Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

DBS: Broly VA gets hit by #MeToo

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #81
    Originally posted by DokTOR. View Post

    Funny how you can be a woman, act retarded and lack any sense of responsibility and then blame the world when bad things happen to you lol
    Are you saying these women were basically asking to be harassed? Maybe because they wore some lowcut shirts and shorts or something?

    Comment


      #82
      yes guys the female species is not renowned for its reasoning skills, inductivs or otherwise. on top of that they tend to be very meek. all of that is kind of why they keep getting themselves and others into rapey situations, see: Sweden

      ergo, "they should have known better if it were REALLY true" is not a valid argument
      Last edited by Helly; February 21st, 2019, 10:43 PM.

      Comment


        #83
        Originally posted by Helly View Post
        Raniero One word: professionalism. Or simply maintaining the status quo. Do you have any idea how many people are living with their abusers at this moment and keeping up the front that nothing happened/is happening?

        Vic seeking counseling means he has a problem.

        Read the article in the op. It links to a tweet with screenshots of Vic instructing one of his fanclubs to go out and defend him.



        eh there coulda been more working incognito you never know


        Anarchism?.......what country are you living in? Haven't you noticed the increments of fascistic tendencies in both the left and the right? Not even the extremes, either; mainstream lefties and righties are deciding more and mord that they have nothing to say to each other, they are completely convinced of their righteousness. The rise of the information age has spawned "information" tailor-made to any bias you can conceive of, which means that...ahahaha....the information age has ironically led its congregants into the misinformation age.

        And besides...the unwashed masses wouldn't be able to get as many gibbs as they reap now if they went the route of anarchy, which is a huge non-starter for them.
        Yeah, I'm well aware as to what conscious confirmation bias is. Would you like to know the one thing scarier? Unconscious confirmation bias. Sites like Facebook and even Google employ the use of advanced algorithms to prioritize media they think you'll like based on their perpetual surveillance of your browsing habits. Most people don't even realize this is happening, which serves to ensure that people's loyalty to their respective "side" is all the more absolute. These are the people who are actually ruining America, not some boogey-scapegoat-man across the world like Uncle Vlad.

        That being said, I didn't say anything about the left/right not attempting to stifle opposing viewpoints, my guy. I know full well that they're two sides of the same coin, which is something I've been saying for years. They are fascists in all but name. It is because they have fascistic tendencies that I thought you'd be all "Fuck it" and align yourself with anarchy instead. Chaotic good > "united" evil. Of course it's not ideal, but is the current state of things? :/
        Last edited by Oneiros; February 22nd, 2019, 03:11 AM.

        Comment


          #84
          Originally posted by Cid View Post

          The evidence against him is all circumstantial, but it's also all valid within a court so long as there are no contradictions in it. As far as I'm aware, there's only one instance of a notable "claim" against him that was proven to be false. And that wasn't even a claim against him, but rather youtubers taking the initial ANN article out of context.
          There were multiple examples of pictures shown with him interacting with fans, which turned out to not be sexual assault and the fans were fine with Vic. ANN did actually take one such picture out of context and was forced to take it down when the woman in it called them out. And the ANN article wasn't unbiased either, considering who wrote it.

          As such, it wouldn't hold up in court as a means to discredit the accusations against him. The claims of images being photoshopped to make it look worse are complete assumptions based off one person being seen saying that an image should be manipulated (with the owner of the image immediately and bluntly refusing any attempt to do so.
          There was a recent incident where somebody said a Vic supporter SWATTED them and got caught lying. We've seen VAs threaten fans. These people aren't angels.

          One of the accusers hypocritically talked about cutting Vic's balls off, so sorry if I have a hard time sympathizing with her. Ironically, Vic has been the most mature person here.

          For reference, the notable claims are from the other VAs and the professional cosplayers, not random fans claiming he groped them. Their opinions and accusations aren't important to the legal aspects here. None of the VAs or industry professionals have had their accusations proven to be false and most of them have been supported by other industry professionals.
          Their opinions and accusations haven't been proven true either. You choose to blindly believe them. I don't. Again, Cid, if you're fine with trial by media or jumping in the social media outrage culture, that's on you. I prefer evidence and our justice system doing its job, not just talk.

