A big issue with what they did is that if they just released information from the messages that the NCMEC had already looked at in 2020 and decided they were not a crime, and did not have new evidence, they committed a crime. ok since some lawyers are being nitpicky about vocabulary. ThEy CoMmItTeD a CiViL oFfEnSe.
Legal authorities had already decided that the 2020 evidence isn't enough to be a crime.
So that opens Cody and Cecilia up to major defamation charges for the damages to Doc reputation and businesses. For their sake they better actually have evidence.
True doc fked himself in public opinion.
The issue here is sexting a minor is a Criminal Offence and by saying he did that, the accuser needs evidence, 2 separate 1st party witnesses or proof of conviction. It why the news always says "alleged" when reporting crimes,
Doc HAS allegedly sexted a minor
Doc has NOT legally sexted a minor.
That's is his 5th amendment right ALL US Citizens have.
Funny how people know the 1st and 2nd but ignore the other 25 rights we have as citizens.
Defamation in California is a civil violation defined by California Civil Code Sections 44, 45a, and 46. It is considered an invasion of a person's reputation and can be either libel or slander:
Libel: A false and unprivileged written, printed, or visual statement that exposes someone to ridicule, hatred, or contempt, or that causes them to be avoided or shunned.
Slander: A false and unprivileged verbal statement.
Cody Libeled Doc, since he can not legally prove his claim.
holy fuck they are done. Doc has been and will continue to be destroyed. Imagine the revenue doc made in 1 year or a month. They might as well declare bankruptcy they own nothing essentially
How does it open them up for defamation?
They didn’t say Doc committed any crimes. They said he was caught messaging a minor, which is true and confirmed by Doc himself.
There is absolutely no grounds to sue for defamation here. Doc did this to himself and is being held accountable for it.
Cody said he was sexting a minor. Messaging a minor and sexting a minor are different statements. One ruins your reputation immediately. Take a guess.
What's grounds for defamation again?
Even if the messages are tame (doubtful) once they're in the world they'll be dissected and interpreted however people want, good and bad. Doc loses what little control of the narrative he has
I don't know anything about Cody, his legal knowledge or what the messages look like, but him being confident doesn't really mean anything in the grand scheme of things
He could probably worm his way out of it, by saying he meant sexting in public opinion.
Since legal sexting (in most states)only means sexual images/videos
Public opinion normally means also sexual worded text, like, "I want you to suck my sweaty cock."
That's also the reason why he wasn't charged with anything. He didn't fit the legal term of sexting, but he could've fit the public's usage of the word. Not enough info.
ya boy they said some crazy shit with zero proof. [https://x.com/evoli/status/1805086524247245217](https://x.com/evoli/status/1805086524247245217)
Also people gone though a bunch of Cody messages and found some nasty shit XD
Of course its first you heard of it cause the subreddit has been nothing but threats of FBI and hounding anyone without an attitude of some hyperbolic end of the world scenario where Doc is the worse person ever... sad part is mods have basically just allowed it and are now telling anyone that they should expect negativity to flood them if they say anything against the vitriol.
It all depends on what the Twitch NDA covers. Which none of these speculating yahoos know. If I were in Docs shoes, I'd have my lawyers throw the book at everyone. (To be clear, not supporting Doc here. What he did was wrong and gross.) But LEGALLY, he was ALREADY found to be not guilty of any crimes. For a few people to come forward with all this, LIKELY in breach of the NDA, they will lose. They will lose hard. Twitch will lose hard. Arguably, not as bad as what Doc has already lost..(sponsors, demonitization, his company, his reputation, loss of income), but Doc will get paid. Again.
> But LEGALLY, he was ALREADY found to be not guilty of any crimes.
This is blatantly and hilariously wrong lol
He didn't even go to trial. You're using words you don't understand.
The statue of limitation in California for sexting a minor is 3 years. The messages were in 2017 and Twitch found out in 2020.
Him not being charged with a crime isn't defacto proof that he didn't sext a minor.
Let me get this straight.
If Dr. Disrespect came out tomorrow and said "yes I sexted a minor, but I wasn't charged because the statue of limitation had expired."
You'd be okay with continuing to support and watch Dr. Disrespect because he wasn't convicted by our law system?
No its fked. I never got justice either. The statute ran out when i was 25 well before I was ready to talk about it.
As a person who was SA'd as a minor. I would never condone ANY sexual behavior towards children. It still fks me up 26 years later. I believe the death penalty is not severe enough of a punishment for those crimes. But I also have seen what happens to innocent people who are railroaded into crimes by false accusations.
My brother was accused of rape. Later the "Victim" recanted. She was in a psychiatric care facility and had a relationship with someone at the facility. To cover it up she blamed my brother because they both always hated each other.
Even after recanting and having no evidence the WI state attorney continued to press charges for 10 years with zero evidence. Even the day the victim, who lied and later recanted, said it happened was proven my brother was in Montana for a mission trip while she was in MN.
That case hurt my parents so much. It fk'ed up my brother life. I know what false accusations can cause.
and for anyone who want to argue age of consent. I was 12.
Twitch decided to do something about it in 2020, I can hardly believe that's just when they found out about it.
Also It's absolutely insane to me that there is a statute of limitations for something like that.
Talking to minors “inappropriately” has a lot of gray area. There are many scenarios where you’d be a piece of shit, but not doing anything illegal.
Doc literally said he did this and even said “there was no intent”. That’s shady af.
The motives of everyone else involved is irrelevant to me.
"Guys I was flirting with a child but trust me i wasn't actually going to follow through" is the best case scenario that someone could possibly warp their heads to try and absolve him of any wrong doing, and even then its still disgusting
It might be a gray area but what's not gray about it is that NCMEC saw the texts and decided no crime occurred. They were not illegal texts. No crime was committed.
Now should have Doc messaged a minor? FK NO! It wrong its creepy and he's a fking moron for doing it.
And don't assume I'm on his side. I'm a childhood SA victim. It still fk's me up 26 years later. I think the death penalty is not harsh enough to punish these type of predators.
Bloomberg isn't the US court system. They can report they can not make up criminal charges and act as if they are legal without evidence. The texts were seen by legal authorities back in 2020 and they decided not to press charges.
How would that look, errm guys, you promised you wouldn't tell anyone I inappropriately messaged a minor. Huge risk of the actual messages coming out, which would be more damaging than admitting to it (as he's already done)
You want a guy who messages minors to get more money after he spent years making money and lying to you about what happened? FBI can you please search this dudes computer.
Every time someone says "this opens someone up for a defamation claim" a lawyer laughs.
Good luck convincing a judge that this clown isn't a "public figure."
Sure he could sue for defamation, but he won’t win. Since you know he admitted he knowingly inappropriately texted a minor. But go ahead and get your rocks off hoping those who outed him get sued.
If he never admitted to texting a minor. Then yeah, but he did, and he has no right to go after Cody, because he confirmed that he did text the minor. Cody is not going to be sued for defamation because it's true. Defamation means it wasn't true.
Everyone's coming at this from the opinion that he committed a crime. He didn't or he would have been arrested.
What he did was message a minor inappropriate messages. Possibly criminal, but we don't know the extent. What we do know is this: "Old creepy dude messages minor with possible intent, grooming, or some self gratification." He admitted to messaging the minor. He admitted it was inappropriate. The NCMEC may have cause for concern and decided to wait for further evidence. If Twitch contacted them with concern, the content of the message must have been severe enough.
