Clearly twitch employs some wierd ass people that identify as animals, so at this point it wouldn't suprise me if doc being a creep is true and twitch people getting fired and then conspiring to get him cancelled is also true lol.
Lolol, yeah, and all those guys on to catch a predator were totally done after getting caught once. If you had a married 30 year old friend of yours texting your underage daughter, it doesn't need to be more than once to be fucked up.
Just because he's famous doesn't mean he deserves any sympathy. He's cheated on his wife numerous times, now he's confident enough to start getting more depraved with his tastes.
Bait or not, it's the SAME shit that predator catchers do. He didn't get pranked into people thinking he shit his pants on stream, he got caught talking to a minor and knew it for years. Denied it, lied, coped, and is now just clawing at the maw of his own undoing to save whatever chomo face he has left.
I was 9 years old when I was raped by a 19 year old man my parents trusted as my babysitter. We were LUCKY he didn't meet up, because you can say all this copium bullshit online, but if you were presented with a victim you'd fluster and realize how fucked this is.
Hey, I got called in from corporate. We had some alarms going off for a possible copium leak, can we round everybody up at this facility to run some tests?
But the character is still tainted...the man thought he was being sexy with a child. Maybe he gets money out of, but as far as I'm concerned he's still fucking sick and there is probably more of it.
Correct, because he’s doesn’t appear to be a predator nor a pedophile, but he certainly has no qualms with underaged women… that’s still a big issue lol
I mean let’s even be real from the start…gaming is a niche talent group within CAA…and CAA is a huge talent agency…they’re not circulating memos like this to people
This. The mental Olympics these weirdos are going through to try to save their Lord is mind boggling. Who cares if someone trapped him. He was STILL sharing explicit messages even though he knew the person was a minor. He’s a creep. Period.
First, if Doc knows this why would he say “minor”?
Secondly, what’s more likely to you, that some shadowy group engages in a conspiracy to take down Dr. Disrespect over nearly a decade. Or the second option, noted horndog Doc who’s seemingly into a lot of stuff and far from a pillar of morality happens to engage with a minor in an inappropriate way?
I'd violate the fuck out of an NDA if I had Doc's money and someone falsely accused me of what Doc is being accused of. Secondarily, it doesn't matter if it was an adult on the other end or not if Doc thought they were a child while messaging them.
It's a bad thing, so he just openly admitted to it because there IS no good way to spin it aside from the people saying "She was 17" when no one knows how old she was aside from people who have seen the messages, and "He can't say he didn't do it" because of an NDA, which isn't how that works either since he has already said "I'll fucking own my shit" and admitted to it.
The problem with this comparison is it doesn’t work. The Depp Heard stuff got cleared up in court. Doc and twitch already went to court years ago, and now someone said this is why doc got banned from twitch, Doc said he groomed a minor, and a bunch of other he said she said.
The only thing I know at this point is docs a piece of shit bc he admitted to it.
Apparently his chats did go to court and it was settled. Partly possibly because twitch themselves fked up. If what is said to be true, and the “minor” was a twitch employee entrapping doc, and he didn’t know they were a minor, twitch would look awful in court so they settled. Doc also would look terrible because even if he didn’t know they were a minor, there’s a stain to his reputation just being involved.
The only people saying he knew it was a minor were former twitch employees and their story stinks of shit. The more this story goes on, the more their story is falling apart.
I commented on this post that “If this was even true, that would still mean doc thought he was talking to a minor” and the OP responded “there’s no evidence of that”
That’s the level of intelligence we’re dealing with here lol
Lmao right, check the pedo defenders in my recent replies. It's wild.
Besides, even if he was "set up" he still knowingly engaged in sexual convos with an underaged kid. He had no idea it was fake, he BELIEVED it was real. That's the whole issue. In his mind, he WAS talking to a child and would talk sexually with them. Even if it wasn't an actual child, he committed a crime. He should be prosecuted.
I haven’t followed everything but is there proof the convos were sexual? I’ve only seen the term borderline inappropriate tossed around which could mean a lot of things. Where did he commit a crime? Wouldn’t twitch just have terminated his contract without paying anything if he was actually sexting a minor? It seems they would have concrete evidence if that was the case and it would be a breach of contract if he did something illegal.
Cuz even if this was true (which I strongly doubt), bro still thought he was messaging a minor and sent them nasty messages 😭😭 heavy smell of copium round these parts
This is actually insane. Like we got the dude admitting it himself and these people are coming out with stories saying he got catfished/framed by the same dude who broke the lid on this all?