          Funimation conducted numerous interviews and heard out multiple stories, that were apparently corroborated with convention and hotel staff. Vic's only defense against those accusations was a repeated claim that all encounters were always consensual, which won't hold up in court. Especially since one of those claims was apparently an outright lie since the convention managers confirmed receiving a report about it.
          Your source for this is a questionable interview with no official sources or backing from anybody in Funimation. Hilarious you call people out on using youtube videos as a source, but you're quick to turn to an article that has been confirmed to have fabricated a lot of what was actually said. How about an official statement on the matter from Funimation itself?

          All of this is further compounded by the fact that his behavior has apparently been a known secret in the industry for over a decade with many, many of his peers coming out and saying that they knew how he acted and would warn their friends and make active attempts to block him from being alone with female peers.
          Sure, you mean rumors. I believe Vic is a weirdo who doesn't know the meaning of personal space because he thinks his fans want his affection (many of them do) and someone with a temper. But a predator? I haven't seen it supported by anything yet.

          So in a court, yes the burden of proof will be on him since the circumstantial evidence seems to be strong enough for a judge to want an explanation from him. He and his lawyer will have to make a case to prove that all of his physical interactions were consensual in nature. So far, at least publicly, he has not been able to do that. This is why he and his lawyer likely will not take anything to court and instead just use the law firm as a scare tactic to stifle discussion.
          Man, imagine thinking when somebody accuses you of sexual assault without any substantial evidence, it's up to you to prove it's false.

          My guess, Vic will likely be taking this to civil court, on charges of defamation. Unless somebody wants charges pressed, it wouldn't come to that.

          As for no law enforcement involvement, unless an act was definitely criminal in nature then there can't be any criminal charges made months or years after the fact. Nobody has claimed he's raped them or forced himself on them. The claims are all that he's made sexual comments, repeated advances, and made unwanted physical contact. That last one could be played off as sexual assault, but it seems like none of it is bad enough to involve police.
          In the very article you posted, there were very obviously claims of Vic forcing himself on them.

          He's just a creep, not a criminal. (As far as we're currently aware at least.)
          Right and he deserves to have his entire career and reputation buried in the dirt within a few weeks because of some twitter post, followed by claims that aren't actually validated by our justice system.

          Now as always, I'm not an attorney.
          I can tell. Law and order doesn't seem to mean much to you. You'd rather believe an article from a joke of a website.

          My studies in law were all done on my own as prep for me to attend law school
          Weren't you trying to join NASA or something?
          Last edited by Raniero; February 22nd, 2019, 03:34 AM.

          Comment


            #85
            Originally posted by Helly View Post
            Raniero One word: professionalism.
            Sending kissy emotes to your coworker is "professionalism"?

            Or simply maintaining the status quo. Do you have any idea how many people are living with their abusers at this moment and keeping up the front that nothing happened/is happening?
            Not an excuse. I sympathize with people who do this, but there needs to be some accountability at a point. That's why a woman who live with her abuser and stays silent out of fear can still be charged if said abuser also ends up beating their kid to death.

            If these VAs knew he was this kind of person for so long, yet kept quiet even though they knew he interacted with minors, they aren't innocent either.

            Vic seeking counseling means he has a problem.
            I guess context means nothing. Seeking "counseling" doesn't automatically mean "seeking help for a problem with committing sexual abuse", especially since that would contradict other statements he's made on the matter.

            Read the article in the op. It links to a tweet with screenshots of Vic instructing one of his fanclubs to go out and defend him.
            It's not the best move, no, but wanting others to defend you from lies and slander isn't inherently a bad thing.
            Last edited by Raniero; February 22nd, 2019, 03:22 AM.

            Comment


              #86
              Originally posted by Helly View Post
              yes guys the female species is not renowned for its reasoning skills, inductivs or otherwise. on top of that they tend to be very meek. all of that is kind of why they keep getting themselves and others into rapey situations, see: Sweden

              ergo, "they should have known better if it were REALLY true" is not a valid argument
              Kinda telling when your counter-argument is basically "she's just retarded"

              Comment


                #87
                Originally posted by Oneiros View Post

                Yeah, I'm well aware as to what conscious confirmation bias is. Would you like to know the one thing scarier? Unconscious confirmation bias. Sites like Facebook and even Google employ the use of advanced algorithms to prioritize media they think you'll like based on their perpetual surveillance of your browsing habits. Most people don't even realize this is happening, which serves to ensure that people's loyalty to their respective "side" is all the more absolute. These are the people who are actually ruining America, not some boogey-scapegoat-man across the world like Uncle Vlad.

