Is there going to be a court battle at this point?
Edit: I read his reply except for those last couple paragraphs since I assumed it was more of the same. Looks like he just may take it there.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Angry Joe accused of sexual harassment/predatory behaviour [Updates from both posted]
- Thread starter Serene
- Start date
Edit: I read his reply except for those last couple paragraphs since I assumed it was more of the same. Looks like he just may take it there.
I'm almost certain that the shower bit happened as he didn't deny that part.
Nah, he did it and now is doing everything in his power to silence her.
Lmaolol obviously. Can't help but feel like AJ basically said to his lawyer "So yeah, I did it. Any idea?"
Lawyer: "Speedy justice for you coming up."
User banned (1 week): Concern trolling; downplaying sexual harassment
I've gotta say, even if all of her claims are true, this community is pretty fucking quick to jump to "sexual predator". The dude may be creepy if true, but being a creep is not a crime. I think it's reckless and uncalled for.
At the very least women will be more alert of any sh!t Joe might pull in the future. And if Joe was stupid enough to do this multiple times, he will still be toast.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding your intent here, but you're like, right on the edge of doing this misogynistic thing men do when they don't like the tone a woman uses.
Good call, he definitely would've spent time on that. In fact, with him putting out this official statement saying he never mentioned the word "sex", it's going to be pretty convenient should he say in court "See, I asked her if she wanted to shower, not if she wanted to have sex in the shower". Jury might have to decide intent. Which looks fucking obvious to me, Watson.
Unfortunately, when you accuse someone of a crime, justice comes into the picture. You wouldn't accuse if you didn't want justice. You wouldn't accuse publicly if you were not ready to accept the fact that it WILL defame the accused. This is just common sense. So you need to be able to back up the claim - maybe in court.
The point you were trying to make is that it's been two years since the alleged event. That the alleged victim will have a difficult time proving the allegation. But that burden is on the accuser.
Note that i have not named the sort of crime being referenced here. That's because it is the same when it is theft, murder, assault, rape, etc.
In the case of murder, chances of an arrest and conviction drop significantly if there is not a significant lead within 48 hours of the murder. Rape is not much different. Theft can be easier unless it was cash. If my roommate steals $200 from my wallet, I should probably report it sooner than two years later. Otherwise, that money's gone and telling someone about it later only serves to make the alleged thief look bad.
Before you freak out on me as to why victims of sex crimes don't report right away, rest assured that i understand these things. I understand that they may be under threat of violence. I understand it may be a family member or close friends or a famous person and the politics or differences in power make it difficult. I understand that maybe they were just ashamed at the time or blamed themselves. Whatever the reasons, it doesn't mean the pursuit of justice can be any different. And sometimes victims don't get justice. That's a tragedy. But that is life.
I felt hard for her when I read her story but there were some things that nagged at me that gave me doubts. I do not know what to believe.
Same thing that happened with Tara Reade. It's ridiculous how people twist themselves into pretzels defending these creeps.
My read is that AJ thought he was getting sex and was aggressive when he didn't get it. Not illegal, just a douchebag who can't/won't self reflect at all.
EDIT: this case will never go to court, ever, unless it's him suing her, which would be a bad choice IMO. She can't sue him. She's just (rightfully, imo) pointing out that he's the kind of creepy douchebag who can't take a hint, doesn't care about communicating/seeking consent and gets "angry" when he's turned down.
Double edit:
With respect, you are out of your depth, legally speaking.
She did not accuse him of a crime and therefore she does not need to prove it in court. Even if he were to try and file a defamation case, he would likely spend a lot of money and get nothing in return, she's probably not got much money to speak of, so the lawyers won't do it unless he pays their fees. That's to say nothing of the fact that he might have to prove "actual malice" motivated her statements, and truth is a defense to a defamation claim. Good luck. The whole thing is posturing, as any CnD is.
EDIT: this case will never go to court, ever, unless it's him suing her, which would be a bad choice IMO. She can't sue him. She's just (rightfully, imo) pointing out that he's the kind of creepy douchebag who can't take a hint, doesn't care about communicating/seeking consent and gets "angry" when he's turned down.
Double edit:
With respect, you are out of your depth, legally speaking.