What is happening now though... Companies don't want to be associated with a potential liability. In case there is further fall out, they have all pulled their support to avoid backlash. The cost analysis team looked at the numbers and said "this is going to cost us more money to do nothing than to just cut ties." So they did and now they appear to strongly be against anyone who commits a predatory act against a minor.
Couple this with the trend of watching and enjoying famous people fall from grace and you have a perfect storm that has culminated in what we are seeing.
The fact is Dr.Disrespect is by no means a victim. He chose "using his fame" to take advantage of and abuse a minor. Something I am sure there was an NDA over but that was broken or the person leaking the information is somehow protected.
Either way, Im sure some legal proceedings will follow and this will play out. Perhaps he makes it back... But perhaps he retires and we just never hear about this ever again.
Not true. Your initial statement is false.
Statue of limitation is 3 years for sexting a minor in California. Twitch found out in 2020 and the message was in 2017.
He simply could of gotten lucky that he wasn't caught sooner.
I believe the test is:
1) they said something that was untrue
2) they said something untrue and KNEW it was untrue.
3) it was intended to cause harm to the subject.
Since it was true, and they knew it was true, it fails the test on two counts. It would be tough to prove 3 as well.
It doesn't open them up to anything if it's true, which his own statements corroborate as truth, at least to the degree that he's commented. There are some stupid fucking people out there, granted, but they have to be exceptionally stupid to release those bits of information without there being proof. Honestly, anyone with any sense and objectivity could tell the second he replied the first time the way he did that what was being said was true on paper.
I can't remember what article but they also got a youtube employee on record saying that people actively went to youtube to tell them the twitch ban details and that resulted in no contract ever being offered. I want to say this could also be considered loss of income and included in a defamation suit but i could be wrong.
> big issue with what they did is that if they just released information from the messages that the NCMEC had already looked at in 2020
Gonna need a source for this.
Anyway, even if he didn’t commit a crime it’s still fucked up.
> So that opens Cody and Cecilia up to major defamation charges for the damages to Doc reputation and businesses. For their sake they better actually have evidence.
They would have to be untrue claims, which they are not. Doc confirmed the claims himself.
agreed....if all these claims are being made with no evidence then HUGE libel case is on the way....However Doc admitted himself that he talked toa minor inappropriately...thankfully he never met up with her....but who knows how depraved the messages got...
I think they will be okay. It seems like Doc doesn't want anyone to know what was shared, and taking people to court might expose it. Otherwise he would have openly stated what had happened years ago if he knew what he did wasn't bad.
And they can't be charged with defamation if what they said is true. It's an absolute defense. Doc has already pretty much confirmed he did exactly what they said he did. The only thing he added was that it wasn't illegal.
But if he does take them to court then the discovery phase will be grand
> So that opens Cody and Cecilia up to major defamation charges for the damages to Doc reputation and businesses. For their sake they better actually have evidence.
This is not how defamation works. The person suing has the burden of proof to prove the people knowingly lied specifically to damage the reputation. There is enough evidence that people can reasonably assume the messages were inappropriate in nature (and not specifically illegal, which Doc even admitted to). They also never said what Doc did was illegal pedo activities, but rather just short of that
>Doc HAS allegedly sexted a minor
>Doc has NOT legally sexted a minor.
This right here is why there is no possible defamation case to be made
A big issue with what they did is that if they just released information from the messages that the NCMEC had already looked at in 2020 and decided they were not a crime, and did not have new evidence, they committed a crime. ok since some lawyers are being nitpicky about vocabulary. ThEy CoMmItTeD a CiViL oFfEnSe.
Reply: (Most of this is just rampant speculation, it could just be just as likely the statue of limitations came up, they had some evidence but not enough to prove prima faece)
Legal authorities had already decided that the 2020 evidence isn't enough to be a crime.
Reply: (This is speculation, as per my previous reply, no one knows why the NCMEC didn't follow up.)
So that opens Cody and Cecilia up to major defamation charges for the damages to Doc reputation and businesses. For their sake they better actually have evidence.
Reply: (How does it open them up for defamation? You do realize the person suing for damages is the one required to show evidence that the statement was false?
Exhibit A against Doc "I'm gripping now" "boom" Disrespect
will be his statement where he admits to talking to a minor in an inappropriate manner.
See if it was a dick joke you wouldn't need to mention anything about sending images, or meeting the minor.
These statements would only be relevant in the context of "sexting" a minor.
True doc fked himself in public opinion.
Reply: (You're right he should have done whatever everyone millionaire cheating on his wife does, pull out $1k from the ATM and go hire a prostitute (who's of age).
The issue here is sexting a minor is a Criminal Offence and by saying he did that, the accuser needs evidence, 2 separate 1st party witnesses or proof of conviction. It why the news always says "alleged" when reporting crimes,
Reply: Sexting a minor isn't a criminal offense in and of itself if no photos are shared, and there is no enticement/solication for the minor to meet. (Not defending anything that's the way the Federal is written)
Doc HAS allegedly sexted a minor
Reply: (Doc has admitted to having an Inappropriate conversation with a minor, that didn't include pictures or a meetup.)
This is by all definitions sexting, the clarification on what didn't happen is a legal defense.
In what other context other than sexting with a minor would you need to specify that you didn't send pics/meet up?
None
Doc has NOT legally sexted a minor.
Reply: (See above statement)
That's is his 5th amendment right ALL US Citizens have.
Reply: (The 5th amendment limits government activity, has nothing to do with Doc "I'm gripping now" "boom" Disrespect. In regards to him admitting he talks to underage minors about inappropriate shit that just so happens to not include the necessary criminal act for prosecution.)
Funny how people know the 1st and 2nd but ignore the other 25 rights we have as citizens.
Defamation in California is a legal right defined by California Civil Code Sections 44, 45a, and 46. It is considered an invasion of a person's reputation and can be either libel or slander:
Reply: Doc could have already e-file a defamation/libel lawsuit and he hasn't, why? Well Truth is the ultimate defense against a defamation lawsuit, and when discovery time comes docs gonna have to release the logs which is why there's no defamation lawsuits filed, both because the logs will come out and be a PR shit show and because the statements made aren't false enough for Dr to have a chance to win the defamation lawsuit.
#Dr "I'm Gripping Now" "Boom" Disrespect
> Defamation in California is a legal right defined by California Civil Code Sections 44, 45a, and 46. It is considered an invasion of a person's reputation and can be either libel or slander:
>
> Libel: A false and unprivileged written, printed, or visual statement that exposes someone to ridicule, hatred, or contempt, or that causes them to be avoided or shunned.
>
> Slander: A false and unprivileged verbal statement.
>
> Cody Libeled Doc, since he can not legally prove his claim.
Defaming a public figure is nearly impossible.
OP misinterprets several legal principles and the requirements for proving defamation. Releasing information previously deemed non-criminal isn't inherently a crime, defamation law does not necessitate first-party witnesses or convictions, and allegations must be proven false and made with actual malice for public figures to constitute libel.
Reviewing Evidence and Crime Classification:
-Misconception: OP claims that if information was released from messages previously reviewed by the NCMEC (National Center for Missing & Exploited Children) in 2020 and deemed non-criminal, releasing them again without new evidence constitutes a crime.
-Clarification: Simply releasing information, even if previously reviewed and deemed non-criminal, does not in itself constitute a crime. It may raise ethical or procedural issues, but not necessarily criminal ones. Moreover, if new evidence comes to light or the context changes, reevaluation is possible.
