kind of thing is super illegal here and treated as a crime. Maybe that's the difference that in some countries this is ok??? I don't know.

 

[rkofan87]

I’m gonna tear my gorgeous hair out reading some of these posts, my stylist is going to hate me.

The man admitted to inappropriately messaging a minor, which is what he got fired from Twitch for. What evidence do you need? Lol

this i hate cancel culture but this is not that.

 

[Arsic]

Not necessarily. He is a US Citizen. Lives in California, so the Age of Consent is 18 for him. He cant go to another state or country where the age of consent is say 15 and engage with them. Like wise if he lived in a state where age of consent was 16, he couldnt bring in someone who was 17 but lived in a state where aoc was 18 to his state.

{Chapter 117, 18 U.S.C. 2423(b)} forbids traveling in interstate or foreign commerce to engage in "illicit sexual conduct"

Chapter 117, 18 U.S.C. 2423(a)} forbids transporting a minor (defined as under 18) in interstate or foreign commerce with the intent of engaging in criminal sexual acts

So any talk of the victim being 16 or 17 is moot.

So there’s no Chance this person was under 18 then when this happened?

If so, then I don’t see any issues. I’ve seen plenty of 35 and 18-20 year olds in my day together. Dudes with money and fame, and chicks who are gold diggers.

To be fair that’s not what this even was. Not sexting, no meet ups, no plans to meet up, and just inappropriate messages with an 18 year old? Who gives a shit?

Again, that’s IF actually went down.

 

[Hookshot]

Guy Beahm is an anagram of He bum gay. Coincidence or proof of what he wanted in his messages?

 

[MostlyPeaceful]

How can people defend him when he admitted it?

Probably the same way nearly everyone is calling him a "pedophile" even after - according to Doc anyway - it has been legally proven and admitted by all parties involved (including Twitch and the subject who was messaged) that no actual pedophilia of any kind took place - it’s called subconscious bias.

As things sit right now, the information we have is still so vague and unrevealing that it’s absurd for anyone to either “defend him” or call him a “pedophile”.

In my view, both are ridiculous stances to take at this current juncture.

 

[FoxMcChief]

Well said imo

Tells ya something when all the people that know doc in real life turned on him. But the blind folk on the internet know best.

 

[near]

Tells ya something when all the people that know doc in real life turned on him. But the blind folk on the internet know best.

Not quite.

 

[NecrosaroIII]

So there’s no Chance this person was under 18 then when this happened?

If so, then I don’t see any issues. I’ve seen plenty of 35 and 18-20 year olds in my day together. Dudes with money and fame, and chicks who are gold diggers.

To be fair that’s not what this even was. Not sexting, no meet ups, no plans to meet up, and just inappropriate messages with an 18 year old? Who gives a shit?

Again, that’s IF actually went down.

Not true.

"Beahm also suggested that the user was not under the age of consent in the jurisdiction where they were messaging him from, and claimed that the person had not wanted to escalate the report of inappropriate messages within Twitch."

The key comment is "the jurisdiction where they were messaging him from". But remember, that doesnt mean jack shit. What matters ultimately is HIS jurisdiction.

 

[MostlyPeaceful]

Not quite.

Jesus, the absolute whiplash I just got after seeing such a fair and reasonable take from someone with a voice in that industry.

One thing I know, I'm gonna wait until I see all the facts before I completely turn my back on a friend to make sure I don't "jeopardize my sponsorships and brand deals."

If I was TimTheTatman and NickMercs, I 100% would have needed to see the whisper messages before cutting all ties from someone I considered to be "close friend" forever. That's just me though.

 

[near]

Jesus, the absolute whiplash I just got after seeing such a fair and reasonable take from someone with a voice in that industry.

One thing I know, If I'm "friends" with someone, I'm gonna wait until I see all the facts before I completely turn my back on them to save all my sponsorships and brand deals.

He has a backbone. If you're not against him, you're sympathizing with a PDF. It's the hive mind mentality at it's finest. Even after Docs statement, he has remained consistent in he's opinion. I respect that.

 

[IntentionalPun]

Not true.

"Beahm also suggested that the user was not under the age of consent in the jurisdiction where they were messaging him from, and claimed that the person had not wanted to escalate the report of inappropriate messages within Twitch."

The key comment is "the jurisdiction where they were messaging him from". But remember, that doesnt mean jack shit. What matters ultimately is HIS jurisdiction.

If we are talking the US and across state lines then it doesn’t matter either way, as it’s federal if they are under 18.

But you’d have to exchange pictures or actually proposition someone for sex and then cross state lines for it to matter.

Just because you can get away with a lot of shit without doing anything illegal doesn’t make you a not a piece of shit though lol

 

[StreetsofBeige]

I havent followed this thread, but from what I gathered, he was sexting a 16 year old. Googling it, his wife also left him, he's now 42 years old and has a daughter.

To me, regardless of legality (a lot of discussion above about jurisdictions and such), it makes no difference to me. Even if he was doing this 100% legally with an 18 year old, while being married with kids dont you guys think that's already creepy enough and in poor taste? He would had been 40 and married/kids. Doing it to a known 16 year old is even worse because now he's going into teenage high schooler territory.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Tells ya something when all the people that know doc in real life turned on him. But the blind folk on the internet know best.

And how strong the wording is from these people especially those who have big time ties to Twitch aka who knows people