She did not accuse him of a crime and therefore she does not need to prove it in court. Even if he were to try and file a defamation case, he would likely spend a lot of money and get nothing in return, she's probably not got much money to speak of, so the lawyers won't do it unless he pays their fees. That's to say nothing of the fact that he might have to prove "actual malice" motivated her statements, and truth is a defense to a defamation claim. Good luck. The whole thing is posturing, as any CnD is.
Last edited:
you have a fundemantally wrong attitude to abuse and the way it is both dealt with by law enforcement and by the victim
in a lot of cases abuse like the one described is not only difficult to prove but *impossible*, both due to the nature of the abuse and the way the abuser controls the person they are abusing
putting the entire validity of someone's claim on a court process is something that has historically significantly benefitted the abuser and the outcome of the case often both validates and rehabilitates the abuser (even if they have been found to not be guilty, just insufficient evidence) and, more distressingly, can be used to both discredit and add trauma to the victim
not getting justice isn't just a case of "that's life!" it's emblematic of a system that does not serve abusers the way you think it does
pushing this to a formal lawsuit only benefits joe as he is able to create doubt and, more importantly, as someone with a reasonable amount of wealth and an established relationship with lawyers, it's placing him in a position of privilege and power to manipulate the situation
My post was in response to people saying this be taken to court and I asked "what evidence are you expecting someone be able to provide of sexual harassment and predatory behaviour a couple of years prior?" if it were taken there as they desired. I should have just focused on the issue with it being focus instead of challenging the logic of where that led.
We should pull the focus back from criminal cases since it's only aiding in distracting from the actual concerns of her post, in favour of the framing Joe has gone for around assault and going to the police.
Probably not. He's probably more the "well he was no angel" camper.
Maybe I'm remembering wrong but, he was still grooming fans even minors, but at no point solicited their nudes?
Big yikes...
What a cringeworthy response.
Big yikes...
What a cringeworthy response.
Just let me say that that dude is a notorious fucking asshole. So I should not start using his Twitts as defense of AJ, specially in a case like this.
Actually he should no be posted anywhere.
use this to search for a specific post on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/search-advanced
could this be what she posted? (Please note, posters or mods. I'm in no way defending either party, just providing information)
Last edited:
Definitely hard not to look at it like that. Feel like bringing legal action against her doesn't help his case one bit
So, direct quotes can't be used if the person that points it out is a jerk?
a direct quote is a direct quote... he answers people who say ''she never said he assaulted her''
anything after that, sure just ignore him, but that tweet is pretty straightforward
Where did she mention he assaulted her though?
My interaction with AngryJoe
I’ve been holding exactly who this was in for over two years now but after seeing other women come forward about other streamers. I…medium.com
what a dirtbag, why he tweeting her now
In all likeliness it's too gets his fans to go after her unfortunately, any lawyer he's involved with would tell him that this is a very bad idea.
She'll get further abuse and then leave Twitter because of it and it limits the way she can talk about what's going on while he can have a field day with his fans.
In a c and d order, the person the order is against is not allowed to talk about the situation further but the person who had the c and d put in place is? That seems a little backwards.
curious if there are pics of thinks like the party after the dinner because that pic is still daytime so it can still be when she had her phone
(for mods im just curious what happened I am not trying to push a narrative one way or another)
There's a lot of people judging him just because he lawyered up but it's absolutely the right move when something this serious is alleged. This could damage his income, youtube relationship, sponsors, and future earnings if it's just out there that he's a sexual predator of some sort without any proper response. If he did it she should absolutely follow through. I believe when I read the initial tweets she said she had witnesses and other proof to provide still.
The photo was taken clearly during the day, is probably using the dude's timezone for the hours. Don't give those assholes exposure to their Sherlock stupid attempts to discredit the victim.
Once again thank you mods for the tolerance. I know I shouldn't be surprised that people wanted every reason to excuse their faaaave gaming personality but here we are
I'm well aware of all these things. But i also don't know how to apply past injustices for other victims to a new case and still find justice. What i mean is do you think one rapist found guilty of this crime yields enough justice for all victims of rape? I would surmise that it does not, as the other victims may still have to exist around their attacker. So the idea that someone should be found guilty of the crime solely because so many others have gotten off when they should not have is not justice. Yet it seems to be what you imply should be done.
I'm open to suggestions as to how you believe this can and should be done better.