                That being said, I didn't say anything about the left/right not attempting to stifle opposing viewpoints, my guy. I know full well that they're two sides of the same coin, which is something I've been saying for years. They are fascists in all but name. It is because they have fascistic tendencies that I thought you'd be all "Fuck it" and align yourself with anarchy instead. Chaotic good > "united" evil. Of course it's not ideal, but is the current state of things? :/
                yes my alt-reich sources have informed me on this long ago

                ah...I see....you are coming at this from an idealist's perspective. I was simply talking about what the masses would likely choose for themselves. Idealistically, sure, I have confessed to having some libertarian leanings myself. Overall, I'm an "intervene as little as necessary" type of person - it spares everyone the hassle of having to deal with someone they don't really care about. But realistically, idealists are simply used by those who exist in power, then thrown away as soon as a new flavour of idealism comes about that appeals to the population. It simply is not very useful to me.

                ---------------------------------------------------


                Originally posted by Raniero View Post
                Sending kissy emotes to your coworker is "professionalism"?
                Keeping up the facade of a casual relationship is its own form of professionalism, especially in a profession as informal as this.



                Not an excuse. I sympathize with people who do this, but there needs to be some accountability at a point. That's why a woman who live with her abuser and stays silent out of fear can still be charged if said abuser also ends up beating their kid to death.

                If these VAs knew he was this kind of person for so long, yet kept quiet even though they knew he interacted with minors, they aren't innocent either.
                I didn't say it vindicated her of all fault, simply that this was likely why she hadn't spoken up before. There are several #MeToo stories that share that theme.



                I guess context means nothing. Seeking "counseling" doesn't automatically mean "seeking help for a problem with committing sexual abuse", especially since that would contradict other statements he's made on the matter.
                The context was about improving himself as a person and how he interacts with other people. I'd say that implies these incidents pretty heavily.



                It's not the best move, no, but wanting others to defend you from lies and slander isn't inherently a bad thing.
                It shows that he's willing to manipulate his own fans. It's a mark on his character. Meanwhile, what have you given me to disbelieve Bulma's VA? Somehow, I don't see the defense of "your honor, she's lying about the assault; she sent me kissy face emotes this one time on social media" holding up very well in comparison to everything we've already seen of Vic.
                Last edited by Helly; February 22nd, 2019, 05:05 AM.

                Comment


                  #88
                  Originally posted by Louay View Post

                  Kinda telling when your counter-argument is basically "she's just retarded"
                  more like "women are retarded".

                  Even still, though, lets look at it this way: if a white dude rides into a ghetto with a mercedes benz, goes into a mcdonalds, walks back out and finds his car gawn....sure, he's dumb for taking a mercedes to a ghetto in the first place, but the car jacker is still the person who commited the crime and thus should be held accountable.

                  Comment


                    #89
                    Originally posted by Helly View Post
                    ah...I see....you are coming at this from an idealist's perspective. I was simply talking about what the masses would likely choose for themselves. Idealistically, sure, I have confessed to having some libertarian leanings myself. Overall, I'm an "intervene as little as necessary" type of person - it spares everyone the hassle of having to deal with someone they don't really care about. But realistically, idealists are simply used by those who exist in power, then thrown away as soon as a new flavour of idealism comes about that appeals to the population. It simply is not very useful to me.
                    Well, yeah, but there would be nobody "in power" in my scenario, hence the parallel to LotF. Ralph, the de facto leader, was moments away from being killed before the boys were rescued by a seaman. Under total anarchy, seizing power is possible though retaining that power is not.

                    Originally posted by Helly View Post
                    Even still, though, lets look at it this way: if a white dude rides into a ghetto with a mercedes benz, goes into a mcdonalds, walks back out and finds his car gawn....sure, he's dumb for taking a mercedes to a ghetto in the first place, but the car jacker is still the person who commited the crime and thus should be held accountable.
                    The guy who stole the Benz should be held accountable, yes, but that doesn't magically absolve the owner of personal responsibility. Therefore, if this woman willingly put herself in a compromising situation with a man with a bad reputation, she is not blameless. Women shouldn't be any freer of personal accountability than men are. And yet, we have the worst type of people advocating for the ability to retroactivey "take back consent" because the walk of shame was too shameful. :/
                    Last edited by Oneiros; February 22nd, 2019, 05:47 AM.

