https://x.com/sinatraa/status/1862644631067849178?t=J8kJc6hHpNcSDaaGqh-Fhw&s=19
16
sinatraa truth...
posted in
Off Topic
Comments:
Threaded
Linear
outlines a situation where either a man was falsely accused, defamed, and had to go through a corrupt investigation for or a woman was sexually assaulted and harassed/ridiculed for it. whatever your perception of it is, you should care because both are terrible things that happen constantly in the modern day and need to be addressed.
Sinatraa/Prod stream 12 hours a day. Apple doesn't fall far from the tree. You realize those 2 are "friends" bc nobody actually likes them. Birds of the same feather flock together.
Also for sinatraa, he gained his audience bc he was a cracked gamer. He chose to stick to this arrogant "im better than you, and I'm rich, have fun at mcdonalds" "persona". I feel like anyone who watches them has to be a bit odd. If you like watching people who feel the need to flex on haters instead of ignoring, you do you. ngl val community is just cooked in general
In Prod's case it's more of a persona than skill but still similarly obnoxious.
My post was mainly just meme, i kinda see them as thing 1 and thing 2 tbh.
As far as the "situation" idrc, he's gonna hear it for the rest of his life. Kinda like Drake. Maybe get over it or since your sooooooo mega rich, get off the internet? Playing Valorant doesn't require a twitch stream. lmaoooooo
I think it's more of getting people off his back about it and getting the last word. Obviously people in the community will hate him either way and will continue to look at him the same as when it happened, but it's better for him to address whatever and end it than still having people bashing him after 3 years.
I don't really like sinatraa but I can kind of accept that this is his side of the story because the people that were close to him at that time and knew the details behind the scenes have stuck to him. I think if anything TenZ and SEN as an org lost because of it. I have also watched an investigation into the topic that pointed out logical fallacy's and straight up lies in the accusations.
Do I think sinatraa is fully innocent? Hell, no.
Do I think he is a rapist and genuinely intentionally wanted to scar his ex for life? Probably not.
Do I think both people in the relationship were immature, damaged and should have never engaged in it ? Yeah, but people make mistakes.
Weird shit , we will never know what truly happened
Stigma associated with it, people may associate it with moral judgment or see it as something "dirty" or "immoral," even if it was a choice made out of necessity or personal agency.
Stereotypes that sometimes seem more like archetypes of being deceitful, manipulative, or opportunistic. These stereotypes influence how others perceive someone's character, leading to assumptions about trustworthiness based on their past occupation.
regardless of situation is also can be seen to be exploititative of someone or something like male's desire for lust and what not. in the end its all up to perception but people who believe so do with reason due to the stigma and somewhat accurate archetypes these creators have. idk specifically about katarina but ig situation is sometimes a valid reason but in my lowly opinion i still view it as a pretty big stain on ur rep seeing how working at maccas may not get u by but ur saving ur dignity and not exploiting people in comparison to of and just grabbing the bag and running. but idk much about her situation so im really not to judge
People are probably innately desperate for money as we need it to literally fucking survive but to be so much more desperate for more money that u sell ur dignity and exploit people for ur personal gain could leave an untrustworthy image upon urself. its hard to see second chances here tbh but its still dependent on situation i cant just like kill a baby and then say im sorry just like how i cant send my nudes to like 100 people for money and then say im high value and dignified but idk her situation or anything so all of this is in the end conjecture
its not the willingness to survive. surviving in late state capitalism maybe alot harder than before yet still working a 9-5 or just working harder in general is still enough to achieve the american dream. immigration still is sky high due to this. to me its not surviving at least based of what ik and assume its more just greed for greater monetary gain at the expense of their own diginity. diginity and trustworthyness are interlinked seeing if ur willinging to give up ur diginity ur giving up ur worthness for trust. Im not giving any of my opinions here im just stating what is common among modern society. she probably was aware of the stigma and the archetypes associated with her line of work yet still chose to join it thus i dont think its wrong for traits of the job to be assimilated with her. in the end my personal opinion is that she was obviously doing it to survive if not why would she quit but i can see why people argue the opposite
it kinda does matter that he lied lmao???? and u cant assume he doesnt have it when he said he does. Theres also many reasons why he would hide it, literally anything that makes him look bad he would not want to release. Also, with ur logic we could also say why not show the vid if theres nothing for him to hide?
