Many actors are scummy.
Many directors are scummy.
You don't have to like them for being scummy.
If you enjoy their work, separate from their scumminess, that is acceptable.
Jump to content
Posted 06 August 2019 - 01:12 AM
Alright, I've seen enough. Full disclosure: I'm not a lawyer. I am a medical doctor by profession and before that, I was a psychologist. In both these fields I worked in, I was trained to do two things: first, listen to the patient's story and work with that in mind but confirm it through other means. Second: even when spoonfed information, do your own research. I've said this upthread but I don't bother with dubs except Dragon Ball and I quit because they were too damn slow. I only knew Vic Mignona as the Edward doll in comedy skits on Yu-Gi-Oh the Abridged series. No, I am not taking his side because I disagree with yours, and don't call me Stan.
I've already expressed doubt that this guy could get away with his so long and with only the "open secret" that was floating around. I agree with the other posters that pointed out that there are many reasons for this but it's unusual nevertheless. That said, I dug into the affidavits that Detour helpfully provided over a couple of lunchbreaks. Unfortunately, when I asked some questions about the contents therein in this very thread, I was not answered so I decided to look into this myself.
I found it unusual that Denbow's affidavit only referred to what Vic did as "inappropriate conduct." Funimation and one of the victims in the affidavit are already being sued here, they have no reason to dance around this topic and by stating outright what Vic did and what convinced them that it was grounds for firing, they could have gotten the case tossed right then and there. But apparently, the case is still on. Unusual but not too out of the ordinary. As I read through them, I realize two things: this guy is a creep and that the opposition, regardless of how incompetent I was told they were would have filed affidavits of their own. I am maybe a half step up from a boomer when it comes to technology so I only had Google and Duckduckgo to go on so I do a little digging.
Soon after I began looking through the results, I realize that both Vic and two of the defendants, Rial and Toy, have already undergone deposition and video of all of them was available online, which would have been handy to know beforehand. It turns out, Monica's story was that Vic lured her to his room, threw her on a bed and attempted to rape her. Thankfully, she was saved by a convention employee Stan Dahlin, who knocked on the door in the nick of time. This would surely be a slam dunk for the defence but looking through the Googledocs folder, there was no affidavit from the guy. Shit happens, maybe their counsel couldn't track the guy down or he wanted nothing to do with the case. Nope, it turns out that Stan did file an affidavit of his own. For Vic's lawyers.
Courtesy of Stan's Twitter, he says that he doesn't remember such an incident.
Some people on Stan's twitter dug up that Faisal Ahmed, somebody who submitted an affidavit, has a record of falsely filing reports.
It is, how you would say, "not a good look."
The affidavit from the twins is one of the more serious incidents it seems. They appear to have locked their twitters down so I can't verify anything but Tweeters have found that the twins at one point lived with Rial and Toy. Again, doesn't mean that the twins story is false but another raised eyebrow from me. One of the twins even worked at the same company Toye does, Tuttle Group which as it turns out also has the fiance of the other defendant, Marchi as a shareholder. Most damningly, it turns out, Toye was using sponsorship from this company as leverage over a convention as shown by leaked texts from knowyourmeme of all places.
Oh yeah, this wasn't just a defamation case now, was it? I dunno what tortoise interference is but this I do know convincing people to break contracts is illegal. Dunno what happened there since it looks like Vic attended with no incident anyway. Why would a mortgage company care about japanese cartoons? It doesn't make any sense.
Aside from this, the shit comment upthread also piqued my interest since it's playground-level behavior at best. Surely nobody who passed the Bar in any country would be so petty. As it turns out, this was a response to one of Toye's tweets that the plaintiff is suing him for. One of 400 tweets that Vic's counsel took the time to respond to and refute each and every one of in a legal document. A bit excessive, but hey, splitting hairs is what lawyers do. And if these incompetent bozos who are mad their client is called poo can find a person that could make or break the case for either side, what does that say about the defendant's counsel?
Lastly, Paladin posted on the first page of this thread about how there was video of Vic flirting with a five year-old. Surely if that were the case, he'd be either locked up or the one on trial now. Twitter, and by extension, Youtube delivers though, here it is.
At about 9:20-9:30. He was on stage acting as a host in a costume contest of sorts making a lame joke in front of a room full of people.
It is clear that this situation is not as cut and dried as either side wants the public to believe, with a lot of crap the public is not privy to. None of this information adds up. He's probably not innocent; there's too much smoke to not be any fire, but this is a shitshow and I want no part in it. The third thing my vocation has taught me is that when you don't know, call a specialist so I say leave it to the courts to sort out.