                    Comment


                      #90
                      Originally posted by Cid View Post

                      Are you saying these women were basically asking to be harassed? Maybe because they wore some lowcut shirts and shorts or something?
                      "Come to my room" is an universal sign of "let's have sex" if they didn't want to, then they shouldn't have gone simple as
                      Originally posted by Kajin_Style ;n513566
                      Why should I even give a damn that some faggot is being stoned to death in another country?

                      Comment


                      • Cid
                        Cid commented
                        Editing a comment
                        It's not normally a universal sign of sex when 1.) both people are in a relationship and 2.) you thought you were both friends.

                      • DokTOR.
                        DokTOR. commented
                        Editing a comment
                        lmao DELUSION

                      #91
                      Originally posted by Oneiros View Post

                      Well, yeah, but there would be nobody "in power" in my scenario, hence the parallel to LotF. Ralph, the de facto leader, was moments away from being killed before the boys were rescued by a seaman. Under total anarchy, seizing power is possible though retaining that power is not.



                      The guy who stole the Benz should be held accountable, yes, but that doesn't magically absolve the owner of personal responsibility. Therefore, if this woman willingly put herself in a compromising situation with a man with a bad reputation, she is not blameless. Women shouldn't be any freer of personal accountability than men are. And yet, we have the worst type of people advocating for the ability to retroactivey "take back consent" because the walk of shame was too shameful. :/
                      .....i forgot to mention....i havent read LotF yet lol ah fml spoiled on another staple of literature YET AGAIN :((((((((((( in any case, if such a scenario were to ever come to life then sure I'll happily assist in lopping Ralph's head off. maybe roll it down a set of stairs for old times sake as tribute to my heathen gods


                      yeh, and I'm not saying the other VAs are innocent, obviously they're not, but thats a separate conversation - Vic Mignogna is the subject of this e-hearing

                      Comment


                        #92
                        Originally posted by Helly View Post

                        .....i forgot to mention....i havent read LotF yet lol ah fml spoiled on another staple of literature YET AGAIN :((((((((((( in any case, if such a scenario were to ever come to life then sure I'll happily assist in lopping Ralph's head off. maybe roll it down a set of stairs for old times sake as tribute to my heathen gods


                        yeh, and I'm not saying the other VAs are innocent, obviously they're not, but thats a separate conversation - Vic Mignogna is the subject of this e-hearing
                        "Life is a journey, not a destination."

                        That's not the point, though. If this Vic guy is found guilty, he'll obviously be punished. The other VA(s) in question, however, will not. Even if he's actually found innocent and they've irrevocably ruined his life and reputation. I guess he could countersue for defamation (which will only yield some financial recompense anyway) after the fact, but once the damage has been done... That said, the alternative is also entirely possible. That he's actually guilty and gets off scot-free due to there only being circumstantial evidence. "He said, she said" are some of the worst types of cases for these very reasons.
                        Last edited by Oneiros; February 22nd, 2019, 06:14 AM.

                        Comment


                          #93
                          Originally posted by Raniero View Post
                          There were multiple examples of pictures shown with him interacting with fans, which turned out to not be sexual assault and the fans were fine with Vic. ANN did actually take one such picture out of context and was forced to take it down when the woman in it called them out. And the ANN article wasn't unbiased either, considering who wrote it.
                          ANN didn't take the picture out of context, the Pro-Vic people did. ANN posted the images but never, at any point, implied those images were depicting non-consensual interactions. In fact, far from it, the article, in that portion, was talking about how handsy he can be with fans (especially younger ones) and used those images to illustrate that point. As soon as the people in the photos asked for the photos to be removed, ANN removed them without question as well. But regardless, I've stated numerous times that the accusations from fans aren't that important here. "Fans" aren't held to any kind of standard. The important accusations against him all come from industry professionals. Those are the only ones that matter, coming from a legal standpoint.


                          Originally posted by Raniero View Post
                          There was a recent incident where somebody said a Vic supporter SWATTED them and got caught lying. We've seen VAs threaten fans. These people aren't angels.
                          As I said, fans are dumb and don't matter. No reason to keep bringing them up. At all. I've never, in this whole conversation, said the fan allegations were true or trustworthy. But have actually said the opposite on multiple occasions. Vic won't sue the fans and nobody can verify any of the accusations from them. So there're useless to discuss.