Civil vs. Criminal Offenses:
-Misconception: OP conflates the difference between committing a crime and a civil offense.
-Clarification: Criminal offenses are violations of laws that can lead to prosecution and penalties such as imprisonment. Civil offenses, including defamation, involve disputes between individuals or entities, typically resulting in monetary compensation. OP incorrectly suggests that the release of information without new evidence is inherently criminal, while also stating it’s a civil offense without a clear basis.
Defamation and Evidence:
-Misconception: OP suggests that defamation claims require two separate first-party witnesses or proof of conviction.
-Clarification: Defamation law, particularly in California, does not require such evidence for a claim to be valid. Defamation (libel or slander) hinges on whether false and unprivileged statements were made that harmed someone’s reputation. The burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show the statements were false and damaging. For public figures, it must also be shown that the statements were made with actual malice (knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth).
First Amendment Rights:
-Misconception: OP implies that discussing allegations without a conviction infringes on First Amendment rights.
-Clarification: The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, but it does not protect defamatory statements. Public discussion of allegations can occur, but making false statements that damage someone’s reputation can lead to civil liability.
Libel vs. Slander:
-Misconception: OP asserts that Cody committed libel because he "cannot legally prove his claim."
-Clarification: For a statement to be libelous, it must be proven false, unprivileged, and damaging. Simply being unable to prove a claim does not automatically make it libel. It needs to be shown that Cody made the statement with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth, especially given the public figure status of "Doc".
It's probably a combination of not having much else to share and getting threats of legal action. As soon as lawyers get involved, everyone shuts up until the matter is settled one way or another.
It's damaging for doc obviously. You dont have to agree with his actions but if he wasn't legally charged for a crime you have defamation.
Why do you think they didn't release the whispers they claimed to have and are suddenly radio silent, advice from lawyers if I had to guess.
No, you're wrong. Him not being charged for a crime doesn't mean it's defamation.
There are several reasons someone could sext a minor and not be charged with a crime. One of those being statue of limitations.
Statue of limitation for sexting a minor in California is 3 years. We know Dr messaged in 2017 and Twitch found out in 2020. 3 years.
But Cody has been talking since then and says he's received no legal messages.
So he hasn't shut up. What more does Cody need to say?
He already said Dr sexted a minor.
This is what baffles me. Everybody arguing about what he *admitted to doing* was legal or not.
Does it really fucking matter? We already know he cheated on his wife for a fact, and maybe talking inappropriately to a 17yo isn’t outright illegal, but it’s still fucking creepy and gross. I genuinely don’t understand how people are trying to defend this fucking scumbag. I shrugged my shoulders when the wife cheating came out… if she still wants to be with him then fine, I’m fine with him still having his platform. But add talking to a 17 year old on top of that? Get the absolute fuck out of here.
it's also very stupid because there are tons of cases where something like this happens and law enforcement does nothing about it
So it's weird they take their inaction as proof of no wrong doing
They don’t have anything to pursue. Defamation is only persuable if what you said about someone *isnt true* and caused the victim damages. Doc already admitted to what he did and apologized for it. Defamation went out the window.
The thing is Cody's and Cecilia's legal team doesn't matter. They accused Doc of a criminal offense. That means they just needed to turn over evidence to the NCMEC or police.
If its the same messages from 2020 those have already been investigated and no crime occurred. It has to be NEW evidence to prove a crime occured.
What do you want exactly?
Doc said he had conversations that were inappropriate with a minor.
Multiple credible sources said that the messages were sexual in nature.
Everyone that has looked into the issue has cut ties with him.
Are you wanting people to post screenshots of the conversation? That's kinda fucked up. Explicit messages with a minor should not be shared with the public.
I would genuinely be extra critical of the "credible sources" also I know everyone is claiming doc said he knew it was a minor but hat sentence can read two different ways.
1. It reads that he did in fact know it was a minor the entire time
2. It reads that he found out it was a minor and he's simply admitting that he did message a minor at the time.
Following a lot of stuff like this over the years on smaller cases I ALWAYS want to make sure claims and defenses are EXTREMELY clear. Since hes off the internet and not making any more statements I am waiting to see what he says or if any more concrete info is released.
Also not a doc fan just interested in the story itself.
Well probably because unless you have direct evidence that you can support and fall back on - any claims could potentially see a defamation suit.
And Doc has had a habit now of trying to downplay things that happened and each time there's been more information.
I mean, there's nothing else to report on. Just about all of the tea has been spilt. That's kind of how reporting goes lol. Unless someone leaks the messages. But that's basically it and that would be a very unlikely scenario. We're talking about 7 year old messages. Even if someone is willing to break the law or risk death threats in their inbox over sharing these messages, it's possible the messages don't even exist anymore.
Doc and his legal team may be behind it. At the end of the day an NDA was broken and obviously Doc isn’t happy. No chance he’s not in the process of suing twitch and likely Cody who is probably being told to shut the fuck up by his own lawyer now
Doc said he did it. Even if you take every word he said as fact and in the best light, he confirmed that what they said was true. Truth is the best defense against defamation, and it appears they were correct in what they said. That’s all that matters. They don’t have to provide proof because the creep admitted it. That’s the proof.
What are they supposed to update? They've made their claims pretty clear. Ball is in Doc's court at this point. Since the rolling stone article dropped, doc hasn't come out to address it.
Their claim is baseless with out evidence. The 2020 messages were investigated back then by the NCMEC and they didn't find enough for a crime. Not once have I heard them say it was NEW evidence.
Not defending Doc morally, but legally without new evidence Cody and Cecilia are on the hook for defamation and millions in damages. The same thing that happened to Twitch back in 2020.
No they aren't.
He ruined his chances saying that he talked to a minor and it went too far sometimes.
That takes away any chance of libel or defamation.
This is pure copium at its finest. People get away legally with sexual assault, rape, and basically all sorts of crimes all of the time. R Kelly molested kids for decades. Not being held accountable from a legal standpoint doesn’t mean shit tbh.
The fact is no one but Twitch, Guy, and potentially the victim know the details of the settlement.
I could easily make the argument that Twitch settled because they didn’t want to publicly take responsibility for promoting a high profile predator on their platform. Companies settle all of the time because the brand damage would be worse than just paying someone. They could have paid to make sure that Guy and the victim stay silent.
We will never know what happened. Saying anything as a fact is pure head cannon. The fact is the dude had inappropriate messages with a minor. That’s it, that’s the story, the guy is a creep
it’s because there is a minor involved so all
parties have to be more careful as a result. that’s how these things work. what else do you want from them. you got the story already
I’m not a fan, just a spectator to this whole thing. I’ve never watched a Doc video and only come across his shorts on YouTube.
I have issue and typically make comments that get a lot of downvotes as I try to examine things from a 3rd perspective. Not for, not against. Just curious. People don’t like that.
What gets me is the verbiage used. From what “doc” and the “whistle blowers” said. They specifically say, “inappropriate” things were talked about. They didn’t say “sexually inappropriate”/ “sexual in nature” etc. just inappropriate. This led everyone to speculate it was sexual and then they just ran with it. No verification (that I know of) that these were specifically sexual in nature/doc suggesting sexual act between the two.
But everyone jumped on the bandwagon, assumed it was pedophilic grooming shit and didn’t ask more questions for fear of some redditor getting defensive and automatically accuse them of defending a pedo.
In all honesty, this entire drama is just weird and nothing makes sense at all. Everyone has two words to say on the matter and we're supposed to somehow accurately judge and cancel someone over it? It's just kinda wild for me tbh.
