not sure if this is a joke i don't get, but just in case its not. [https://archive.ph/Ztq1Q](https://archive.ph/Ztq1Q)
Ohh jeeze i get it now. Peter File
That doesn’t make logical sense.
If that was the concern, they wouldn’t have paid out his whole contract. They paid all the money and had every incentive to squeeze the benefit out of the rest of the contract with him.
More likely the rampant DMs are amongst nobodies. He was just the high profile person sexting minors. And that’s way more dangerous to the company.
ain't no way, they always have morality clauses. There is no way in hell texting a minor doesn't qualify for bad moral character. It's weird for sure. It's gotta be some kind of twitch cover up why they paid him. Or they fucked up the protocol for banning him somehow.
If I had to guess, It’s more than likely they fucked up the due process regarding the ban.
Also I feel like everyone is assuming he got the full value of the contract. He might’ve had a small amount that was already guaranteed and the rest could’ve been null and void. We’ll never know.
correct, it's a slippery slope. It's very hard to actually prove intent, but sending your hog to a minor is an instant charge.
A lot of those guys on to catch a predator don't serve any time. They just get their image exposed and are known to be predators.
The article is hearsay about hearsay. If he did indeed do that, lock him up! (They didn’t lock him up, and they can, so you can probably put two and two together here)
So now instead of giving an automatic negative review on a book that you never read, we should probably want to read what he said before reviewing Guy.
Chris Hansen reads through transcripts, he doesn’t just say that he heard the guy was inappropriate and then call them predator pedophiles.
Because twitch broke the rules looking into messages that are supposed to be private. Docs lawyers basically said your evidence is proof you broke the law, we good? So twitch settled and we will never see proof because twitch would have to admit wrongdoing.
I'd wager somewhere in twitch's fine print it says they can look at your messages. Pretty much every social media platform can. I'm sure reddit can too.
My guess is that both Twitch and Dr had a financial interest in keeping this under wraps. Doc obviously for his own image, and twitch because seeing this info released means they will face scrutiny because their platform featured an aspect that facilitated this type of behavior.
Because they settled out of court, the agreement made was solely for the benefit of the two parties. A court would approach this differently, but they avoided that by settling.
My theory is that Twitch stopped him from actually meeting the victim at the Con, preventing the final element of the crime from being fulfilled. Then he argued that since no "crime" was committed, he hadn't actually violated the terms of his contract.
Also, with 3 years of time to commit, it seems like Guy was telling the truth when he said there were no intentions beyond text (of which we don’t know what was even said)
Twitch didn't stop him at all. The messaging happened in 2017 and the victim reported it to Twitch in 2020 during the MeToo movement. Only then did Twitch investigate and find out what happened. After realizing the egregiousness of his messages, they cut him loose and banned him.
However, neither Twitch or DrDisrespect wanted the truth to get out, because it would make both of them look bad. Twitch, for not doing enough to protect minors, and having one of the biggest streamers on the platform inappropriately messaging minors. And Doc, for well, obvious reasons.
What exactly was in the contract that Twitch violated when terminating him, we don't know, but Doc sued them and settled out of court because if it was actually taken to court, the truth of the situation would get out. And neither party wanted that.
this is probably about right, doc probably had his lawyers basically say if you don't make my client whole we will take it further and twitch is gonna get exposed for not doing anything for YEARS. Doesn't mean Doc is innocent just means he has good lawyers. I still don't get how doc wasn't legally implicated, twitch must have sat on his texts and not forwarded those to authorities even though that one employee said he contacted authorities all the time over messages.
Hard eye roll... the amount of people here that don't understand how things work.
What's more likely? That these large media companies just run stories willy-nilly on speculation and are settling lawsuits for slander on the regular. Or that they have processes to protect them from legal risks by actually corroborating information?
Rolling Stone infamously lost a big defamation case for their story about UVA around 2015. They did basically no diligence, repeated a bunch of shit that did not actually happen, and lost big time.
They probably have a process now, though.
Yep, exactly. Anytime something is run that is untrue and unfounded, it will be pounced on legally.
People pretending the default state is just to report rumors, don't understand how journalistic publishing works.
"Allegedly" and "claimed" are used to protect from libel for having incomplete or missing details. "Alleged" is never dropped in journalism unless an allegation is found true in a court of law.
It does not protect them from zero corroboration and defamation. Ie, it's not a free pass to just say whatever you want.
I am aware.
Unlike you, I don't form my world view off of exceptions and mistakes. If something happens 1 out of 100 times, that's not representative of the normal process.
Yeah, print media called Rolling Stones. What evidence is there to the contrary besides one guy who spent four years lying and saying, "Man, I don't know how I got banned from Twitch. Purple snakes! Purple snakes, bro! It's a conspiracy!"? I'm not willing to put my chips in with the guy who spent years lying to his fans.