I cannot show the video because she asked me to delete it after we broke up which I did
The reason I didn’t provide the video is because I just thought she MUST provide the video because she’s accusing me , but I guess not
doesnt 2nd statement imply that he was still in full possession of the video during the investigation? if he did delete it, why would he say "The reason I didn’t provide the video" which suggests the idea that he actually could provide the video?
you seem to be insinuating that sinatraa possibly had the video, but didn't supply it as it incriminated him, but that makes no sense, since if the video was incriminating, why wouldn't his ex provide it as evidence? we know she had it, considering she extracted the audio file.
whether this contradiction actually exists or not, the result is that it doesn't play a part in actually contradicting any of sinatraa's main points.
U know the most fucked up part that I don't like no matter what case scenario when such things happen is the fact that the Company themselves or the organisation themselves INVESTIGATE THE MATTER , like the fuck are you all , either hire a real fucking guy who could investigate independently without bias cause let's be real if org investigates there could be bias on the players side or if the company like riot here does there again could be bias considering they will try an option that doesn't damage their reputation no matter if that's the wrong decision so yeah, a different independent guy should be hired for investigation who's actually knowing abt this stuff
"Sinatraa's ex has withdrawn from the case, and this decision is unrelated to the effectiveness of the American legal system.
According to a 2021 article by The Guardian, rape is one of the easiest violent crimes to escape justice in much of the world. In the U.S., only 19% of reported rapes and sexual assaults result in arrests, and just around 6.5% lead to a conviction. I can provide the link to this source if needed, but I want to keep this brief.
For survivors, the decision to pursue a case is ultimately personal; they know what happened to them, and the trauma they carry is immense. Often, the involvement of the courts, convictions, and police only adds to their suffering. Speaking from the experiences of people I know who have faced these situations, the court process seems to offer little in the way of healing.
When someone asks, "But why not tough it out and seek a conviction to protect others?" I reference The Guardian's statistics. Only 6.5% lead to a conviction, which highlights the vast disparity in outcomes. To further illustrate this disparity, I will also refer to https://rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system.
This issue extends beyond the points already discussed; https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6994185/#S4 is also an excellent study if you're interested in looking further into it. I believe your perspective is fundamentally flawed; it is well-known that the U.S. justice system regarding sexual violence is biased in favour of the perpetrator from the outset.
My friend told me about this situation, but she didn't take action because she was too afraid of the potential consequences. The low conviction rate and the involvement of a close family friend, who had family support, made her hesitant. It frustrates me that people are quick to support harsh laws while rejecting the updates needed for laws that are clearly unfit for purpose.
yes us law is geniunely that weak. we call our principle "innocent until proven guilty" which means you have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that someone is guilty. this means for example, if someone goes "theres snow outside" if we didn't see the snow fall then we can't say it snowed. so if a woman wants to win a sa case against someone she knows, she basically needs the guy to confess he did it knowingly as sa.
while i mean not and never mean to discredit anybody's experience with SA, your claim that a confession needs to come out is simply not true; it's difficult, you'd be absolutely correct to say that, but would it be more just to make it easy? if not innocent until proven guilty, what? guilty until proven innocent? is that the principle that would make a "strong" justice system?
Ignoring the part about Sinatraa, and talking abstractly. If you know someone is guilty, but the nature of the encounter means that someone will never be found guilty because the only meaningful evidence will be kept out by exclusionary rules. Do you think there’s any justice in that situation?
Also as a side note, there are things such as preponderance of the evidence in civil trials (essentially >51%) but you’d still need to get the evidence in.
The point is that, and maybe you weren’t making this point, it’s not like beyond a reasonable doubt gets you to justice. In some cases it prevents justice. Beyond a reasonable doubt is a good system for making sure we don’t convict people who aren’t guilty, but it also lets a lot of guilty people walk free. So I don’t think it’s fair to say that getting rid of it gets rid of justice.
It’s also worth noting that we only run this standard for when we’re imprisoning or executing people. For civil cases, we’re completely fine saying that 51% means you did it.
Also worth noting that any evidence such as video or audio recordings would not be admitted under rules of evidence. Most states have rules that bar nonconsensual audio and video recordings from being admitted as evidence if they’re in a place with a reasonable expectation of privacy.
There’s good reasons for this though, so don’t get it twisted.
I don’t really know about the rest of the shit, but I’m calling BS on the lawyer part.
I don’t have much experience in defamation or torts in general. I also don’t work with celebrities, but I feel like no (good) lawyer is going to tell you to post a claim that you aren’t going to follow through with. It’s just opening your client up to unnecessary liability, and yourself up to liability if your client ends up being hurt by it.
Discord