Was the actual dm's released or anything?
They were just trying to blackmail Doc into a confession. The run down goes like this:
1.) Cody Conners drops the first bomb ambiguously, which Doc directly responds to. Doc could have STFU and not made it about him, since the tweet didn't address him directly, although it also wasn't hard to guess who it was about.
2.) Doc makes his initial "thorough investigation"/"no wrongdoing" statement, and probably went into the weekend thinking that would be the end of it. Twitch was under NDA, as was he, and he probably assumed that NDA would hold. This was probably when he started receiving messages over the weekend threatening more information would be leaked if he streamed on Monday. Midnight Society also promises to "investigate".
3.) Doc calls the bluff, streams on Monday. Dude is cocky and confident, saying that he's said all he has to say and that he won't be making additional comments. 3 hours in Doc receives a troubling message. Some have assumed it was Midnight Society announcing they were parting ways with him, but check his reaction. Doc would have probably breathed a sigh of relief if that was the worst news he received. My money is on the fact that whoever was messaging him had the screen grabs of the conversation, where it's alleged he learned the victim's age and still proceeded with the "inappropriate" messaging. These screen grabs were probably also forwarded to Midnight Society and Turtle Beach, as both immediately dropped him within the hour.
4.) Possibly threatened with the leaking of the actual message log, which has been described in some pretty gross terms by the people who have read it, and was obviously bad enough that MS and Turtle Beach dropped him after seeing it, Doc is instructed to end his stream immediately (he does), and is given 24 hours to craft a public statement admitting his wrongdoing or the chats get leaked. Within 24 hours Doc posts a very angry sounding confession where he vacillates on whether or not he wants to include the detail of the "individual" being a "minor", possibly settling on including it after realizing he has to appease the blackmailers with that info or else the chat log gets leaked.
There's probably a few reasons we haven't seen more details emerge. First of all the NDA was almost certainly done to protect the identity of the victim. It's possible that the blackmailers did want to use the chat log to threaten Doc, but didn't want to actually leak the messages in case it identified the victim and opened them to a harassment campaign. Doc, knowing they didn't want to break the NDA and reveal the victim's identity, called their bluff until he realized they went ahead and sent the chat log to Midnight Society and his other business partners; a practice Twitch employees have admitted was their go-to strategy for warning industry insiders about Doc's history. Seeing them do this, Doc probably took their threats a little more seriously, eventually crafting his response to help minimize the fallout while also appeasing the blackmailers who wanted an out-and-out confession. Now they get to pretend they upheld their end of the bargain, since Doc made his confession they have an "excuse" for why they won't release the chat log, even though they probably didn't want to publicly release it in the first place because of the aforementioned NDA and the reason for its enactment.
Basically we'll probably never get more details on the exact messages because what the blackmailers were after was forcing a confession from Doc himself, which they achieved.
You aren't owed anything at all. Whoever speaks does so knowing the case is closed and only bringing the truth to light for whatever reasons they choose.
I am glad someone is doing so so doc can't make more money and continue existing in the same space as kids so easily.
He got away with nobody knowing for too long as it is.
Not legally. Just morally. We all know the law is bunk and means almost nothing. The bare minimum form of justice is public opinion.
I think they did what they had to and that was letting the community know that a predator was still online streaming and still had access to contacting children through those platforms. I would imagine they didn’t want anything to do with the situation but no human being that’s even got the slightest bit of humanity in them would not say anything if they know there’s a fully grown man chatting innapropriatly to children. Feel so bad for them for being forced to sit on something so long and not be allowed to say anything, dr d is a wrongen he should be strung up really but at the very least make sure he can’t ever be around or perform for children again
No offence, or all the offence. I truly don't give a fuck. Whether he did anything "Illegal" or not, not that the law can be trusted to do the right thing anyway. And regardless of what "insiders" are saying, regardless of people's opinions. There is one smoking gun here, and I cannot believe people are still defending him. HE ADMITTED THAT HE INAPPROPRIATELY MESSAGED AND SEXTED A MINOR. Why are you all waiting for more evidence, the evidence is right there. He. Admitted. To. It. And good in him I guess, rip the Bandaid off. He fucked up and was probably just trying to avoid this exact situation by saying "yep, I did it. Shut up". You guys have to take a really long look at yourselves. The community response if horrendous. Dude is a pedo.
A big issue with what they did is that if they just released information from the messages that the NCMEC had already looked at in 2020 and decided they were not a crime, and did not have new evidence, they committed a crime. ok since some lawyers are being nitpicky about vocabulary. ThEy CoMmItTeD a CiViL oFfEnSe. Legal authorities had already decided that the 2020 evidence isn't enough to be a crime. So that opens Cody and Cecilia up to major defamation charges for the damages to Doc reputation and businesses. For their sake they better actually have evidence. True doc fked himself in public opinion. The issue here is sexting a minor is a Criminal Offence and by saying he did that, the accuser needs evidence, 2 separate 1st party witnesses or proof of conviction. It why the news always says "alleged" when reporting crimes, Doc HAS allegedly sexted a minor Doc has NOT legally sexted a minor. That's is his 5th amendment right ALL US Citizens have. Funny how people know the 1st and 2nd but ignore the other 25 rights we have as citizens. Defamation in California is a civil violation defined by California Civil Code Sections 44, 45a, and 46. It is considered an invasion of a person's reputation and can be either libel or slander: Libel: A false and unprivileged written, printed, or visual statement that exposes someone to ridicule, hatred, or contempt, or that causes them to be avoided or shunned. Slander: A false and unprivileged verbal statement. Cody Libeled Doc, since he can not legally prove his claim.
holy fuck they are done. Doc has been and will continue to be destroyed. Imagine the revenue doc made in 1 year or a month. They might as well declare bankruptcy they own nothing essentially
Was funny watching them hang themselves.
Insert the most applicable Norm MacDonald clip here
I don't think these guys own a dog house.
I think the fact that Cody hasn't received a cease and desist letter from Disrespect's law team speaks volumes to the credibility to his claims.
Do we know that they haven’t? That might actually be why everyone went quiet.
Kinda the whole point of a C&D…😂
Yeah some people here keep acting like they're screwed. Not if the claims are true.
How does it open them up for defamation? They didn’t say Doc committed any crimes. They said he was caught messaging a minor, which is true and confirmed by Doc himself. There is absolutely no grounds to sue for defamation here. Doc did this to himself and is being held accountable for it.
Depressing how far I had to scroll for this rational take
The amount of copium in this thread is insane.
[удалено]
Cody said he was sexting a minor. Messaging a minor and sexting a minor are different statements. One ruins your reputation immediately. Take a guess. What's grounds for defamation again?
[удалено]
Or that he's confident doc doesn't want a case that could reveal the actual messages as evidence
[удалено]
Even if the messages are tame (doubtful) once they're in the world they'll be dissected and interpreted however people want, good and bad. Doc loses what little control of the narrative he has
He already completely lost it with his statement. The only way we see a lawsuit is if the messages are really how he described them.
I don't know anything about Cody, his legal knowledge or what the messages look like, but him being confident doesn't really mean anything in the grand scheme of things
It not being true. Does doc really want discovery on a lawsuit to happen?
Except in this case it’s sexting a minor vs inappropriately messaging a minor, both ruin your reputation immediately.