Why did I do this? Why did I waste 4-5 hours of my 80-hour work week looking this up when I barely know the guy and don't even watch dubs? There are three things I cannot stand: misrepresenting what I say, condescension and especially people thinking that they can pull one over me. This thread has all three, so call me petty, arrogant or whatever for doing this out of spite but hell, I already did the legwork so may as well put this up. Hey, maybe I can qualify as a pulitzer nominee now, seeing as all it apparently takes nowadays is digging through 140-character chunks of text and a handful of legal documents. Or do I not qualify because I don't have pictures of people involved in the case voguing?
Well done, anti-Vic crowd, you've not only convinced me that your side condones hiding and covering for sexual predators until you don't but also possibly have reckless disregard for the truth, are actively concealing parts of it or are actively out to deceive, even if there is truth in there somewhere. Vic is definitely a creep but I want nothing to do with your ilk either.
Also, I looked into the Threadnought. Things just get lost in the jumble of reaction GIFs and replies and I couldn't make sense of it. Dude should maybe consider getting a blog instead.
Edited by unluckiness, 06 August 2019 - 01:18 AM.
Posted 06 August 2019 - 03:47 AM
Yeah, I freely admit that I don't get IT. Why would a primordial evil dress up like a clown, or even take a physical form at all? And the book was creepy in the bad way. The first movie was good and second looks promising but I probably won't be able to see it in theaters.
But man, what if there were a way for people to communicate information to others that wasn't just driveby passive-aggression? Dude, that sure would make the job of getting IT easier.
Edited by unluckiness, 06 August 2019 - 04:11 AM.
Posted 06 August 2019 - 04:19 AM
Posted 06 August 2019 - 04:30 AM
I'm not even saying Vic is innocent. I'm saying hat there's so many things about this case that raise more questions. If I were to hazard a guess, the inconsistencies are there to reduce the legal liability on the enabler's part.
The way I understand it it, Vic already brought this affair to court. Either he loses the case and subsequently gets exposed and destroyed in a criminal court or Funimation and its voice actors get eaten by the monster who by their own admission they created and allowed to roam free but who is then rendered radioactive for the industry. I don't need to take a side in this and even if I did, it would not make a difference. I say let things play out.
Apparently, I'm not supposed to do this?
Is there a fourth choice?
I swear, my moveset sucks. Don't put me in the game Nintendo.
Edited by unluckiness, 06 August 2019 - 04:41 AM.
Posted 06 August 2019 - 05:33 AM
Posted 06 August 2019 - 05:46 AM
So, Stan just filed an affidavit for shits and giggles? There are amendments to motions and responses to the opposition. They are allowed to file things later on because that's what deposition is for. The defendants will likely amend their defences and produce new filings as well after they deposed Vic.
Even if we say that Stan just forgot about the night, how does that look to a judge when the witness you specifically named as somebody who can vouch for the incident on record can't remember? That you didn't even bother to call this person up to ask if he remembered or not?
Let's say the affidavit turns out to be bunk. In that google docs folder, there was an affidavit that basically stated "Vic shouted at people" and emails between him and a (rightfully) very angry ex. Why were these deemed more important to include for us people who weren't invested in this rather than documents that are very much more relevant to the case, or even any of the plaintiff's filings?
And again, I did not say Vic is innocent. Just that something's fishy about all this. Just because I don't 100% align with what you believe does not mean I oppose it.
Edited by unluckiness, 06 August 2019 - 06:08 AM.
Posted 06 August 2019 - 07:41 AM
"Does pineapple belong on pizza" is an opinion to dissent.
"Is this person a sex offender" is not something with the option of nuance; that is strictly a yes or no position.
Posted 06 August 2019 - 07:45 AM
I did say he was a sex offender. I stated that I changed my mind up there. My dissent in this case is in exactly how involved Funimation and the con circuit are in allowing him to run wild and covering for him.
Acknowledging that they were fully aware of his behavior for 2 decades yet permitted it to sell a few autographs and DVDs is worse than scum. Just short of doing the actual molesting IMO. As I said, I suspect that the inconsistencies and general lack of evidence are probably due to these people helping cover things up. Unfortunately, when they did decide to expose him, they covered it up too well or wanted to somehow reduce their culpability and the result is that things aren't quite fitting together.