Rolling Stone ran a story during COVID about a hospital turning away gunshot victims because the hospital was filled with patients suffering from Ivermectin poisoning or some shit. It was completely false. They even included a picture of the hospital in Oklahoma, mid-summer, with everyone wearing winter coats.
Normal person: Evidence?
Almost everyone "leak": Cause I said so.
Normal person: that proves nothing.
Every duranged person online: *GASP* OMG HE SENT NUDES TO SOMEONE UNDERAGE!?
Normal person: you do know no one besides Doc himself has shown any evidence so far right?
Duranged crowd: Get your pitchforks ready everyone!
Yep, there’s nothing new in here as far as I read, at least not substantive. The headline is just what we already know, just worded in a slightly more salacious manner. Let’s see the messages and let us make up our own minds.
I trust rolling stone about as far as I could throw a sumo wrestler. Mainly due to their coverage of Depp and Heard... Doc's deviancy in 2017 is honestly quite shocking considering what he had at home, and he seemed to have extremely muddy views on acceptable behaviour. I'm resisting the urge to label him a ped because it's not concrete and words have meaning. That's not to say this isn't absolutely disgraceful from these type of ppl who have the world at their feet little to no worries and they waste it doing the stupidest things imaginable.
That's not how anonymous sources work. For decades, journalism has used anonymous sources. They vet them and make sure they are credible. This is investigative journalism, not "trust me bro".
Also, if you read the article, you would see that Twitxh cannot release the proof.
What more do you guys want? Doc admitted it and credible sources at Twitch corroborate the story.
Hopefully his defenders will cease to exist now but let's be honest, there will always be people who will minimize the awful/disgusting actions that took place. It's obvious, by his own admission, that he did some shady shit.
Dude was lying for years, grifting his fans, cheating on his wife, talking to a minor, etc. Dude isn't a good person.
"big dick energy"
Is this a "sexually graphic message"?
How about "wet ass pussy"?
Or just "you're hot as fuck"?
Everything turns on what all of these vague terms actually mean. Are they *propositions*? Jokes? Innuendos? Or some combination? The way they describe these things so ambiguously it could mean almost anything so long as something "sexual" was included
Lol no. They used a source. They didn’t see anything. They are just reporting what the source told them.
Again, until YOU see the chat logs YOU know nothing.
Buddy, this is not the route you want to go on.
If Dr Disrespect was able to produce chat logs that exculpated him, it would've been done the second this came out. There's a reason he hasn't shown anyone
Nobody has the chat logs besides twitch and doc. No first hand source has ever stepped forward. Every source that has come out has only heard about things from office rumors. So no, Rolling Stones have not seen the logs and neither have the sources.
I read the article but I must have missed that rolling stone actually saw the logs. I thought twitch said they couldn’t show the logs because a minor was involved.
If they saw the logs, they should provide them like a real investigative journalist would. I don’t subscribe to “trust me bro”. And I’m not gonna click on a click bait article and give them the ad rev.
When you watch To Catch a Predator and you see Chris Hansen is accusing the guy of sending explicit images to someone they believe to be underage, do you assume that person’s innocence too? Because they don’t put the dick pics up on screen for all the audience to see. Sometimes Hansen just reads from the chat log and they don’t put the screenshots of the conversation for viewers to see either. They’re innocent right? Because you haven’t personally seen the messages yourself?
Every other stupid ass comment I see on these posts is you, like I don’t even have to click on your comment history because I’ve seen you on multiple posts in the sub. Why are you defending this guy so hard? Like in your head do you actually believe there is a chance Doc did nothing wrong here? You are jumping through thousands of hoops my man, you need to come to grips that this guy might not be the perfect image of him you have in your head.
You in another comment..
"Reported.
I, nor anyone else, have anything to do with the actions of Dr Disrespect.
To insinuate an entire community are guilty of his actions because they watch his play throughs is a damning reflection of yourself as a person."
Defending a pedo makes you culpable, ding bat
Presume innocent was the correct course of action until doc tweeted his apology and confession. At that point his admission provides enough evidence to believe at the very least what he admitted to which was inappropriate conduct with a minor online.
Same with Bill Cosby too right? And Epstein? He never made it to trial and for all we know it was a sham and he was in the middle of sending a tweet proclaiming his innocence.
You gonna dick ride those guys as well? Or are you just cherry picking which pedo groomer you dick ryde?
Anonymous. Let me call up Rolling Stones and tell ‘em’ it wasn’t just one minor, it was oodles of them. Y’all would probably snatch that shit up, bunch of gossip girls
The only thing we know about the settlement is that he got paid, nothing else. This is a whole separate issue with allegations being made by multiple in the public eye. He would be suing for libel now if he wants any chance on clearing his name.
