John Oliver grills Dustin Hoffman about sexual harassment allegations - Sensationalist Headlines

[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZNuh0xxKis[/media] [url]https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2017/12/04/john-oliver-grills-dustin-hoffman-over-sexual-harassment-allegation/[/url] [quote]HBO host John Oliver hammered Dustin Hoffman about allegations of sexual harassment and the actor fired back with a ferocious defense, as a seemingly benign screening became an explosive conversation about Hollywood sexual misconduct on Monday night. “This is something we’re going to have to talk about because … it’s hanging in the air,” Oliver said to Hoffman at the discussion, an anniversary screening of the film “Wag the Dog.” He was alluding to an allegation made by Anna Graham Hunter last month that Hoffman groped her and made inappropriate comments when she was a 17-year-old intern on the set of the 1985 TV movie “Death of a Salesman.” “It’s hanging in the air?” Hoffman said. “From a few things you’ve read, you’ve made an incredible assumption about me,” he noted, adding sarcastically, “You’ve made the case better than anyone else can. I’m guilty.” The “Last Week Tonight” personality was moderating a 20th-anniversary screening panel at the 92nd Street Y on behalf of the Tribeca Institute, with stars Hoffman, Robert De Niro, producer Jane Rosenthal and director Barry Levinson on the stage. About halfway through the hour-long talk, Oliver brought up the issue to Hoffman, saying he found the actor’s statements about the matter wanting. Nearly the entire rest of the discussion was then dominated by Oliver, Hoffman and the subject of sexual harassment.[/quote]

Dustin Hoffman does look pretty bad in this. It would be a perfect knockout if Oliver didn't state "Because there’s no point in [an accuser] lying."

[QUOTE=DiscoDriver32;52948832]Dustin Hoffman does look pretty bad in this. It would be a perfect knockout if Oliver didn't state "Because there’s no point in [an accuser] lying."[/QUOTE] Why would she lie in this case though?

[QUOTE=MrHeadHopper;52948872]Why would she lie in this case though?[/QUOTE] Why would they [I]all[/I] lie, there are three accusers with Hoffman

[QUOTE=DiscoDriver32;52948832]Dustin Hoffman does look pretty bad in this. It would be a perfect knockout if Oliver didn't state "Because there’s no point in [an accuser] lying."[/QUOTE] There really isn't though. Accusing rich and powerful people of crimes is not exactly a barrel of laughs; they'll use their resources to try and discredit you, your name will be dragged through the mud. He admitted to touching her without her consent and when she told him to stop rather than apologising he made her apologise to him. That's a pretty clear sign of someone with very little respect for women and consent.

[QUOTE=DiscoDriver32;52948832]Dustin Hoffman does look pretty bad in this. It would be a perfect knockout if Oliver didn't state "Because there’s no point in [an accuser] lying."[/QUOTE] There is no point in lying. Can you tell me the point in lying? Please. Elaborate the point behind implicating a rich, famous, successful, beloved actor in a criminal act Is it for fame? I don't see that as once you do this falsely, you're blacklisted and forgotten about. Is it for money? Not likely as there's no money to be made here and legal bills for defending yourself from a rich person aren't fucking cheap. Is it for an unknown third reason? Like, justice? I would guess so!

[QUOTE=Butthurter;52948906]what a wonderful woman to work with[/QUOTE] I'm not sure what she means by saying that. is she saying that those are the only predators in the industry?

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52948893]There is no point in lying. Can you tell me the point in lying? Please. Elaborate the point behind implicating a rich, famous, successful, beloved actor in a criminal act Is it for fame? I don't see that as once you do this falsely, you're blacklisted and forgotten about. Is it for money? Not likely as there's no money to be made here and legal bills for defending yourself from a rich person aren't fucking cheap. Is it for an unknown third reason? Like, justice? I would guess so![/QUOTE] Look up Sabrina Erderly and Mike Nifong for me.

[QUOTE=Stroheim;52949574]Look up Sabrina Erderly and Mike Nifong for me.[/QUOTE] Yes there are cases of false accusations, it does happen. But to think it's the case often enough to not believe in the victims creates a society where they don't come out about it, and we get the feedback loop effect of not reporting these things allowing them to go on, increasing the frequency with which they don't get reported. Breaking that cycle is going to cause a lot of people to react in disbelief. But it's been happening.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52949690]Yes there are cases of false accusations, it does happen. But to think it's the case often enough to not believe in the victims creates a society where they don't come out about it, and we get the feedback loop effect of not reporting these things allowing them to go on, increasing the frequency with which they don't get reported. Breaking that cycle is going to cause a lot of people to react in disbelief. But it's been happening.[/QUOTE] Ideally, people would quietly file a police report immediately upon something happening.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52949743]Ideally, people would quietly file a police report immediately upon something happening.[/QUOTE] Ideally but often times people who go through things of that nature don't feel like they'll be believed if a powerful/rich/influential/famous person did it. And it's not an unsubstantiated fear.

[QUOTE=sgman91;52949743]Ideally, people would quietly file a police report immediately upon something happening.[/QUOTE] And that police report would be quietly swept under the rug.

[QUOTE=IKTM;52949945]And that police report would be quietly swept under the rug.[/QUOTE] File the report first, if it goes nowhere, then make it public? Sexual harrassment/assault is a dilemma because of the lack of evidence. If you're in a state that has two-party consent for recording, then you can't catch someone in the act because they would not consent to being recorded, so wearing a "wire" isn't an option nor are hidden cameras, and most of these incidents happen in private property because predators know the spots where they can get away with sexual abuse. Unless there's a struggle or some kind of fluid exchange there's no DNA evidence. All the person reporting the case to the cops can offer is eye witness testimony which is unreliable and turns into "he said, she said" which leaves reasonable doubt. Each case kind of comes down to a subjective judgement call - is that person's story likely? Does the person seem truthful? Defendants are innocent unless proven guilty but if there's no proof there's little chance of justice. You can't default to believing every claim as true as there are spiteful people out there who will lie just to ruin someone, like mattress girl. It's a moral dilemma and there has to be some kind of way for evidence to be presented in order for the truth to be conclusively proven, but that opens up a can of worms with privacy in terms of rights involving being recorded without consent.

[QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52948893]There is no point in lying.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=HumanAbyss;52949690]Yes there are cases of false accusations, it does happen.[/QUOTE] The fact that false accusations do occur basically just demonstrates that you are lacking imagination as to why people lie, not that the only possible motivation is a genuine desire to seek justice and therefore false accusations don't occur (as you implicitly claimed). Most accusations are genuine. Some are not. Some people are, in fact, motivated by a desire for fame, or personal retribution, or other petty, individual factors. Throwing out due process on an assumption of good faith is absurd.

[QUOTE=catbarf;52950231]The fact that false accusations do occur basically just demonstrates that you are lacking imagination as to why people lie, not that the only possible motivation is a genuine desire to seek justice and therefore false accusations don't occur (as you implicitly claimed). Most accusations are genuine. Some are not. Some people are, in fact, motivated by a desire for fame, or personal retribution, or other petty, individual factors. Throwing out due process on an assumption of good faith is absurd.[/QUOTE] We've had a clear issue for several decades with believing the people who go through this shit. Due process is a wonderful thing and they should be fairly tried in court but that takes believing them enough to investigate issues in the first place. It will take a change of atmosphere for that to happen in all honesty and that won't happen if people are afraid the issue would be buried. I don't know what the answer is but it isn't going as we have been for years.

I'm not sure why the false discussion is happening. Didn't Hoffman admit to doing scummy shit?