Aside from this, I'm pissed at how incompetently this was handled. When they did decide to do something about it, they started a hashtag, fired him and just stopped there. They were so content on doing nothing else that Vic was able to sue them with no sign of them preparing a case at all. That is not how you handle a predator. When the case was started, you don't even call your corroborating witness and constantly underestimate the opposition who are watching every single word you put out. Your affidavit of the investigation doesn't clearly say what he did, leaving wiggle room. Then while you've been sued for defamation, you run to a newspaper and print an article that could be construed as defamation, possibly compromising your defence right then and there. Your online presence consists of people telling increasingly fantastic made-up stories that a single Google search can debunk instead of his verified actions, giving him an opportunity to ask for more damages and cratering credibility. Focus on the defamation when the tortoise interference is apparently a stronger case. You enlist the help of an online lawyer who spends his time adding to an ever-expanding snowball of contextless tweets and reaction GIFs instead of laying the case out in an organized manner for newbies. It's like they're trying to give Vic every possible advantage.
I don't want just Vic to face justice. The enablers deserve some too not only for taking this long to do anything but also for doing so so badly. And no, I cannot see them as the good guys or anybody I'd want to support in this situation.
Also, I'm kinda peeved that I had to dig through Twitter because regardless of how guilty he is, the documentation shared in this thread was sorely lacking and Twitter is garbage.
Edited by unluckiness, 06 August 2019 - 09:13 AM.
Posted 06 August 2019 - 12:43 PM
Focus on the defamation when the tortoise interference is apparently a stronger case.
Tortious interference. I have no idea how he has interfered with tortoises.
Posted 06 August 2019 - 07:17 PM
Here's something that bothers me about the "Open Secret" defense: If the studio knew about it, and did nothing, they make themselves liable. If the convention organizers knew about it, and invited Vic anyway, they open themselves up to being liable as well. The more people acknowledge this as an open secret, and do nothing to stop it, they become accessories. Those con security people: accessories as well.
It is extremely damaging to everyone. And the simple solution was "Don't invite or allow that guy in here." That makes way more sense than having to assign extra security people to him to protect the convention goers.
This is absolutely true. I realize this is going to make me look like one of those fascists who believe people should be locked up for not ratting out their drug dealers, but there need to be consequences when individuals and institutions conspire to keep known sex offenders out of trouble like this. Because this is why it keeps happening. Not because every man is a rapist waiting to happen, but because so many of them are surrounded by people who'd have their back if they were. It's why the John Lasseter business has permanently soured me on watching Pixar movies—not just because his name is in the credits of every movie they made before he left, but because the rest of those credits, and the credits of a good many films to come, are filled with people who had to have known and did nothing. His enablers.
...it's okay to still enjoy the stuff he worked on, right? I mean, I won't be down on anyone who disliked anything Mignogna's taken part in - we're all allowed to like or dislike a given fictional work - but FMA:Brotherhood's one of my favorite anime titles, and I don't want to disavow it simply because of accusations or worse against the lead VA.
I mean, it's anime, so you could just watch the subs from now on.
Edited by Pocket, 06 August 2019 - 07:18 PM.
If you ever somehow become a Catholic saint, be aware that they will harvest your bones and build altars around them.
Posted 06 August 2019 - 10:14 PM
I offer to you what I consider "A correct way to handle the situation". Feel free to tear it apart.
After first incident or two. "Thanks for coming in, Vic. Have a seat. We've had a couple comments and some feedback that you're behavior toward some women has been bordering on if not outright inappropriate. Knock it off. Behave yourself. Tone it down. Whatever it takes, we don't want anyone working in an environment where they feel uncomfortable, and we don't want to be sued. We don't think you do either. Thanks for coming in."
If it kept going on: "Thanks for coming in, Vic. You remember the last meeting? Yeah, we're getting complaints, and the tone and candor of them is worse. The next complaint we get will be your last. Stop being a prick."
And, as a final resort. "Thanks for coming in, Mr. Mignognas. I don't know if you've been paying any attention at all, but this Weinstein scandal has all of us soiling our collective undergarments. We cannot afford anything like that here. This is a termination conference. I realize we are under contract with each other, but if you don't make a fuss about leaving, we won't have to make our reasons public. Neither of us wants a scandal. You won't be working for us, nor representing yourself in any way as any of the characters on our projects. If anyone asks, this will go under the heading of 'Creative Differences'. If any incidents come up and people press us, we may have to admit to the truth. Perhaps you shouldn't use us as a reference. Thank you for coming in. Here are the NDA forms for you to sign. Security will see you out."
Heck, if they'd just done that instead of blasting Twits across the internet, they could have covered their posteriors, allowed everyone to save face, and made it quite clear, if it ever came up, that they had, indeed, punished someone they considered a predator/perv.
Posted 08 August 2019 - 02:32 AM
oh it is a huge clusterhug full of conflicting statements, legitimately real and also legitimately falsified evidence, and updates that somehow nobody agrees on whos side it makes look right or wrong.
I'm just gonna wait to see where everything is once the dust has settled.
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users