World News

Yeah the largest biological weapon attack on US soil was a cult.

Just look at the Catholic Church.

Well, if republican politicians and catholic priests are any guide, this means Kutcher and Moore are almost certainly prolific child abusers.

EDIT: oh FFS, their org is THORN?!? The same group of wine mommies trying to destroy the internet with that awful and mislabeled “kids online safety act”?

Fuck them AND their parent-pandering bullshit. Scientologists are nasty business.

Except when defending adult rapists I guess?

"As a role model, Danny has consistently been an excellent one," Kutcher wrote, later writing, "He has always treated people with decency, equality, and generosity."

Not that I want to throw shade at his current work, but this is a pretty big red flag on his credibility towards siding with victims. ESPECIALLY since this is was in relation to defending a Scientologist, a known organzation for SA.

Yes, writing a letter to get sentence reduction might be reasonable if it were a non-violent crime. Shoplifting, tax fraud or drugs or something, I dont know. But not rape for effs sake.

I absolutely hate this situation and I was going to write a whole thing about how we wouldn't do the same thing if an upstanding husband and father was convicted of murder, except oh yes people literally actually do do the same thing. You'll literally have letters written like "he made a mistake but he has kids at home please go easy on him" as if actual murder isn't a pretty big disqualifier.

I guess we humans have a blind spot to the most common sins versus the mythical perfect criminal who spits on babies and hails satan...

In their interactions and personal knowledge, perhaps he was. If you personally don't know Danny or anyone else involved, your only exposure is what you've heard presented and made public. If you personally knew Danny and hadn't witnessed any of these crimes yourself, you now have a conflicted view of someone who is both your friend and now guilty of 2 counts of sexual assault. While that conviction almost certainly changes your relationship going forward, it doesn't change how you thought of that individual beforehand.

Ashton and Mila were asked to write letters of character that described the Danny they knew. It doesn't change the outcome of the trial, but as with matters that carry different sentencing structures awarded by the judge, a judge will often take letters like this to determine what is appropriate. Is there a chance that the defendant will repeat this offense? What punishment, if any, will be restorative to the victims? How does this punishment affect everyone, including families established years afterwards? Is the defendant the same person today as they were when they committed these crimes?

These aren't matters easily decided and therfore it isn't surprising to see letters of character submitted either as part of the trial or during sentencing. If there is a patten of behavior, then sentencing might be maximum allowed, but if there's no clear discernable behavior, then sentencing might be light.

I don't know all the details that was considered, but based on my knowledge from reports, I think 15 years concurrent would have been appropriate. However, I don't have all the evidence or material to make an informed decision. I don't look upon these letters ss reflecting poorly on Ashton or Mila as they were just doing what was asked of them to help give the judge the context necessary to carry out an appropriate sentence. They aren't guilty of doing anything wrong, more than the lawyers defending a now convicted and sentenced rapist.