                          I haven't seen other VAs threaten anyone. I saw Monica Rials inform her fans that she was keeping up with the threats of violence against her and that she would turn them over to police. That's not a threat to fans. That's her defending herself. Any attempts to paint it otherwise are pretty scummy. If any of you assholes made

                          Originally posted by Raniero View Post
                          One of the accusers hypocritically talked about cutting Vic's balls off, so sorry if I have a hard time sympathizing with her. Ironically, Vic has been the most mature person here.
                          Other than when he begged his fans to go out on social media and defend him, I guess. But of course he's not going to go on rants about how he's innocent. That would just make him look even more guilty than he already does.

                          Originally posted by Raniero View Post
                          Their opinions and accusations haven't been proven true either. You choose to blindly believe them. I don't. Again, Cid, if you're fine with trial by media or jumping in the social media outrage culture, that's on you. I prefer evidence and our justice system doing its job, not just talk.
                          They've been corroborated by other industry professionals and well as by convention and hotel staff that were involved. For Vic's own statements, he hasn't actually denied most of the allegations but instead has been saying that it was always consensual or that he's just overly affectionate... I mean, he's not even denying that he's touched, groped, and made sexual advances on these women without permission. He's just claiming he thought it was always consensual. Even when he admits that the person in question quickly left his room as soon as they were able to get free from him. Come on dude. lol

                          Originally posted by Raniero View Post
                          Your source for this is a questionable interview with no official sources or backing from anybody in Funimation. Hilarious you call people out on using youtube videos as a source, but you're quick to turn to an article that has been confirmed to have fabricated a lot of what was actually said. How about an official statement on the matter from Funimation itself?
                          I mean... Journalists from a reputable site are already much more credible than youtube neckbeards. There's a certain amount of professionalism involved here. But yes, I'm much more inclined to believe interviews from a journalist's article on a reputable website than I am some rando on youtube. And no, none of the i09 article I sourced has been confirmed to have been fabricated. That's just a blatant lie on your behalf.

                          Originally posted by Raniero View Post
                          Sure, you mean rumors. I believe Vic is a weirdo who doesn't know the meaning of personal space because he thinks his fans want his affection (many of them do) and someone with a temper. But a predator? I haven't seen it supported by anything yet.
                          Yes, sure, rumors. By industry professionals who'd have no reason to lie... Come on dude, why are you reaching so hard here?

                          Originally posted by Raniero View Post
                          Man, imagine thinking when somebody accuses you of sexual assault without any substantial evidence, it's up to you to prove it's false.
                          It is when they're your own peers making the accusations, accusations that were corroborated by other members of your industry as well as by convention and hotel staff, independently.

                          Originally posted by Raniero View Post
                          My guess, Vic will likely be taking this to civil court, on charges of defamation. Unless somebody wants charges pressed, it wouldn't come to that.
                          Very doubtful. He's only got a case against some rando fans on twitter and no lawyer worth their salt will try to bring civil suits against random twitter followers. It'd cost more than it's worth and would just further drive his reputation into the dirt.

                          Originally posted by Raniero View Post
                          In the very article you posted, there were very obviously claims of Vic forcing himself on them.
                          Kissing and groping. It's sexual harassment but it wouldn't be enough for police to ever investigate since most of these claims are years old.

                          Originally posted by Raniero View Post
                          Right and he deserves to have his entire career and reputation buried in the dirt within a few weeks because of some twitter post, followed by claims that aren't actually validated by our justice system.
                          He's had it coming for a long time, honestly.

                          Originally posted by Raniero View Post
                          I can tell. Law and order doesn't seem to mean much to you. You'd rather believe an article from a joke of a website.
                          I mean... I obviously know more than you do about law. lol

                          Originally posted by Raniero View Post
                          Weren't you trying to join NASA or something?
                          Not when I was 17.

                          Comment


                            #94
                            Originally posted by Cid View Post

                            The evidence against him is all circumstantial, but it's also all valid within a court so long as there are no contradictions in it. As far as I'm aware, there's only one instance of a notable "claim" against him that was proven to be false. And that wasn't even a claim against him, but rather youtubers taking the initial ANN article out of context. As such, it wouldn't hold up in court as a means to discredit the accusations against him. The claims of images being photoshopped to make it look worse are complete assumptions based off one person being seen saying that an image should be manipulated (with the owner of the image immediately and bluntly refusing any attempt to do so.) For reference, the notable claims are from the other VAs and the professional cosplayers, not random fans claiming he groped them. Their opinions and accusations aren't important to the legal aspects here. None of the VAs or industry professionals have had their accusations proven to be false and most of them have been supported by other industry professionals.