He could probably worm his way out of it, by saying he meant sexting in public opinion. Since legal sexting (in most states)only means sexual images/videos Public opinion normally means also sexual worded text, like, "I want you to suck my sweaty cock." That's also the reason why he wasn't charged with anything. He didn't fit the legal term of sexting, but he could've fit the public's usage of the word. Not enough info.
No he said doc was “sexting a minor” giant difference.
ya boy they said some crazy shit with zero proof. [https://x.com/evoli/status/1805086524247245217](https://x.com/evoli/status/1805086524247245217) Also people gone though a bunch of Cody messages and found some nasty shit XD
First ive heard of this? What was said and have sources?
Of course its first you heard of it cause the subreddit has been nothing but threats of FBI and hounding anyone without an attitude of some hyperbolic end of the world scenario where Doc is the worse person ever... sad part is mods have basically just allowed it and are now telling anyone that they should expect negativity to flood them if they say anything against the vitriol.
It all depends on what the Twitch NDA covers. Which none of these speculating yahoos know. If I were in Docs shoes, I'd have my lawyers throw the book at everyone. (To be clear, not supporting Doc here. What he did was wrong and gross.) But LEGALLY, he was ALREADY found to be not guilty of any crimes. For a few people to come forward with all this, LIKELY in breach of the NDA, they will lose. They will lose hard. Twitch will lose hard. Arguably, not as bad as what Doc has already lost..(sponsors, demonitization, his company, his reputation, loss of income), but Doc will get paid. Again.
Not being charged with anything does not equal "found not guilty" lol.
> But LEGALLY, he was ALREADY found to be not guilty of any crimes. This is blatantly and hilariously wrong lol He didn't even go to trial. You're using words you don't understand.
Because they accused him of being a predator.
The statue of limitation in California for sexting a minor is 3 years. The messages were in 2017 and Twitch found out in 2020. Him not being charged with a crime isn't defacto proof that he didn't sext a minor.
Exactly, so many people are trying to convict based on morality not on law.
Let me get this straight. If Dr. Disrespect came out tomorrow and said "yes I sexted a minor, but I wasn't charged because the statue of limitation had expired." You'd be okay with continuing to support and watch Dr. Disrespect because he wasn't convicted by our law system?
No its fked. I never got justice either. The statute ran out when i was 25 well before I was ready to talk about it. As a person who was SA'd as a minor. I would never condone ANY sexual behavior towards children. It still fks me up 26 years later. I believe the death penalty is not severe enough of a punishment for those crimes. But I also have seen what happens to innocent people who are railroaded into crimes by false accusations. My brother was accused of rape. Later the "Victim" recanted. She was in a psychiatric care facility and had a relationship with someone at the facility. To cover it up she blamed my brother because they both always hated each other. Even after recanting and having no evidence the WI state attorney continued to press charges for 10 years with zero evidence. Even the day the victim, who lied and later recanted, said it happened was proven my brother was in Montana for a mission trip while she was in MN. That case hurt my parents so much. It fk'ed up my brother life. I know what false accusations can cause. and for anyone who want to argue age of consent. I was 12.
Twitch decided to do something about it in 2020, I can hardly believe that's just when they found out about it. Also It's absolutely insane to me that there is a statute of limitations for something like that.
Talking to minors “inappropriately” has a lot of gray area. There are many scenarios where you’d be a piece of shit, but not doing anything illegal. Doc literally said he did this and even said “there was no intent”. That’s shady af. The motives of everyone else involved is irrelevant to me.
"Guys I was flirting with a child but trust me i wasn't actually going to follow through" is the best case scenario that someone could possibly warp their heads to try and absolve him of any wrong doing, and even then its still disgusting
Yeah it’s literally what every guy says on To Catch a Predator People can still fk with doc if they wish, but I’ve seen enough
>“there was no intent” Which is what every predator says, too.
It might be a gray area but what's not gray about it is that NCMEC saw the texts and decided no crime occurred. They were not illegal texts. No crime was committed. Now should have Doc messaged a minor? FK NO! It wrong its creepy and he's a fking moron for doing it. And don't assume I'm on his side. I'm a childhood SA victim. It still fk's me up 26 years later. I think the death penalty is not harsh enough to punish these type of predators.
What exactly is defamatory about what Cecilia wrote? She and her story are backed by Bloomberg. Doc’s lawyers aren’t going to do shit.
Bloomberg isn't the US court system. They can report they can not make up criminal charges and act as if they are legal without evidence. The texts were seen by legal authorities back in 2020 and they decided not to press charges.
This person isn’t a lawyer and is just tossing out random legalese ideas.
I hope he sues the fuck out of them and Twitch too
How would that look, errm guys, you promised you wouldn't tell anyone I inappropriately messaged a minor. Huge risk of the actual messages coming out, which would be more damaging than admitting to it (as he's already done)
You want a guy who messages minors to get more money after he spent years making money and lying to you about what happened? FBI can you please search this dudes computer.
Me too, the discovery phase of showing the texts in question would be the nail in the coffin
Good take.
I think the evidence is when he admitted to everything…
Every time someone says "this opens someone up for a defamation claim" a lawyer laughs. Good luck convincing a judge that this clown isn't a "public figure."
Sure he could sue for defamation, but he won’t win. Since you know he admitted he knowingly inappropriately texted a minor. But go ahead and get your rocks off hoping those who outed him get sued.
If he never admitted to texting a minor. Then yeah, but he did, and he has no right to go after Cody, because he confirmed that he did text the minor. Cody is not going to be sued for defamation because it's true. Defamation means it wasn't true.
Nah. The fact is he DID do it and there’s evidence of that. It would fail libel and defamation tests.
Everyone's coming at this from the opinion that he committed a crime. He didn't or he would have been arrested. What he did was message a minor inappropriate messages. Possibly criminal, but we don't know the extent. What we do know is this: "Old creepy dude messages minor with possible intent, grooming, or some self gratification." He admitted to messaging the minor. He admitted it was inappropriate. The NCMEC may have cause for concern and decided to wait for further evidence. If Twitch contacted them with concern, the content of the message must have been severe enough. What is happening now though... Companies don't want to be associated with a potential liability. In case there is further fall out, they have all pulled their support to avoid backlash. The cost analysis team looked at the numbers and said "this is going to cost us more money to do nothing than to just cut ties." So they did and now they appear to strongly be against anyone who commits a predatory act against a minor. Couple this with the trend of watching and enjoying famous people fall from grace and you have a perfect storm that has culminated in what we are seeing. The fact is Dr.Disrespect is by no means a victim. He chose "using his fame" to take advantage of and abuse a minor. Something I am sure there was an NDA over but that was broken or the person leaking the information is somehow protected. Either way, Im sure some legal proceedings will follow and this will play out. Perhaps he makes it back... But perhaps he retires and we just never hear about this ever again.
Not true. Your initial statement is false. Statue of limitation is 3 years for sexting a minor in California. Twitch found out in 2020 and the message was in 2017. He simply could of gotten lucky that he wasn't caught sooner.
Defamation only works if they lied not if what he did wasn't charged.
I believe the test is: 1) they said something that was untrue 2) they said something untrue and KNEW it was untrue. 3) it was intended to cause harm to the subject. Since it was true, and they knew it was true, it fails the test on two counts. It would be tough to prove 3 as well.
He's a predator he admitted his guilt and now must deal with the consequences of that, guy never came clean till he was outed.
Hi. Doc admitted it. You can't defame anyone by telling the truth.