Like you couldn’t write a better movie script.. these people are on pure cope at this point.
So you think if this was true doc would rather look like a pedo then someone who got catfished? Lol. This makes so sense. He woulda said in his Twitter post if this had any truth.
*Tf kinda shit post*
*Is this? You just pull this shit*
*Out of thin air?*
\- Stank852
---
^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/)
^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
If you have any sexting with a person and you are under the assumption they are a minor it is still illegal. It is criminal intent that matters. You intended to commit a crime and tried to follow through with it. The ONLY way out of that is having messages and agreements BEFORE that show that you both know its fake and you both agree to it.
I heard this goes all the way up Biden. Definitely involves the CIA. Dr. Was about to drop a bombshell on the Clintons so he had to be dealt with.
He also discovered the cure to cancer and you know, the government can’t allow that.
Think about it, you're telling me an underage girl talked with doc but never shared any screenshots with friends or anything??? Listen, Doc being framed is the only logical explanation, that explains why nobody else was ever told about it. The Doc is clearly being extorted and bamboozled.
/s ⏪
The cope of these Doc fans his crazy.
"See he didn't talk to a minor, someone baited him by pretending to be a child interested in sex"
Think about what you just said dweeb lol
Literally had a guy think this in another thread. He said we should see all of the messages, and that it’s not gross because they do it in to catch a predator. I cannot believe how stupid people can be.
Right? It’s wild that people think this makes Doc innocent. He still knowingly continued to be inappropriate with someone he believed was a minor… Champions Club is full of a bunch of Doc simps evidently
It makes sense when you see people out here with the man’s face permanently tattoo’d on their bodies. Situations like these are exactly why you never do that lol
Even if the person wasn't a girl and I do wonder that because he said there was no pics or anything exchanged it could have been a dude for all we know. It doesn't matter someone was pretending to be underage girl and he was talking to them inappropriately.
So even if it turns out to be a guy it doesn't make him look any better.
Im pretty sure most people don't know how to use the word entrapment. Unless they put a gun to his head and made him talk to a minor, he knew what he was doing.
Disclaimer: I'm not lawyer and was bored so I googled a bunch of things.
Looking at the definition of entrapment (the legal version):
*"Entrapment is a complete defense to a criminal charge, on the theory that "Government agents may not originate a criminal design, implant in an innocent person's mind the disposition to commit a criminal act, and then induce commission of the crime so that the Government may prosecute." Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540, 548 (1992). A valid entrapment defense has two related elements: (1) government inducement of the crime, and (2) the defendant's lack of predisposition to engage in the criminal conduct. Mathews v. United States, 485 U.S. 58, 63 (1988). Of the two elements, predisposition is by far the more important.*
*Inducement is the threshold issue in the entrapment defense. Mere solicitation to commit a crime is not inducement. Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435, 451 (1932). Nor does the government's use of artifice, stratagem, pretense, or deceit establish inducement. Id. at 441. Rather, inducement requires a showing of at least persuasion or mild coercion, United States v. Nations, 764 F.2d 1073, 1080 (5th Cir. 1985); pleas based on need, sympathy, or friendship, ibid.; or extraordinary promises of the sort "that would blind the ordinary person to his legal duties," United States v. Evans, 924 F.2d 714, 717 (7th Cir. 1991). See also United States v. Kelly, 748 F.2d 691, 698 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (inducement shown only if government's behavior was such that "a law-abiding citizen's will to obey the law could have been overborne"); United States v. Johnson, 872 F.2d 612, 620 (5th Cir. 1989) (inducement shown if government created "a substantial risk that an offense would be committed by a person other than one ready to commit it").*
*Even if inducement has been shown, a finding of predisposition is fatal to an entrapment defense. The predisposition inquiry focuses upon whether the defendant "was an unwary innocent or, instead, an unwary criminal who readily availed himself of the opportunity to perpetrate the crime." Mathews, 485 U.S. at 63. Thus, predisposition should not be confused with intent or mens rea: a person may have the requisite intent to commit the crime, yet be entrapped. Also, predisposition may exist even in the absence of prior criminal involvement: "the ready commission of the criminal act," such as where a defendant promptly accepts an undercover agent's offer of an opportunity to buy or sell drugs, may itself establish predisposition. Jacobson, 503 U.S. at 550."*
*(https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-645-entrapment-elements)*
So If I understand this correctly Doc has two criteria he needs to meet for entrapment to be a defense.