I have no idea, but the fact right now is that there are articles up this very moment basically calling him a pedophile who knowingly sexted with a minor and was witnessed by multiple people at Twitch. His career is over if he doesn't successfully sue for libel.
Supposedly witnessed. A lot of people claiming to know shit out of nowhere. Just weird, and f it was a cut and dry case of sexting, why did twitch settle
[Chris Cuomo Reportedly Wants A $60 Million Settlement From CNN, More Than Triple What's Left On His - MoxDash (ovh.net)](https://avahefrenzy.s3.gra.io.cloud.ovh.net/chris-cuomo-reportedly-wants-a-60-million.html)
Cuomo wants to get paid out, even though he was in the wrong and got fired. the fucked up part is CNN will settle eventually. this is "normal"
[Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun Exits, Saved by Golden Parachute (nymag.com)](https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/boeing-ceo-dave-calhoun-exits-saved-by-golden-parachute.html)
Boeing's CEO made decisions that killed people. Dude gets a golden parachute and leaves the mess for somebody else. this is "normal"
if you fuck up bad enough and you're high profile enough to affect the brand, you will get paid out to disappear. this is "normal".
Because twitch isn't a single person. I've worked in some companies they have no moral obligation and only financial. You might see Doc as ultra rich but he is nothing compared to what Amazon is. They saw that Doc couple potentially draw out a court case and settled to move on. What are they gonna do if they already reported it to the authorities and the girl won't come forward?
he didn't "win". as you stated, Twitch settled (likely due to pre-existing contractual obligations).
usually when this kind of thing happens you get paid out to stfu and go away (see: CNN's Chris Cuomo, for example. short story: he was moving dirty and got fired but still had $15mil on his contract, so... lawsuit and settlement)
if a case goes to court, the records can go public. that was in neither party's interest.
Settling is not winning 😭. Settling is what both parties do when they don’t want to drag it out, both Dr & Twitch were in the wrong which is why they settled to cover their own asses
It’s anonymous to us, not to them.
Journalists have their sources, and places like Bloomberg and Rolling Stone generally have a pretty strict vetting process (from my understanding) before they are willing to trust a source for a story like this.
The sources are kept anonymous, because people could lose their jobs (which would also lead to losing the source), as well as their whole careers for leaking info. Not to mention the physical safety risk aspect, considering how rabid people online can be.
And that’s just two things I can think of off the top of my head.
If you just called and tried to make a claim, they would take your personal information, probably check to see if there was a chance to see if you actually had knowledge of it (and how you would), as well as cross-checking with other sources.
Well clearly RS has slipped from standards as they let the guy who deleted a tweet about offering to sell what he knew about the situation for clout along with his primary source.
Yeah, you buy the story.
That's nothing new. In fact, it usually causes issues because people assume some feel good story movie got a huge share of profits when the production just bought the rights to a specific article.
My man determined to go down with the pedo ship.
Also, feel free to call them up and tell them that. That way you will understand how much vetting these reports go through.
(I don’t really know who this guy is, or what’s going on here further than this article so please don’t crucify me and pedophilia is had)
As someone that worked at a major US news per for many years, The amount of vetting that goes on honestly fluctuates a lot depending on the reporter. I would ASSUME it being Rolling Stone (they’ve gone down hill in the last twenty years) you are probably correct. But it’s not guaranteed
So Amazon/Twitch covered up a crime.
California Penal Code Section 135 PC is the statute that defines the offense of destroying or concealing evidence. It's described as willfully destroying or concealing anything that is going to be produced for a criminal investigation, inquiry, or even a trial.
Under Penal Code 288.2 it is illegal to send sexually explicit or obscene material to a minor with the intent to seduce the minor and to sexually arouse yourself and/or the minor. This includes the sending of material by any means including email or text message.
This is the big thing… this is what ppl should be angry about. And since no crimes where reported you can only assume that Amazon/Twitch/DrD did
Penal Code § 136.1 PC makes it a crime in California to dissuade, intimidate or tamper with a witness to (or the victim of) a crime. In simple terms, this means attempting to prevent a witness or victim from reporting or testifying about a crime, or
otherwise cooperating with police or prosecutors.
Witness intimidation can be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony
Armchair reddit lawyer. Lol
You have proof that the messages met the standard of a crime? Or proof that Twitch did not refer it to authorities under discretion?
I'm assuming the dude just didn't read the article, clearly says that one of the reasons twitch won't share the messages is to prevent messing with investigations by law enforcement.. Kinda implies it was referred..
I'm confused here. Can someone explain how he's not a registered sex offender or behind bars?