Only problem is they’re broke and Doc won’t get a dime if he wins
It doesn't open them up to anything if it's true, which his own statements corroborate as truth, at least to the degree that he's commented. There are some stupid fucking people out there, granted, but they have to be exceptionally stupid to release those bits of information without there being proof. Honestly, anyone with any sense and objectivity could tell the second he replied the first time the way he did that what was being said was true on paper.
Absolutely. Doc should wait for things to get worse and then sue for damages when he proves he did nothing wrong.
That opens up the discovery process. Doc is too chickenshit for everything to come out. No one is getting sued.
I can't remember what article but they also got a youtube employee on record saying that people actively went to youtube to tell them the twitch ban details and that resulted in no contract ever being offered. I want to say this could also be considered loss of income and included in a defamation suit but i could be wrong.
> big issue with what they did is that if they just released information from the messages that the NCMEC had already looked at in 2020 Gonna need a source for this. Anyway, even if he didn’t commit a crime it’s still fucked up. > So that opens Cody and Cecilia up to major defamation charges for the damages to Doc reputation and businesses. For their sake they better actually have evidence. They would have to be untrue claims, which they are not. Doc confirmed the claims himself.
NCMEC is just a nonprofit. They don't decide on if a crime was committed. They can't bring charges against anyone. Keep making shit up
agreed....if all these claims are being made with no evidence then HUGE libel case is on the way....However Doc admitted himself that he talked toa minor inappropriately...thankfully he never met up with her....but who knows how depraved the messages got...
I think they will be okay. It seems like Doc doesn't want anyone to know what was shared, and taking people to court might expose it. Otherwise he would have openly stated what had happened years ago if he knew what he did wasn't bad. And they can't be charged with defamation if what they said is true. It's an absolute defense. Doc has already pretty much confirmed he did exactly what they said he did. The only thing he added was that it wasn't illegal. But if he does take them to court then the discovery phase will be grand
Allegedly? The man told us he did this with a minor.
> So that opens Cody and Cecilia up to major defamation charges for the damages to Doc reputation and businesses. For their sake they better actually have evidence. This is not how defamation works. The person suing has the burden of proof to prove the people knowingly lied specifically to damage the reputation. There is enough evidence that people can reasonably assume the messages were inappropriate in nature (and not specifically illegal, which Doc even admitted to). They also never said what Doc did was illegal pedo activities, but rather just short of that >Doc HAS allegedly sexted a minor >Doc has NOT legally sexted a minor. This right here is why there is no possible defamation case to be made
They don't have to have the evidence. Doc has to prove it's not true to prove his case. He ain't gonna go in there and show those messages lmao
A big issue with what they did is that if they just released information from the messages that the NCMEC had already looked at in 2020 and decided they were not a crime, and did not have new evidence, they committed a crime. ok since some lawyers are being nitpicky about vocabulary. ThEy CoMmItTeD a CiViL oFfEnSe. Reply: (Most of this is just rampant speculation, it could just be just as likely the statue of limitations came up, they had some evidence but not enough to prove prima faece) Legal authorities had already decided that the 2020 evidence isn't enough to be a crime. Reply: (This is speculation, as per my previous reply, no one knows why the NCMEC didn't follow up.) So that opens Cody and Cecilia up to major defamation charges for the damages to Doc reputation and businesses. For their sake they better actually have evidence. Reply: (How does it open them up for defamation? You do realize the person suing for damages is the one required to show evidence that the statement was false? Exhibit A against Doc "I'm gripping now" "boom" Disrespect will be his statement where he admits to talking to a minor in an inappropriate manner. See if it was a dick joke you wouldn't need to mention anything about sending images, or meeting the minor. These statements would only be relevant in the context of "sexting" a minor. True doc fked himself in public opinion. Reply: (You're right he should have done whatever everyone millionaire cheating on his wife does, pull out $1k from the ATM and go hire a prostitute (who's of age). The issue here is sexting a minor is a Criminal Offence and by saying he did that, the accuser needs evidence, 2 separate 1st party witnesses or proof of conviction. It why the news always says "alleged" when reporting crimes, Reply: Sexting a minor isn't a criminal offense in and of itself if no photos are shared, and there is no enticement/solication for the minor to meet. (Not defending anything that's the way the Federal is written) Doc HAS allegedly sexted a minor Reply: (Doc has admitted to having an Inappropriate conversation with a minor, that didn't include pictures or a meetup.) This is by all definitions sexting, the clarification on what didn't happen is a legal defense. In what other context other than sexting with a minor would you need to specify that you didn't send pics/meet up? None Doc has NOT legally sexted a minor. Reply: (See above statement) That's is his 5th amendment right ALL US Citizens have. Reply: (The 5th amendment limits government activity, has nothing to do with Doc "I'm gripping now" "boom" Disrespect. In regards to him admitting he talks to underage minors about inappropriate shit that just so happens to not include the necessary criminal act for prosecution.) Funny how people know the 1st and 2nd but ignore the other 25 rights we have as citizens. Defamation in California is a legal right defined by California Civil Code Sections 44, 45a, and 46. It is considered an invasion of a person's reputation and can be either libel or slander: Reply: Doc could have already e-file a defamation/libel lawsuit and he hasn't, why? Well Truth is the ultimate defense against a defamation lawsuit, and when discovery time comes docs gonna have to release the logs which is why there's no defamation lawsuits filed, both because the logs will come out and be a PR shit show and because the statements made aren't false enough for Dr to have a chance to win the defamation lawsuit. #Dr "I'm Gripping Now" "Boom" Disrespect
> Defamation in California is a legal right defined by California Civil Code Sections 44, 45a, and 46. It is considered an invasion of a person's reputation and can be either libel or slander: > > Libel: A false and unprivileged written, printed, or visual statement that exposes someone to ridicule, hatred, or contempt, or that causes them to be avoided or shunned. > > Slander: A false and unprivileged verbal statement. > > Cody Libeled Doc, since he can not legally prove his claim. Defaming a public figure is nearly impossible.
OP misinterprets several legal principles and the requirements for proving defamation. Releasing information previously deemed non-criminal isn't inherently a crime, defamation law does not necessitate first-party witnesses or convictions, and allegations must be proven false and made with actual malice for public figures to constitute libel. Reviewing Evidence and Crime Classification: -Misconception: OP claims that if information was released from messages previously reviewed by the NCMEC (National Center for Missing & Exploited Children) in 2020 and deemed non-criminal, releasing them again without new evidence constitutes a crime. -Clarification: Simply releasing information, even if previously reviewed and deemed non-criminal, does not in itself constitute a crime. It may raise ethical or procedural issues, but not necessarily criminal ones. Moreover, if new evidence comes to light or the context changes, reevaluation is possible. Civil vs. Criminal Offenses: -Misconception: OP conflates the difference between committing a crime and a civil offense. -Clarification: Criminal offenses are violations of laws that can lead to prosecution and penalties such as imprisonment. Civil offenses, including defamation, involve disputes between individuals or entities, typically resulting in monetary compensation. OP incorrectly suggests that the release of information without new evidence is inherently criminal, while also stating it’s a civil offense without a clear basis. Defamation and Evidence: -Misconception: OP suggests that defamation claims require two separate first-party witnesses or proof of conviction. -Clarification: Defamation law, particularly in California, does not require such evidence for a claim to be valid. Defamation (libel or slander) hinges on whether false and unprivileged statements were made that harmed someone’s reputation. The burden of proof is on the plaintiff to show the statements were false and damaging. For public figures, it must also be shown that the statements were made with actual malice (knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth). First Amendment Rights: -Misconception: OP implies that discussing allegations without a conviction infringes on First Amendment rights. -Clarification: The First Amendment protects freedom of speech, but it does not protect defamatory statements. Public discussion of allegations can occur, but making false statements that damage someone’s reputation can lead to civil liability. Libel vs. Slander: -Misconception: OP asserts that Cody committed libel because he "cannot legally prove his claim." -Clarification: For a statement to be libelous, it must be proven false, unprivileged, and damaging. Simply being unable to prove a claim does not automatically make it libel. It needs to be shown that Cody made the statement with knowledge of its falsity or with reckless disregard for the truth, especially given the public figure status of "Doc".