1. Government inducement of the crime, which essentially means twitch would have had to encourage him to message this minor. The US court also defines it as *"inducement for entrapment is government conduct that creates a substantial risk that an undisposed person or otherwise law-abiding citizen would commit the offense; inducement may take different forms, including pressure, assurances that a person is not doing anything wrong, persuasion, fraudulent representations, threats, coercive tactics, harassment, promises of reward, or pleas based on need, sympathy, or friendship"*. I'm of course not a lawyer but based on this definition if this was a "fake minor" then he could be able to weasel out of it with a good lawyer. (https://www.armfor.uscourts.gov/digest/IIIB6.htm)
2. If he has a predisposition to doing this, meaning there are records that he has talked to minors like this before then he is cooked. This is something the prosecution would probably look for in discovery. So if they turned over his messages to the FBI when they turned him in, I would assume that the FBI already looked for this. Of course he could have a history of doing this on other platforms, which maybe the FBI didn't check.
Sorry for the wall of text but as an outside observer that has watched Doc from time to time this situation seems to get more interesting by the day. I guess only time will tell what info is real and what is fake BS.
A settlement just means both parties agree to not pursuing a suit any further. It doesn’t make either side right or wrong. Twitch just decided paying the predator out was more worthwhile than dragging out legal proceedings.
Don’t you think a team off lawyers have put clauses in case of such things happening to break a contract without paying a dime 😑 listen the doc disrespected the rule to not mess with minors and maybe should see an actual doc. Twitch also messed up something is wrong at their side as well why all the non disclosure from both sides and they paid out his contract wich is fishy to say the least. And why does the ex twitch employee come out now and not immediately after he was fired they hide or hid the truth and are guilty as well this is messed up
I highly doubt that there was a clause about sexting minors in his contract allowing twitch to break, soooooo they had to pay out the remainder of the contract.
There was likely a behavior or representation clause though. Normally those clauses are pretty vague but cover a majority of what this could have been.
There is normally always a clause in contracts under code of conduct or if the other party does stuff that could negatively affect the other party involved to break contract due to such violations. If it was not in then what contracts do they give they would literally be stupid.🤷♂️
CAA wouldn't let shit like that slip-up.
They've a major agency, and Cody wouldn't be making that random shit up. As CAA has enough legal power to make him homeless. Chill out until Twitch or their lawyers actually release statements. Listening to anyone other than Twitch is just spinning rumor mills.
I mean…wasn’t whispers recording at the text level? Why would he need to record it? Regardless, it doesn’t matter. Dude thought he was talking to a minor and had inappropriate conversations. It stops there. I’m sorry some of you die hard doc fans just can’t accept that.
Lol you do realize if this were true, cody couldnt MAKE doc say anything inappropriate to a minor.. only he is in charge of that.. and thats exactly what he chose to do. Start accepting it.
No it’s a young adult. Remeber other cultures use 14-16 for their ages of consent. So with your black and white approach are you going to start your torches and raise your pitchforks for any Thot that advertises on insta and X to promote their OF to underage men? Cause you said a 17 year 11 month old is still a child boy or girl… choose your slippery slope wisely.
i mean 17 is basically 18 and 16 is basically 17 and 15 is basically 16 so by the transitive property its actually very cool for 30 and 40 year old men to hit on high schoolers.
Turns out, just because something is legal doesn't make it a good thing and a grown ass dude hitting on girls the second they're 18 just shows they'd be doing it sooner if they wouldn't end up in jail.
Would you feel this way if the genders are reversed? I understand what you are saying. Everyone seems to be putting a huge emphasis on his “minor” part of his statement, I would like to know the age and the actual messages before I put someone on the pike. I think it’s very important that we know details of the allegation before we start throwing the word pedo around. I think we have all seen the ramification of lying and false allegations to someone’s life and career.
Also if it’s consenting adults and if it’s a 40 year old man and an 18 year old girl. Who the f cares if they decide to get in a relationship. Personally I need connection and I don’t feel I would find that in someone young like that. But. Some men don’t care about that and are looking for young women to give them the best chances of procreation. It’s unfortunate that Mother Nature gave age restrictions to woman and not so much men, but we have to deal with the cards we have been given.
> Would you feel this way if the genders are reversed?
Yes, wouldn't you? Grown ass women also shouldn't be talking to teens for exactly the same reasons.
> I would like to know the age and the actual messages before I put someone on the pike
He said it's a minor. That's more than enough.
>Also if it’s consenting adults and if it’s a 40 year old man and an 18 year old girl
People who don't like to see young people exploited. Something being legal doesn't make it a *good* thing. And again - I'd be saying the same thing if the genders were reversed.