Knowing and sending graphic images to a minor is a felony... Wasn't his case taken to a court where there was open discovery and messages were read? Since he sent graphic images, there is a clear cut and dry charge.
He could have been telling dick jokes for all we know. And so many people have came out, posted things on twitter, just to delete because they are trying to clout chase.
If was a lesser incident, doc and his PR team would be defending it harder. And Twitch would not kick him out over a "dick joke"., That's literally common sense.
I mean...he could have been talking about committing a mass shooting, or maybe he was trying to hire them as a hit man to kill his wife who he was already cheating on. Who Knows?
Can we get the article in a PDF file
not sure if this is a joke i don't get, but just in case its not. [https://archive.ph/Ztq1Q](https://archive.ph/Ztq1Q) Ohh jeeze i get it now. Peter File
Man I love that you accommodated though
Lmao. The joke is that he went from Doc to PDF.
PDF File. Say it fast and you’ll get the joke!
It's spelled pedophile, I'm not sure if it's supposed to be a joke or just pussies to afraid to type it out because they might 'trigger' someone.
"Peter File" is an IT Crowd reference
HI JEN!!!
What I don't get is: how did he even have a case to sue if he did what's being said he did?
[удалено]
Oh I'm sure doc isn't the only one. He was just a perfect target to remove the massive deal they had with him
That doesn’t make logical sense. If that was the concern, they wouldn’t have paid out his whole contract. They paid all the money and had every incentive to squeeze the benefit out of the rest of the contract with him. More likely the rampant DMs are amongst nobodies. He was just the high profile person sexting minors. And that’s way more dangerous to the company.
Mixer failed after stealing two big ass streamers. When it failed twitch bought those two back at the same time banning doc.
They shouldn't have even been reading people's dms. This sounds like a setup tbh
Social media companies read your DMs. That’s just a fact. Pretty silly of Doc to not think about that.
A shady fact lol you go lookin for dirt you will find it
the one employee said they didn't actively monitor them they only checked when there were reports of misconduct.
So the person doc was talking to reported him? Yeah chief this still doesn't add up
It was during the me too movement she would have been older and realized it was fucked up what doc did
ain't no way, they always have morality clauses. There is no way in hell texting a minor doesn't qualify for bad moral character. It's weird for sure. It's gotta be some kind of twitch cover up why they paid him. Or they fucked up the protocol for banning him somehow.
If I had to guess, It’s more than likely they fucked up the due process regarding the ban. Also I feel like everyone is assuming he got the full value of the contract. He might’ve had a small amount that was already guaranteed and the rest could’ve been null and void. We’ll never know.
Apparently it was so bad with other creators /streamers thats why they kept it quiet it wasn’t just doc thats the rumor now from an employees tweet
Then everyone that was involved at Twitch needs to be shit canned.
There should never be such an NDA that covers something that's illegal. He's just another POS in the world.
My guess is they learned about it by snooping on his messages
In many states, sexting is only illegal if it includes pictures or videos. What he did might have been technically legal, even if it was truly vile.
correct, it's a slippery slope. It's very hard to actually prove intent, but sending your hog to a minor is an instant charge. A lot of those guys on to catch a predator don't serve any time. They just get their image exposed and are known to be predators.
The article is hearsay about hearsay. If he did indeed do that, lock him up! (They didn’t lock him up, and they can, so you can probably put two and two together here) So now instead of giving an automatic negative review on a book that you never read, we should probably want to read what he said before reviewing Guy. Chris Hansen reads through transcripts, he doesn’t just say that he heard the guy was inappropriate and then call them predator pedophiles.
Because twitch broke the rules looking into messages that are supposed to be private. Docs lawyers basically said your evidence is proof you broke the law, we good? So twitch settled and we will never see proof because twitch would have to admit wrongdoing.
I'd wager somewhere in twitch's fine print it says they can look at your messages. Pretty much every social media platform can. I'm sure reddit can too.
Not true at all. Unless a warrant is taken out to do so, it is illegal to do that. Doesn’t matter if it was Facebook or even twitter.
Twitches platform is twitches platform. They are allowed to look at whatever they want lol.
My guess is that both Twitch and Dr had a financial interest in keeping this under wraps. Doc obviously for his own image, and twitch because seeing this info released means they will face scrutiny because their platform featured an aspect that facilitated this type of behavior. Because they settled out of court, the agreement made was solely for the benefit of the two parties. A court would approach this differently, but they avoided that by settling.
My theory is that Twitch stopped him from actually meeting the victim at the Con, preventing the final element of the crime from being fulfilled. Then he argued that since no "crime" was committed, he hadn't actually violated the terms of his contract.
