Kevin Spacey acquitted of all 9 sexual assault charges by jury in UK trial

www.usatoday.com...

The "House of Cards" actor, 64, was cleared at the conclusion of a four-week long trial that took place in London, beginning June 28. The Academy Award-winner, whose stellar acting career was derailed by sex assault allegations, was accused of sexual offenses against four men in Britain.

Tears rolled down Spacey’s cheeks as the final “not guilty” verdict was read. It was his 64th birthday.

There were nine charges against Spacey, who pleaded not guilty to all, including multiple counts of sexual and indecent assault and one count of causing a person to engage in penetrative sexual activity without consent. He had faced 13 charges until July 19, when the judge removed four counts that duplicated the same allegations under an older statute.

Three men accused the actor of aggressively grabbing their crotches. A fourth, an aspiring actor seeking mentorship, said he awoke to the actor performing oral sex on him after going to Spacey’s London apartment for a beer and either falling asleep or passing out.

The accusations date from 2001 to 2013 and include a period when Spacey — after winning Academy Awards for "The Usual Suspects" and "American Beauty" — had returned to theater, his first love. During most of that period he was artistic director of the Old Vic Theatre in London.

Clearly a victory for Kevin Spacey but it comes at a cost of losing his job and getting cancelled, a damaged reputation, and losing everything else as a result of these unsubstantiated or false allegations. Even if a event has has happened, the burden of proof is not on the defendant, and the allegation has to be substantiated.

What I find completely inappropriate and disgusting are the witch-hunt media trials and the consequent condemnations without any evidence (in most cases) and without even waiting for the real trail to begin. But nobody should be condemned by the media before the trial concludes.

I made a distinction between unsubstantiated and false claims. In my opinion, making a false claim and trying to destroy the reputation and life of another person must come at a heavy price.

The actor has been cleared before in a criminal case over sex assault allegations.

abcnews.go.com...


Edit: I wasn't there and can't say what has happened, as there are many allegations, but the court found no evidence any of these have happened. Media trials shouldn't happen, that's what I am trying to say.

The new circus- at any given time society must be destroying someone.
The earliest example I remember was OJ, but I'm sure it goes back all the way to the Roman bread and circus.

Guilty or not, someone fairly well known will be next... just not anyone from the protected class

The UK names people before any evidence or convictions because its an ignorant, bigoted little country at its core, similar to an old whore.

originally posted by: Cwantas
The UK names people before any evidence or convictions because its an ignorant, bigoted little country at its core, similar to an old whore.

I don't know how the law is in the UK with respect to these matters, but it seems unacceptable to name, shame, condemn, and eventually destroy someone, before even the trial has started.

a reply to: Cwantas

The UK names people before any evidence or convictions because its an ignorant, bigoted little country at its core, similar to an old whore.

Ha ha ha.
Please elaborate.

a reply to: AlienBorg
A guy called Sir Cliff Richards was accused of messing around with young boys, he was all over the media at the time and to all intense and purposes guilty in the eyes of the media, he was found to be innocent but the damage was done.

a reply to: Freeborn
Your not from the UK then.

originally posted by: Cwantas
The UK names people before any evidence or convictions because its an ignorant, bigoted little country at its core, similar to an old whore.

In some regards they actually have a stronger degree of burden of proof to keep someone detained and bring up charges than many western countries.

They can only hold you for 24 hours, and have to bring up charges or release you. You either have to get a confession or provide evidence for charges to be brought.

originally posted by: Cwantas
a reply to: Freeborn
Your not from the UK then.

I don’t think you are either. You called the UK “a little bigoted country”, when in fact the United Kingdom is several countries banded together.

a reply to: Cwantas

What makes you think that?

Again, please elaborate.

There were fifteen accusers in total and absolutely no witnesses to the actual sexual acts. Typical with sexual assaults in general, I would say, because it always seems to happen that way, when nobody is around. But, this may just be an old horny geezer with the 'old way' of grabbing someone's genitalia is just a way to show you like them or as Kevin says, being flirtatious.

www.usatoday.com...

a reply to: Freeborn
If you u derstand what ignorant bigoted behavior is then all you have to do is apply that knowledge in order to understand what an ignorant bigoted society is.

a reply to: CriticalStinker
Yeah the police have to follow procedures the media coverage however in the UK is ignorant and bigoted because they name people whether they're guilty or not.

a reply to: CriticalStinker
Lol OK.

Back in the internet/YT hay day, there was a photo of Spacey sitting in an alley, totally wasted, with a child laying over his lap. The boy had no pants on and a red butt hole.

I always thought the accusations against him harassing adults was a diversion of what he was really doing.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: Cwantas
The UK names people before any evidence or convictions because its an ignorant, bigoted little country at its core, similar to an old whore.

In some regards they actually have a stronger degree of burden of proof to keep someone detained and bring up charges than many western countries.

They can only hold you for 24 hours, and have to bring up charges or release you. You either have to get a confession or provide evidence for charges to be brought.

Yeah, I remember they did that with Ian Huntley with regard to the murder of those children Jessica and Hollie. Their decomposed bodies were found near a US Airforce base on UK soil.
What's your point?

originally posted by: Cwantas
a reply to: AlienBorg
A guy called Sir Cliff Richards was accused of messing around with young boys, he was all over the media at the time and to all intense and purposes guilty in the eyes of the media, he was found to be innocent but the damage was done.

That's completely wrong like I said in my OP. The media shouldn't condemn and defame anyone before the trial has even started. The person who is defamed has every right to sue the media and ask for heavy punishments against each and every one who has caused them harm.

originally posted by: Cwantas
The UK names people before any evidence or convictions because it’s an ignorant, bigoted little country at its core, similar to an old whore.

Oh the irony in calling the entire UK bigoted.

a reply to: Tortuga
Lol, thanks for the belly laugh.

originally posted by: BelleEpoque
Back in the internet/YT hay day, there was a photo of Spacey sitting in an alley, totally wasted, with a child laying over his lap. The boy had no pants on and a red butt hole.

I always thought the accusations against him harassing adults was a diversion of what he was really doing.

Are you implying something else?
What was he doing?