I don't get why people nowadays always have to pick a side no matter what. A controversial news about someone appears and in split seconds everyone is sure about which side to pick and bad mouth the other side. I don't remember the internet before the 2010s being like that, also Twitter seems to play a big role in promoting this kind of behavior. I prefer a more laid back approach. Therefore I am not picking any sides and waiting how this plays out. It will be more obvious when more is said by both sides or if this gets to court.
Also maybe I am biased as I am studying law, but I don't think threatening legal actions if you feel that someone is destroying your reputation is a red flag, especially not if you are a public person where a bad reputation can ruin your career. On the other side if someone has done you wrong or made you feel uncomfortable you can and depending on the severeness absolutely should call that person out but be prepared that people on the internet want see some kind of proof (and the law even demands it).
Lastly if I see this correct, even if the allegations were true Joe would be kind of a bad Casanova or 'asshole' more than anything. Hitting on someone, even when sex is implicated, doesn't make you a sexual predator at least not by the (german) law. Not 100% sure about the US law but I think its the same in this regard.
Also maybe I am biased as I am studying law, but I don't think threatening legal actions if you feel that someone is destroying your reputation is a red flag, especially not if you are a public person where a bad reputation can ruin your career. On the other side if someone has done you wrong or made you feel uncomfortable you can and depending on the severeness absolutely should call that person out but be prepared that people on the internet want see some kind of proof (and the law even demands it).
Lastly if I see this correct, even if the allegations were true Joe would be kind of a bad Casanova or 'asshole' more than anything. Hitting on someone, even when sex is implicated, doesn't make you a sexual predator at least not by the (german) law. Not 100% sure about the US law but I think its the same in this regard.
Joe is fucking lying obviously which makes me very suspicious of his side of the story. His texts were clearly flirty. The "you can cheer me up" text and "I was only helping someone network" statement don't add up at all. Any dude who has sent a woman they barely know a message would instantly know that's suggestive and flirting. He wasn't honest in his response about his intentions at the time and he skips over all the important details (like the hotel room stuff) as if it's nothing. Why was he alone with her in a hotel room anyway? That kind of situation doesn't just happen.
It would have been a lot more believable if he had said he wanted to get laid, but didn't know she had a bf and that he didn't do the predatory shit. His lawyers made him write this bullshit about him being just a nice guy helping out. His story sucks and the victim is likely telling the truth.
It would have been a lot more believable if he had said he wanted to get laid, but didn't know she had a bf and that he didn't do the predatory shit. His lawyers made him write this bullshit about him being just a nice guy helping out. His story sucks and the victim is likely telling the truth.
Were you there? Because that clearly didn't happen based on what they BOTH wrote...
Yeah that is the case, he acknowledged that in another tweet.
Last edited:
PIcking what the accuser said apart and use it as ammo qualifies as victim blaming to me. Specially from assholes like that. Just saying , and not taking sides.
I take no disrespect from your comment, and I'll defer to your expertise.
The phone stuff sounds like it would shine some light on what happened. If there is no activity during the time he claims she was tweeting it casts serious doubt on his story. Plus there were other people present that could share what they witnessed at the party.
Also this isn't the first female internet personality he's gotten involved with. If others come forward with equally uncomfortable stories he's dead in the water.
Also this isn't the first female internet personality he's gotten involved with. If others come forward with equally uncomfortable stories he's dead in the water.
Joe going hard on potential legal action means that he's just trying to scare the story away. Since no actual crime took place and it mostly came down to him being a creepy horny guy throwing his Youtube clout around this will likely go nowhere.
No crime may have taken place but the way he talks down to her in his statement about how she's a grown woman and could lead at any time or w/e is a HUGE red flag for me.
Predatory behavior isn't against the law, sadly.
Predatory behavior isn't against the law, sadly.
What are the "facts" he is referring to? I have not followed this story closely besides reading some snippets from the initial thread so I'm a bit behind on the matter.
He basically confirms that the events in the Tweet happened but with none of the creeper/predatory overtones and behavior described in the original story. It comes down to a he said/she said so take from that what you will.
Will wait for more information in this case, but I think she should go to the cops, report it and let them investigate it further, get the security footage etc anything that may still exist as evidence.
Has "Other Joe" been implicated in any wrongdoing? He was always my favorite character on their show.
According to his story, she was the one to reach out to him and eventually stuck to him all the way, even to waiting for him while he took a shower.
Like whut?