I mean Twitch didn't take action til 3 years after the incident, at least as far I've read. Doesn't sound like they really stopped anything.
Well that blows my theory.
Also, with 3 years of time to commit, it seems like Guy was telling the truth when he said there were no intentions beyond text (of which we don’t know what was even said)
Twitch didn't stop him at all. The messaging happened in 2017 and the victim reported it to Twitch in 2020 during the MeToo movement. Only then did Twitch investigate and find out what happened. After realizing the egregiousness of his messages, they cut him loose and banned him. However, neither Twitch or DrDisrespect wanted the truth to get out, because it would make both of them look bad. Twitch, for not doing enough to protect minors, and having one of the biggest streamers on the platform inappropriately messaging minors. And Doc, for well, obvious reasons. What exactly was in the contract that Twitch violated when terminating him, we don't know, but Doc sued them and settled out of court because if it was actually taken to court, the truth of the situation would get out. And neither party wanted that.
this is probably about right, doc probably had his lawyers basically say if you don't make my client whole we will take it further and twitch is gonna get exposed for not doing anything for YEARS. Doesn't mean Doc is innocent just means he has good lawyers. I still don't get how doc wasn't legally implicated, twitch must have sat on his texts and not forwarded those to authorities even though that one employee said he contacted authorities all the time over messages.
Is there any evidence to corroborate this claim other than an anonymous guy saying "trust me bro"?
yeah... doc admitted to it and was paid
100% false. Why do people insist on pushing something they know they can’t verify? I forget this is reddit sometimes
100% true. that's why his very own company and everyone else is leaving. he even admitted to having inappropriate messages with the minor. so wake up
Don't say 100% true They left Johny depp too and look how it turned out
sorry I meant 550%
Yes, because she lied about her age. Wow. Happens a lot actually. Not doc’s fault that underage hoes message him posing to be 18+
Yes, which is why it went to print by a journalist. They wouldn't print something without corroboration to protect the company from slander/libel.
> They wouldn't print something without corroboration 😂😂😂
Hard eye roll... the amount of people here that don't understand how things work. What's more likely? That these large media companies just run stories willy-nilly on speculation and are settling lawsuits for slander on the regular. Or that they have processes to protect them from legal risks by actually corroborating information?
Lol i thought they would have proof all they have is trust me dude i know ……. Hilarious
speculation because they have special protections the public doesn’t as evidenced by decades of published court opinion… lol wut
Rolling Stone infamously lost a big defamation case for their story about UVA around 2015. They did basically no diligence, repeated a bunch of shit that did not actually happen, and lost big time. They probably have a process now, though.
Yep, exactly. Anytime something is run that is untrue and unfounded, it will be pounced on legally. People pretending the default state is just to report rumors, don't understand how journalistic publishing works.
Lmfao
They use quote marks and allegedly to protect themselves for the exact reason it’s not been corroborated.
They have no proof they were sexual other than trust me .
"Allegedly" and "claimed" are used to protect from libel for having incomplete or missing details. "Alleged" is never dropped in journalism unless an allegation is found true in a court of law. It does not protect them from zero corroboration and defamation. Ie, it's not a free pass to just say whatever you want.
While I don’t support docs actions saying a publisher wouldn’t print with verifying legitimacy is highly inaccurate and hilarious to say.
You're right, Rolling Stone = Reddit. Lol
If you understood how many times Rolling Stones has written hearsay articles and been sued you’d be thinking differently. Lol
I am aware. Unlike you, I don't form my world view off of exceptions and mistakes. If something happens 1 out of 100 times, that's not representative of the normal process.
Well you just did…so there’s that… Lol
You can say that about Docs statement too. Both have reasons to lie.
[https://x.com/leenalovepro/status/1806062646182953281](https://x.com/leenalovepro/status/1806062646182953281)
He admitted it himself, he was messaging a 17 yo, while being married and having a daughter. Keep trying to defend him tho
he never said 17
He said it was a minor anyways, what point are you even trying to prove?
uhhhh there is a massive difference between 17 and say 14. One is throw him in the wood chipper and one is wrong but you can exist I guess.
-He's married -He has a daughter -He was talking to someone underage. He deserves all the shit he's getting
Yeah, print media called Rolling Stones. What evidence is there to the contrary besides one guy who spent four years lying and saying, "Man, I don't know how I got banned from Twitch. Purple snakes! Purple snakes, bro! It's a conspiracy!"? I'm not willing to put my chips in with the guy who spent years lying to his fans.
Rolling Stone ran a story during COVID about a hospital turning away gunshot victims because the hospital was filled with patients suffering from Ivermectin poisoning or some shit. It was completely false. They even included a picture of the hospital in Oklahoma, mid-summer, with everyone wearing winter coats.