                            Funimation conducted numerous interviews and heard out multiple stories, that were apparently corroborated with convention and hotel staff. Vic's only defense against those accusations was a repeated claim that all encounters were always consensual, which won't hold up in court. Especially since one of those claims was apparently an outright lie since the convention managers confirmed receiving a report about it. All of this is further compounded by the fact that his behavior has apparently been a known secret in the industry for over a decade with many, many of his peers coming out and saying that they knew how he acted and would warn their friends and make active attempts to block him from being alone with female peers. So in a court, yes the burden of proof will be on him since the circumstantial evidence seems to be strong enough for a judge to want an explanation from him. He and his lawyer will have to make a case to prove that all of his physical interactions were consensual in nature. So far, at least publicly, he has not been able to do that. This is why he and his lawyer likely will not take anything to court and instead just use the law firm as a scare tactic to stifle discussion.

                            As for no law enforcement involvement, unless an act was definitely criminal in nature then there can't be any criminal charges made months or years after the fact. Nobody has claimed he's raped them or forced himself on them. The claims are all that he's made sexual comments, repeated advances, and made unwanted physical contact. That last one could be played off as sexual assault, but it seems like none of it is bad enough to involve police.

                            He's just a creep, not a criminal. (As far as we're currently aware at least.)

                            Now as always, I'm not an attorney. My studies in law were all done on my own as prep for me to attend law school and so I can't be sure anything I said is true. As always, I defer to Post-Crisis Shobto make any corrections to what I've said since he actually is an attorney who specializes in these types of cases. (I think he said he does, at least.)
                            I haven’t been following this story at all. What’s the fact-pattern here? (Give me a brief synopsis of the allegations + actions taken in response)

                            Comment


                              #95
                              Originally posted by Oneiros View Post

                              "Life is a journey, not a destination."
                              Im going to kill you in ur sleep

                              That's not the point, though. If this Vic guy is found guilty, he'll obviously be punished. The other VA(s) in question, however, will not. Even if he's actually found innocent and they've irrevocably ruined his life and reputation. I guess he could countersue for defamation (which will only yield some financial recompense anyway) after the fact, but once the damage has been done... That said, the alternative is also entirely possible. That he's actually guilty and gets off scot-free due to there only being circumstantial evidence. "He said, she said" are some of the worst types of cases for these very reasons.
                              nothing i really disagree with bro, ur preaching to the choir. im just sayin, its not exactly a refutation of the evidence that has come to light

                              Comment


                                #96
                                Originally posted by Post-Crisis Shob View Post
                                I haven’t been following this story at all. What’s the fact-pattern here? (Give me a brief synopsis of the allegations + actions taken in response)
                                Started out with fans on Twitter talking about how Mignogna was prone to kissing, hugging, and groping without their permission. A lot of these fans were underaged at the time of meeting him and posted photos of their encounters. Mignogna's response to these claims was that he was raised in an affectionate household and he never knew that his fans were upset by such things. He said he would stop making any such contact, and during the few convention appearances he's had since, he has stayed behind his table and made no physical contact.

                                Then came the accusations of similar unwanted advances from his peers in the voice acting industry. Two actresses came forward saying that he also made multiple unwanted advances on them and showed support to fans who coming out against him. One such complaint was that when greeting them he would pull their heads back by their hair and kiss their necks. Mignogna denied those allegations outright, but other peers in the industry have corroborated their accusations and have said that it was an open secret in the industry that he was very handsy.

                                Rooster Teeth and Funimation fired him after these accusations became widespread. Funimation, specifically, says that they conducted an investigation into the claims before severing ties with him.

                                An i09 article released a couple days ago interviewed three of the actresses at Funimation who were part of that investigation, they claim that he would invite them to his room for something innocuous, like wanting to show them a video, and then he would grab them, rub on them, and kiss them. Mignogna actually didn't deny any of these three claims, but instead insisted that all three encounters were completely consensual. Apparently, i09 was able to verify with convention staff that one of the incidents did happen and that they had received a complaint from the actresses in question. It also seems that, after she pushed him away and left his room, that he had her table moved to an entirely different room in the convention hall, which is why she didn't come forward sooner. All three claimed that they were afraid that he would use his immense power within the industry to destroy their careers.

