Oh yes Jo; all of us fighting the False Allegations Industry agree than many allegations have essentially true elements to them and may be exaggerated or inflated. Very few are totally made up; most are based on truth but, for example, meeting someone, trying to seduce someone and failing to succeed is not a crime. Take Rolf Harris; he had an affair with his daughter's friend - he has admitted it; but was she 18, as he says, or younger, as she does? Morally it is not hugely important but when legally it becomes enormously important.

JK2006 wrote:
...trying to seduce someone and failing to succeed is not a crime...
It surely depends on how it's done. Lauren Sivan's allegation, if true, doesn't sound like a seduction attempt, more a display of power and desire to humiliate after she told him she was already spoken for. Then the phone call afterwards as if nothing untoward had happened, maybe to check if she was likely to report him.

Perhaps the Rolf Harris accuser was telling the truth, but she didn't come forward until shortly after the Jimmy Savile scandal, which makes me wonder if that prompted her to see an opportunity and revise her age downwards. I also question the logic of any crime victim waiting for decades of their adult life until a story about an alleged celebrity criminal (or football coach, etc.) erupts before giving themselves permission to report a crime supposedly committed by someone with the same occupation. It seems more logical to me that a sudden emergence of allegations against people with the same occupation would occur when a story prompted an idea rather than acted as a reminder to report crime.

Jo wrote:
In The Know (as always !) wrote:
Thats an awful lot of admissions for someone who didn't do anything !
He must surely have been up to something. Watched a couple of interviews with this woman yesterday ("Harvey Weinstein Victim Lauren Sivan: 'I Was So Shocked' | MSNBC" and "Harvey Weinstein: ‘I Had A Great Time,’ After Harassing Journalist Lauren Sivan | Megyn Kelly TODAY") and she seemed genuine to me. Not overegging things, hadn't sought a settlement, her finding it "pathetic" sounds authentic and her story is consistent over both interviews. But if he behaved like that, then phoned her the following day as if nothing untoward had happened, it puts a question mark over his interpretation of what is consensual and what isn't.

He was recorded in a police sting in 2015 apparently admitting to touching a woman's breast.
money.cnn.com/2017/10/10/media/harvey-we...-magazine/index.html

His wife has left him.
www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-41578997

He may well attract exaggerated or false allegations from opportunists, but women such as Angelina Jolie or Gwyneth Paltrow surely could not be accused of seeking fame or money by making these claims, as they must have plenty of that already.

NYT: Gwyneth Paltrow, Angelina Jolie and Others Say Weinstein Harassed Them

you are falling into a very bad old habit there : that somehow great movie stars must be telling the truth because they are very famous. It's simply not true.

They may have many reasons to attack Weinstein- didn;t get a role, just don't like him etc.

JK2006 wrote:
...trying to seduce someone and failing to succeed is not a crime...
It surely depends on how it's done. Lauren Sivan's allegation, if true, doesn't sound like a seduction attempt, more a display of power and desire to humiliate after she told him she was already spoken for. Then the phone call afterwards as if nothing untoward had happened, maybe to check if she was likely to report him.[/quote]

These words spring to mind ... creepy, slimy, predatory.

hedda wrote:
you are falling into a very bad old habit there : that somehow great movie stars must be telling the truth because they are very famous. It's simply not true.

They may have many reasons to attack Weinstein- didn;t get a role, just don't like him etc.
I take your point but my thinking was not so much that Paltrow and Jolie must be telling the truth because they're rich and famous but that they're less likely to have the money/fame motivation to lie than the assortment of Z-listers and former prostitutes who accused Bill Cosby. I find Rose McGowan less credible too as she seems to be an exhibitionist and attention-seeker. I agree that Paltrow and Jolie could also have some sort of axe to grind but would they really both stoop so low as to invent a story in revenge, especially now that they have had successful careers?

There's no getting away from the fact that he apologised and is seeking therapy for some kind of inappropriate behaviour. There's also the tape, where he's not just propositioning a woman but badgering her despite her obvious reluctance into coming into his hotel room and apparently discounting her unwillingness to being touched. That doesn't sit well with the accusations of how he behaved in private.

If he was a rapist, perhaps that would have emerged by now, but it seems logical that coercive pestering dirty-mac-style behaviour might have gone unreported given his position and influence.

I think we all agree - he liked to try it on and pull women, as we used to say, back in the day. So in the 80s and 90s women would be warned and make sure they carried protection. But rape? I don't think so - just as I'm fairly sure Savile never raped anyone. Check out the False Memory Thread. Even stars exaggerate. It's a better story.

even his own brother turns n him now -
news.sky.com/story/bob-weinstein-harvey-...-whatsoever-11081050

In The Know wrote:
even his own brother turns n him now -
news.sky.com/story/bob-weinstein-harvey-...-whatsoever-11081050

His own brother who admits he knows nothing!

Yes when even ITK is more offended by the extraordinary delight that everyone seems to show presuming guilt, we can wonder about our species.

JK2006 wrote:
Yes when even ITK is more offended by the extraordinary delight that everyone seems to show presuming guilt, we can wonder about our species.

and there are those who would never imagine guilty - no matter what the avalanche !!!!

Oscars kicks him out now, too !
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-41623637

Agree with you ITK; frightening, isn't it?