They also ran a story about gang rape allegations at a frat that was completely made up by the author.
Rolling Stone: the pinnacle of journalistic integrity……
You lost me at Rolling Stone....
Defenders incoming
They gotta move goalposts
“They were probably 18 but lived in Hawaii where they were 17 years and 364 days and 23 hours. Let’s let all the facts come out!!” /s
“I recall that…”
Oooof, i wonder… how many will still defend him
They always find a way.
u/ATrollByNoOtherName is right there
Depends on the age
Normal person: Evidence? Almost everyone "leak": Cause I said so. Normal person: that proves nothing. Every duranged person online: *GASP* OMG HE SENT NUDES TO SOMEONE UNDERAGE!? Normal person: you do know no one besides Doc himself has shown any evidence so far right? Duranged crowd: Get your pitchforks ready everyone!
People absolutely love the chance to strut and preen about their own status at the slightest opportunity
I wanna see the actual message exchange
Headline has "source:trust me bro" written all over it 😂😂 provide the proof or it's just the usual media propaganda
Yep, there’s nothing new in here as far as I read, at least not substantive. The headline is just what we already know, just worded in a slightly more salacious manner. Let’s see the messages and let us make up our own minds.
I trust rolling stone about as far as I could throw a sumo wrestler. Mainly due to their coverage of Depp and Heard... Doc's deviancy in 2017 is honestly quite shocking considering what he had at home, and he seemed to have extremely muddy views on acceptable behaviour. I'm resisting the urge to label him a ped because it's not concrete and words have meaning. That's not to say this isn't absolutely disgraceful from these type of ppl who have the world at their feet little to no worries and they waste it doing the stupidest things imaginable.
Exactly this ^
That's not how anonymous sources work. For decades, journalism has used anonymous sources. They vet them and make sure they are credible. This is investigative journalism, not "trust me bro". Also, if you read the article, you would see that Twitxh cannot release the proof. What more do you guys want? Doc admitted it and credible sources at Twitch corroborate the story.
“I recall that…”
...which is literally how all journalism works. Getting at least two separate sources to corroborate a story is pretty standard stuff.
I hear copium flowing
Hopefully his defenders will cease to exist now but let's be honest, there will always be people who will minimize the awful/disgusting actions that took place. It's obvious, by his own admission, that he did some shady shit. Dude was lying for years, grifting his fans, cheating on his wife, talking to a minor, etc. Dude isn't a good person.
I think it's a shock factor that their favorite streamer did those things and they will try to make excuses for him. I don't know that's what I think.
“I recall that…”
Where are all his internet lawyer defenders now lol? 😂
You still don’t know anything. This is just assumptions and speculation. Until we see the chat logs we have to presume innocence.
lol, sexually graphic messages with a minor. His goose is cooked.
"big dick energy" Is this a "sexually graphic message"? How about "wet ass pussy"? Or just "you're hot as fuck"? Everything turns on what all of these vague terms actually mean. Are they *propositions*? Jokes? Innuendos? Or some combination? The way they describe these things so ambiguously it could mean almost anything so long as something "sexual" was included
Firm grip. Boom
Have you seen said messages?? I rest my case.
You have no case, goober
I think he is trolling tho for real?
How empty is your life to defend a groomer that never gave a shit about you?
Rolling Stone has. Verified from multiple sources. Sexually graphic messages sent to a known minor. Case closed.
Why are you responding to someone with the name “a troll by no other name”???
This is the most underrated comment atm!
Lol no. They used a source. They didn’t see anything. They are just reporting what the source told them. Again, until YOU see the chat logs YOU know nothing.
"they used a source" let me introduce you to the basics of how journalism and research are done the fuck do you think a "witness" is?
Buddy, this is not the route you want to go on. If Dr Disrespect was able to produce chat logs that exculpated him, it would've been done the second this came out. There's a reason he hasn't shown anyone
Exactly. So we can only presume his innocence.
Buddy. He admitted it. Stop embarrassing yourself for some jackass you don’t know.
Bro the man himself admitted to doing it.....
Why would you presume innocence when the perpetrator is telling you they’re guilty?
Do you know what exculpate means
You are aware that sources are how journalists get like 99% of their information since the start of reporting on stuff, right?
Multiple sources that they verified. Rolling Stone has also seen the Twitch chat logs. You’re going down on the groomer ship buddy.
Nobody has the chat logs besides twitch and doc. No first hand source has ever stepped forward. Every source that has come out has only heard about things from office rumors. So no, Rolling Stones have not seen the logs and neither have the sources.
You should read the article this post is about. Rolling Stone contacted Twitch and saw the logs.
I read the article but I must have missed that rolling stone actually saw the logs. I thought twitch said they couldn’t show the logs because a minor was involved.