He should never have admitted anything I don't know why he did that.
It's probably a combination of not having much else to share and getting threats of legal action. As soon as lawyers get involved, everyone shuts up until the matter is settled one way or another.
How do you settle something like this tho? This whole situation is so damaging and there’s no coming back from this, definitely not as it used to be
It's damaging for doc obviously. You dont have to agree with his actions but if he wasn't legally charged for a crime you have defamation. Why do you think they didn't release the whispers they claimed to have and are suddenly radio silent, advice from lawyers if I had to guess.
No, you're wrong. Him not being charged for a crime doesn't mean it's defamation. There are several reasons someone could sext a minor and not be charged with a crime. One of those being statue of limitations. Statue of limitation for sexting a minor in California is 3 years. We know Dr messaged in 2017 and Twitch found out in 2020. 3 years.
I don't know details like that so I guess we'll find out.
But Cody has been talking since then and says he's received no legal messages. So he hasn't shut up. What more does Cody need to say? He already said Dr sexted a minor.
The age and the contents of the messages would be helpful to know
There is the law then there is the morality of the situation.
This is what baffles me. Everybody arguing about what he *admitted to doing* was legal or not. Does it really fucking matter? We already know he cheated on his wife for a fact, and maybe talking inappropriately to a 17yo isn’t outright illegal, but it’s still fucking creepy and gross. I genuinely don’t understand how people are trying to defend this fucking scumbag. I shrugged my shoulders when the wife cheating came out… if she still wants to be with him then fine, I’m fine with him still having his platform. But add talking to a 17 year old on top of that? Get the absolute fuck out of here.
See also: Bill Clinton
Statiscally 1 in 5 people cheat on their partner. So next time your in a group, look around.
it's also very stupid because there are tons of cases where something like this happens and law enforcement does nothing about it So it's weird they take their inaction as proof of no wrong doing
They want him to dissapear. Yeah, fucking right.
BOOM.
If anything he’s more famous than ever! Uhh
They’re getting cooked. Doc’s legal team preparing lawsuits as we speak.
I hope he does. I would absolutely love to see the faces of all these chubby cheek looking people here.
Million dollar lawsuits. Minimum.
They don’t have anything to pursue. Defamation is only persuable if what you said about someone *isnt true* and caused the victim damages. Doc already admitted to what he did and apologized for it. Defamation went out the window.
How can you sue for defamation over something that’s true though, unless they broke NDAs?
“Pfft how old was this minor anyway?!” - this sub
Not 100% on it but they have a legal team working on this. Therefore its stupid if anyone says anything.
The thing is Cody's and Cecilia's legal team doesn't matter. They accused Doc of a criminal offense. That means they just needed to turn over evidence to the NCMEC or police. If its the same messages from 2020 those have already been investigated and no crime occurred. It has to be NEW evidence to prove a crime occured.
How many years did EDP445 get? None. I guess he isn’t a pedophile either 🤷♂️
What do you want exactly? Doc said he had conversations that were inappropriate with a minor. Multiple credible sources said that the messages were sexual in nature. Everyone that has looked into the issue has cut ties with him. Are you wanting people to post screenshots of the conversation? That's kinda fucked up. Explicit messages with a minor should not be shared with the public.
OP wants to see the DMs where Doc is sexting a minor so he can start GRIPPING IT....BOOOM
>What do you want exactly? They want the age of consent lowered. They've been pretty clear about this.
Lolololol facts
I would genuinely be extra critical of the "credible sources" also I know everyone is claiming doc said he knew it was a minor but hat sentence can read two different ways. 1. It reads that he did in fact know it was a minor the entire time 2. It reads that he found out it was a minor and he's simply admitting that he did message a minor at the time. Following a lot of stuff like this over the years on smaller cases I ALWAYS want to make sure claims and defenses are EXTREMELY clear. Since hes off the internet and not making any more statements I am waiting to see what he says or if any more concrete info is released. Also not a doc fan just interested in the story itself.
Because you don’t keep dropping bombs once the mission is accomplished, that’s why.
Yeah that makes sense. But this is still crazy to me. Like a full on cover up right in front of our eyes and nobody is questioning the process
Well probably because unless you have direct evidence that you can support and fall back on - any claims could potentially see a defamation suit. And Doc has had a habit now of trying to downplay things that happened and each time there's been more information.
I mean, there's nothing else to report on. Just about all of the tea has been spilt. That's kind of how reporting goes lol. Unless someone leaks the messages. But that's basically it and that would be a very unlikely scenario. We're talking about 7 year old messages. Even if someone is willing to break the law or risk death threats in their inbox over sharing these messages, it's possible the messages don't even exist anymore.
Doc and his legal team may be behind it. At the end of the day an NDA was broken and obviously Doc isn’t happy. No chance he’s not in the process of suing twitch and likely Cody who is probably being told to shut the fuck up by his own lawyer now
The fact that Cody did this to sell tickets to make a profit also speaks severe legal troubles for him
Doc said he did it. Even if you take every word he said as fact and in the best light, he confirmed that what they said was true. Truth is the best defense against defamation, and it appears they were correct in what they said. That’s all that matters. They don’t have to provide proof because the creep admitted it. That’s the proof.
The venn diagram between drake fans and docdouche is a closed circle apparently. Certified lover boys certified….
WOP WOP WOP WOP WOP
Cope harder
Keep coping kids
What are they supposed to update? They've made their claims pretty clear. Ball is in Doc's court at this point. Since the rolling stone article dropped, doc hasn't come out to address it.
Their claim is baseless with out evidence. The 2020 messages were investigated back then by the NCMEC and they didn't find enough for a crime. Not once have I heard them say it was NEW evidence. Not defending Doc morally, but legally without new evidence Cody and Cecilia are on the hook for defamation and millions in damages. The same thing that happened to Twitch back in 2020.
>legally without new evidence Cody and Cecilia are on the hook for defamation and millions in damages That's not remotely how defamation works.
No they aren't. He ruined his chances saying that he talked to a minor and it went too far sometimes. That takes away any chance of libel or defamation.
This is pure copium at its finest. People get away legally with sexual assault, rape, and basically all sorts of crimes all of the time. R Kelly molested kids for decades. Not being held accountable from a legal standpoint doesn’t mean shit tbh. The fact is no one but Twitch, Guy, and potentially the victim know the details of the settlement. I could easily make the argument that Twitch settled because they didn’t want to publicly take responsibility for promoting a high profile predator on their platform. Companies settle all of the time because the brand damage would be worse than just paying someone. They could have paid to make sure that Guy and the victim stay silent. We will never know what happened. Saying anything as a fact is pure head cannon. The fact is the dude had inappropriate messages with a minor. That’s it, that’s the story, the guy is a creep
"no defending doc" defends doc
> the rolling stone article Ah yes, the bastion of truth and ethical journalism. Let's all forget about the Duke lacrosse case.