                                I think that covers about everything.
                                Last edited by Cid; February 22nd, 2019, 10:40 PM.

                                Comment


                                  #97
                                  Originally posted by Cid View Post
                                  Then came the accusations of similar unwanted advances from his peers in the voice acting industry. Two actresses came forward saying that he also made multiple unwanted advances on them and showed support to fans who coming out against him. One such complaint was that when greeting them he would pull their heads back by their hair and kiss their necks. Mignogna denied those allegations outright, but other peers in the industry have corroborated their accusations and have said that it was an open secret in the industry that he was very handsy.

                                  Rooster Teeth and Funimation fired him after these accusations became widespread. Funimation, specifically, says that they conducted an investigation into the claims before severing ties with him.
                                  ...thats the real heart-of-the-matter then...

                                  There's no criminal law issue here.

                                  The civil law imposes no duty to investigate or remediate claims that he was making unwanted advances on random fans / convention attendees.

                                  Where the civil law kicks in is when the claims of unwanted sexual advances come from COWORKERS.

                                  Thats an employment law issue of hostile work environment on the basis of sex.

                                  At that point, once the employer is put on notice of claims, they have an affirmative duty under the law to conduct a prompt investigation. And, if the allegations are substantiated, to take prompt remedial action.

                                  If the employer receives complaints from multiple employees that another employee is doing what you just described, and the employer fails to conduct a prompt investigation. Or if the employer investigates and substantiates the claim but fails to take remedial action.

                                  ...the employer could than be sued by the employees who reported the coworker and had their complaints ignored; thats the kind of case I would put into suit.

                                  Now of course the missing piece of the puzzle here that we're not privy to is the substance of the investigation conducted by the employer. Someone at HR should have published an investigatory report that would have been seen by executives who had the power to make the hire-or-fire decision, but which would not have been made available to the general public. That report should now be preserved as a business record.

                                  And if there's litigation arising from this matter, one of the first things any competent attorney is going to do is demand identification/production of all such records. (then depose any investigator named in produced investigatory reports and get their testimony-under-oath as to what manner of factfinding was used to compile them)

                                  Thats the kind of material I'd expect to have access to if I really wanted to give a well-reasoned opinion on whether or not the correct action was taken here. Thats the kind of material I'd be able to get in litigation.

                                  ...just as a lay-observer...

                                  From the outside looking in, it sounds like Funimation acted correctly here.



                                  Comment


                                    #98
                                    Now the flip side here is that if a prompt investigation found (or should have found) the allegations were unsubstantiated but they fired him anyway, that’s a basis for a wrongful termination action. That’s also the kind of case I would put into suit. (again—it all comes down to what kind of investigation they did + what was their factual basis for reaching a finding of substantiation)
                                    Last edited by Post-Crisis Shob; February 22nd, 2019, 11:39 PM.

                                    Comment


                                      #99
                                      Originally posted by Post-Crisis Shob View Post
                                      Now the flip side here is that if a prompt investigation found (or should have found) the allegations were unsubstantiated but they fired him anyway, that’s a basis for a wrongful termination action. That’s also the kind of case I would put into suit. (again—it all comes down to what kind of investigation they did + what was their factual basis for reaching a finding of substantiation)
                                      Assuming the report consists of nothing but testimony from his coworkers and there's no reason to suspect any lies from them (and in fact, Vic corroborates the accusations himself but merely plays them off as being completely consensual) do you think he has a wrongful termination case?

                                      That's really the biggest question I had, as Raniero thinks that the women's word and corrboration from male peers isn't enough to constitute his firing. (Or he thinks Vic could file for defamation against any coworkers that accused him, could be both.)

                                      Comment


                                        Originally posted by Cid View Post

                                        Assuming the report consists of nothing but testimony from his coworkers and there's no reason to suspect any lies from them (and in fact, Vic corroborates the accusations himself but merely plays them off as being completely consensual) do you think he has a wrongful termination case?

                                        That's really the biggest question I had, as Raniero thinks that the women's word and corrboration from male peers isn't enough to constitute his firing. (Or he thinks Vic could file for defamation against any coworkers that accused him, could be both.)
                                        If they had multiple coworkers saying that Vic engaged in unwanted grabbing and kissing and Vic’s own admission that he made sexual advances on same-said women, that’s enough for a proper termination.

                                        Comment

                                        Working...
                                        X