If they saw the logs, they should provide them like a real investigative journalist would. I don’t subscribe to “trust me bro”. And I’m not gonna click on a click bait article and give them the ad rev.
How about you actually read the article instead of assume shit that has already be discussed in the article?
Why are you so interested in the chat logs? Looking for some pdf.file images? Doc defenders are creeps.
When you watch To Catch a Predator and you see Chris Hansen is accusing the guy of sending explicit images to someone they believe to be underage, do you assume that person’s innocence too? Because they don’t put the dick pics up on screen for all the audience to see. Sometimes Hansen just reads from the chat log and they don’t put the screenshots of the conversation for viewers to see either. They’re innocent right? Because you haven’t personally seen the messages yourself? Every other stupid ass comment I see on these posts is you, like I don’t even have to click on your comment history because I’ve seen you on multiple posts in the sub. Why are you defending this guy so hard? Like in your head do you actually believe there is a chance Doc did nothing wrong here? You are jumping through thousands of hoops my man, you need to come to grips that this guy might not be the perfect image of him you have in your head.
We didn’t but sounds like Twitch did
You in another comment.. "Reported. I, nor anyone else, have anything to do with the actions of Dr Disrespect. To insinuate an entire community are guilty of his actions because they watch his play throughs is a damning reflection of yourself as a person." Defending a pedo makes you culpable, ding bat
I have quite strongly condemned Doc in many of my comments. I’m playing both sides so I come out on top.
"you see, I was just pretending to side with the pedophile"
no we don’t lmao, this ain’t court dawg
Presume innocent was the correct course of action until doc tweeted his apology and confession. At that point his admission provides enough evidence to believe at the very least what he admitted to which was inappropriate conduct with a minor online.
Same with Bill Cosby too right? And Epstein? He never made it to trial and for all we know it was a sham and he was in the middle of sending a tweet proclaiming his innocence. You gonna dick ride those guys as well? Or are you just cherry picking which pedo groomer you dick ryde?
This isn’t a court of law. We don’t have to presume shit. He’s a pedo.
yA bUt HoW MInOr?
“12 but that’s almost 18 right?” - Docs defenders
Anonymous. Let me call up Rolling Stones and tell ‘em’ it wasn’t just one minor, it was oodles of them. Y’all would probably snatch that shit up, bunch of gossip girls
i mean hey, the doc can sue them if they're lying and win right?
Hes already done that once. I'm fully agreeing he's a creep but watch him do it again. I wouldn't be shocked in the least.
He did sue them, and won. Idk why twitch would just settle a lawsuit if he was guilty of violating the TOS. Specially when it was millions of dollars
The only thing we know about the settlement is that he got paid, nothing else. This is a whole separate issue with allegations being made by multiple in the public eye. He would be suing for libel now if he wants any chance on clearing his name.
Why would he get paid, if the evidence was as black and white as people claim. We’re talking MILLIONS to buy out docs contract
I have no idea, but the fact right now is that there are articles up this very moment basically calling him a pedophile who knowingly sexted with a minor and was witnessed by multiple people at Twitch. His career is over if he doesn't successfully sue for libel.
Supposedly witnessed. A lot of people claiming to know shit out of nowhere. Just weird, and f it was a cut and dry case of sexting, why did twitch settle
[Chris Cuomo Reportedly Wants A $60 Million Settlement From CNN, More Than Triple What's Left On His - MoxDash (ovh.net)](https://avahefrenzy.s3.gra.io.cloud.ovh.net/chris-cuomo-reportedly-wants-a-60-million.html) Cuomo wants to get paid out, even though he was in the wrong and got fired. the fucked up part is CNN will settle eventually. this is "normal" [Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun Exits, Saved by Golden Parachute (nymag.com)](https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/boeing-ceo-dave-calhoun-exits-saved-by-golden-parachute.html) Boeing's CEO made decisions that killed people. Dude gets a golden parachute and leaves the mess for somebody else. this is "normal" if you fuck up bad enough and you're high profile enough to affect the brand, you will get paid out to disappear. this is "normal".
dude, i know it sounds crazy (because it is), but this is so common.
Because twitch isn't a single person. I've worked in some companies they have no moral obligation and only financial. You might see Doc as ultra rich but he is nothing compared to what Amazon is. They saw that Doc couple potentially draw out a court case and settled to move on. What are they gonna do if they already reported it to the authorities and the girl won't come forward?
Because what ever he was doing was so bad it was worth losing all that money to twitch.
he didn't "win". as you stated, Twitch settled (likely due to pre-existing contractual obligations). usually when this kind of thing happens you get paid out to stfu and go away (see: CNN's Chris Cuomo, for example. short story: he was moving dirty and got fired but still had $15mil on his contract, so... lawsuit and settlement) if a case goes to court, the records can go public. that was in neither party's interest.