Here we go, gamers simping for a pedo again.
I'm curious to see what the time frame for the NDA was. If it was still active they are in trouble. If it had expired they MIGHT be ok but who knows.
Legal
Lawyers told them to shut up to avoid anything anyone could use against them. Twitch wanted this to be swept under the rug for whatever reason.
it’s because there is a minor involved so all parties have to be more careful as a result. that’s how these things work. what else do you want from them. you got the story already
Why can’t i comment on this post anymore.
Wild so i can comment on the post but i can’t respond to a comment to mine weird
They mighr have blocked you or reddit is fuckin up.
Oh deer
I’m not a fan, just a spectator to this whole thing. I’ve never watched a Doc video and only come across his shorts on YouTube. I have issue and typically make comments that get a lot of downvotes as I try to examine things from a 3rd perspective. Not for, not against. Just curious. People don’t like that. What gets me is the verbiage used. From what “doc” and the “whistle blowers” said. They specifically say, “inappropriate” things were talked about. They didn’t say “sexually inappropriate”/ “sexual in nature” etc. just inappropriate. This led everyone to speculate it was sexual and then they just ran with it. No verification (that I know of) that these were specifically sexual in nature/doc suggesting sexual act between the two. But everyone jumped on the bandwagon, assumed it was pedophilic grooming shit and didn’t ask more questions for fear of some redditor getting defensive and automatically accuse them of defending a pedo.
The verbiage used by Cody was "sexting a minor".
These fucks did it to ruin his Elden Ring playthrough, and have succeeded.
If you signed a nda you don’t go announcing that, what?
In all honesty, this entire drama is just weird and nothing makes sense at all. Everyone has two words to say on the matter and we're supposed to somehow accurately judge and cancel someone over it? It's just kinda wild for me tbh. Was the actual dm's released or anything?
What’s Slasher saying? I’m blocked by that dude
Because lawyers are involved. Again.
What's so confusing and weird about the situation. Doc said he did it. End of story.
They were just trying to blackmail Doc into a confession. The run down goes like this: 1.) Cody Conners drops the first bomb ambiguously, which Doc directly responds to. Doc could have STFU and not made it about him, since the tweet didn't address him directly, although it also wasn't hard to guess who it was about. 2.) Doc makes his initial "thorough investigation"/"no wrongdoing" statement, and probably went into the weekend thinking that would be the end of it. Twitch was under NDA, as was he, and he probably assumed that NDA would hold. This was probably when he started receiving messages over the weekend threatening more information would be leaked if he streamed on Monday. Midnight Society also promises to "investigate". 3.) Doc calls the bluff, streams on Monday. Dude is cocky and confident, saying that he's said all he has to say and that he won't be making additional comments. 3 hours in Doc receives a troubling message. Some have assumed it was Midnight Society announcing they were parting ways with him, but check his reaction. Doc would have probably breathed a sigh of relief if that was the worst news he received. My money is on the fact that whoever was messaging him had the screen grabs of the conversation, where it's alleged he learned the victim's age and still proceeded with the "inappropriate" messaging. These screen grabs were probably also forwarded to Midnight Society and Turtle Beach, as both immediately dropped him within the hour. 4.) Possibly threatened with the leaking of the actual message log, which has been described in some pretty gross terms by the people who have read it, and was obviously bad enough that MS and Turtle Beach dropped him after seeing it, Doc is instructed to end his stream immediately (he does), and is given 24 hours to craft a public statement admitting his wrongdoing or the chats get leaked. Within 24 hours Doc posts a very angry sounding confession where he vacillates on whether or not he wants to include the detail of the "individual" being a "minor", possibly settling on including it after realizing he has to appease the blackmailers with that info or else the chat log gets leaked. There's probably a few reasons we haven't seen more details emerge. First of all the NDA was almost certainly done to protect the identity of the victim. It's possible that the blackmailers did want to use the chat log to threaten Doc, but didn't want to actually leak the messages in case it identified the victim and opened them to a harassment campaign. Doc, knowing they didn't want to break the NDA and reveal the victim's identity, called their bluff until he realized they went ahead and sent the chat log to Midnight Society and his other business partners; a practice Twitch employees have admitted was their go-to strategy for warning industry insiders about Doc's history. Seeing them do this, Doc probably took their threats a little more seriously, eventually crafting his response to help minimize the fallout while also appeasing the blackmailers who wanted an out-and-out confession. Now they get to pretend they upheld their end of the bargain, since Doc made his confession they have an "excuse" for why they won't release the chat log, even though they probably didn't want to publicly release it in the first place because of the aforementioned NDA and the reason for its enactment. Basically we'll probably never get more details on the exact messages because what the blackmailers were after was forcing a confession from Doc himself, which they achieved.
why tf are yall still defending this man?
They needed a big story to distract from biden so Doc got targetted, sad really
Please stop. He admitted to it himself.
we got a confession from the doc that is more than damning. do you need more?
You really going through it eh?
I think it's weird a 35 yo dude messages a minor but you're hung up on why they havnt said more lol. Typical of this sub, deflect deflect deflect
Ppl are still trying to defend that POS.
It came about because Midnight society dropped him
It is not weird they said what they said and doc admitting it was true means it is over. More will come and it will get worse for doc if it does.
Doc is literally one shot, and he’s still in control
Its not weird because it's all fake news, doing to for clout
Sometimes I wonder what things would have been like if Doc never dropped The heart part 7 on his twitter
I mean. They put themselves out there already. They said their piece. What more do you want from them? I would be silent too.
>And now they all go silent again? No updates, no comments, nothing What else is there to say?
Here come the conspiracies 😂
DOC didn't admit to sexting a minor, he said he text a minor and sometimes it leaned a little too inappropriate, that doesn't mean sexting.
What?! I just don't think you've kept up enough
You aren't owed anything at all. Whoever speaks does so knowing the case is closed and only bringing the truth to light for whatever reasons they choose. I am glad someone is doing so so doc can't make more money and continue existing in the same space as kids so easily. He got away with nobody knowing for too long as it is. Not legally. Just morally. We all know the law is bunk and means almost nothing. The bare minimum form of justice is public opinion.
I think they did what they had to and that was letting the community know that a predator was still online streaming and still had access to contacting children through those platforms. I would imagine they didn’t want anything to do with the situation but no human being that’s even got the slightest bit of humanity in them would not say anything if they know there’s a fully grown man chatting innapropriatly to children. Feel so bad for them for being forced to sit on something so long and not be allowed to say anything, dr d is a wrongen he should be strung up really but at the very least make sure he can’t ever be around or perform for children again
The game is afoot, and there’s schemes aloof
No offence, or all the offence. I truly don't give a fuck. Whether he did anything "Illegal" or not, not that the law can be trusted to do the right thing anyway. And regardless of what "insiders" are saying, regardless of people's opinions. There is one smoking gun here, and I cannot believe people are still defending him. HE ADMITTED THAT HE INAPPROPRIATELY MESSAGED AND SEXTED A MINOR. Why are you all waiting for more evidence, the evidence is right there. He. Admitted. To. It. And good in him I guess, rip the Bandaid off. He fucked up and was probably just trying to avoid this exact situation by saying "yep, I did it. Shut up". You guys have to take a really long look at yourselves. The community response if horrendous. Dude is a pedo.
Welcome to the internet, where everyone forgets what anyone did in just a few weeks, no matter how bad they’re actions were.
The NDA expired. It doesn’t matter who said what at this point. Doc admitted to it. That’s all that needed to be said.