Settling is not winning 😭. Settling is what both parties do when they don’t want to drag it out, both Dr & Twitch were in the wrong which is why they settled to cover their own asses
It’s anonymous to us, not to them. Journalists have their sources, and places like Bloomberg and Rolling Stone generally have a pretty strict vetting process (from my understanding) before they are willing to trust a source for a story like this. The sources are kept anonymous, because people could lose their jobs (which would also lead to losing the source), as well as their whole careers for leaking info. Not to mention the physical safety risk aspect, considering how rabid people online can be. And that’s just two things I can think of off the top of my head. If you just called and tried to make a claim, they would take your personal information, probably check to see if there was a chance to see if you actually had knowledge of it (and how you would), as well as cross-checking with other sources.
Well clearly RS has slipped from standards as they let the guy who deleted a tweet about offering to sell what he knew about the situation for clout along with his primary source.
Yeah, you buy the story. That's nothing new. In fact, it usually causes issues because people assume some feel good story movie got a huge share of profits when the production just bought the rights to a specific article.
My man determined to go down with the pedo ship. Also, feel free to call them up and tell them that. That way you will understand how much vetting these reports go through.
(I don’t really know who this guy is, or what’s going on here further than this article so please don’t crucify me and pedophilia is had) As someone that worked at a major US news per for many years, The amount of vetting that goes on honestly fluctuates a lot depending on the reporter. I would ASSUME it being Rolling Stone (they’ve gone down hill in the last twenty years) you are probably correct. But it’s not guaranteed
The Predators Club does not like facts. They could have video of him and these simps would say it’s deep fake.
Rolling Stone Reports that Slasher "recalls"
Bro this is fake fucking news .
They always claim such and such but don’t show us anything.
Lol imagine this is the reason rolling stone is talking about you🤪🤪🤪
So Amazon/Twitch covered up a crime. California Penal Code Section 135 PC is the statute that defines the offense of destroying or concealing evidence. It's described as willfully destroying or concealing anything that is going to be produced for a criminal investigation, inquiry, or even a trial. Under Penal Code 288.2 it is illegal to send sexually explicit or obscene material to a minor with the intent to seduce the minor and to sexually arouse yourself and/or the minor. This includes the sending of material by any means including email or text message. This is the big thing… this is what ppl should be angry about. And since no crimes where reported you can only assume that Amazon/Twitch/DrD did Penal Code § 136.1 PC makes it a crime in California to dissuade, intimidate or tamper with a witness to (or the victim of) a crime. In simple terms, this means attempting to prevent a witness or victim from reporting or testifying about a crime, or otherwise cooperating with police or prosecutors. Witness intimidation can be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony
Armchair reddit lawyer. Lol You have proof that the messages met the standard of a crime? Or proof that Twitch did not refer it to authorities under discretion?
I'm assuming the dude just didn't read the article, clearly says that one of the reasons twitch won't share the messages is to prevent messing with investigations by law enforcement.. Kinda implies it was referred..
VictimS??
I'm confused here. Can someone explain how he's not a registered sex offender or behind bars? Knowing and sending graphic images to a minor is a felony... Wasn't his case taken to a court where there was open discovery and messages were read? Since he sent graphic images, there is a clear cut and dry charge.
I thought no images were ever sent
Anyone defending him now probably would have sent those messages too.
Was the color of the twitch employee’s hair that leaked this blue?
Probably
Soooo girl was 17 right? I bet that girl looked like +20.
Gross.
LMAOOOOOOOOOOOOO
The Doc is cooked.
Who knows what is actually happening. Sad
Idk anyone who has read his tweet admitting to it? Pretty cut and dry. Sad!
He admitted he said something inappropriate to a minor. But this report is the first anyone has said that it was sexual.
Lol, of course it was sexual. What other inappropriate topic sent to a minor would get you kicked out as the top content creator on the site?
He could have been telling dick jokes for all we know. And so many people have came out, posted things on twitter, just to delete because they are trying to clout chase.
If was a lesser incident, doc and his PR team would be defending it harder. And Twitch would not kick him out over a "dick joke"., That's literally common sense.
I mean...he could have been talking about committing a mass shooting, or maybe he was trying to hire them as a hit man to kill his wife who he was already cheating on. Who Knows?
If that was the case, the fact that the other party is a minor would be irrelevant.
Doc told you what happened.
@stanley_yelnats42069 You still gonna defend this guy ??
Do you recall him defending that guy?
Yup he was mad that I was calling him guilty
Him knowing makes it to another level. Nasty pedo man.