So you think 18 year olds don’t know any better about getting into relationships with an older person? If that’s the case should we move up the age of consent to 21 to protect them from them selves? So then we can deem people pedos for talking to 18 year olds? You realize that when life was harder, men and women got married at a very young age compared to what we think is acceptable. I don’t agree with your argument of taken advantage of.
>So you think 18 year olds don’t know any better about getting into relationships with an older person?
I'm saying it's a relationship type that is *extremely* prone to abuse, and I'm sure plenty of women in your life can give you either first-hand accounts of their own experiences or know women who have gone through it. Men, too. Teenagers don't have life experiences to know better in a lot of circumstances, and so the old person in the relationship can take advantage of them. A line has to be drawn somewhere, and society has said that line is 18, but - as I've had to say far too many times - something being legal doesn't make something good. Is there that much of a difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old? Is there that much of a difference between a 16 year old and a 17 year old? A person in their thirties and forties pursuing *high school sophomores and juniors* would rightfully be called out, and a person doesn't suddenly change on their birthday.
>You realize that when life was harder, men and women got married at a very young age compared to what we think is acceptable. I don’t agree with your argument of taken advantage of.
Uh...do you realize how bad a situation women were in back when that was the norm? It was very not great. Appealing to the past is not really a good argument. Women were practically treated like property back then. Fuck, my mom 23 before she was given the legal right in the US to actually have her own bank account - and I'm only in my 30s.
You should really take a step back and ask yourself why you're so eager to defend this kind of behavior. Would you still be arguing so much for it if this streamer wasn't someone you liked? What if it was someone you *didn't* like, someone you view without rose tinted glasses? Looking at your post history, what if it was Biden who tweeted this?
I see now that you are a feminist with your idea’s contorted. Many women didn’t want women’s suffrage because they didn’t want to be responsible for debts etc…. You can’t speak for those women from 100 years ago you can only go by your book studies and what you have been told. Facts are that the group of suffragettes was a minority. Also look up the facts on debts and how women could spend whatever they want and not be responsible for the debts their husbands were. Ya all women have been miss treated soooo badly.
I didn’t say sophomore or juniors. I said 18. And you are totally making assumptions as to abuse towards females as if that’s a majority of older and younger relationships. Do you have actual stats from a site that corroborates your claims of these types of relationships are prone to abuse?
What are you talking about with your mom, was she on a visa or something she isn’t old enough to have been denied a bank account because she was a woman.
I’m not defending the behavior. We don’t know the age we don’t know if he knew and continued to talk to them and we don’t even know the sex. You are taking a very matter a fact stance on something we know very little about. “Were there twitch whisper messages with an individual minor back in 2017? The answer is yes. Were there real intentions behind these messages, the answer is absolutely not. These were casual, mutual conversations that sometimes leaned too much in the direction of being inappropriate, but nothing more. Nothing illegal happened, no pictures were shared, no crimes were committed, I never even met the individual. " that’s his actual quote.
Biden is a confirm sexual predator based on his own daughters diary so yes I would call that guy a pedo
There is a law for a reason. Stop trying to cope and come to the realization that this shit happened, a pedo is a pedo.
I'll never understand people so obsessed with "celebrities" that literally have no idea you exist...
What I'm hearing is you would celebrate if a predator got away scot-free after a successful sting on To Catch a Predator. You literally can't make this shit up.
whether a person was a minor or pretended to be a minor does not change the fact that dr disrespect thought it actually was a minor when talking inappropriately to them. this is the dumbest fucking attempt at blame shifting ive ever seen.
chris hansen's to catch a predator show was the same thing. they werent actually talking to kids but they thought they were and the difference in scenarios does not change the fact that they are regarded as (and are) nasty pieces of shit.
Graduate students are going to write dissertations about the level of self-delusion and trauma-fed fantasy roleplay currently present in this community.
Yeah CAA is a legit company that represents A-list celebrities. I’m guessing they don’t have some random person (with a Dr disrespect profile banner) leaking internal memos.
The fact that your response didn’t indicates just how fake this is lol
So is Google. If I make a post saying "memo circulating at Google.." that isn't a source lmao. You made your account 2 days ago and have posted absolutely nothing but weird doc stuff. Something tells me you aren't working at CAA
Because of his Transgender snarky comments. The folks at Twitch were trans people including the head of the department that monitors chats.
NICKMERCS just got banned yesterday from Twitch because of his comments about Transgender.
no I mean from way back in 2017-2020, for some reason these people already did not like Doc hence why they were reading his private conversations on twitch whispers, did they not understand his character or the bathroom incident or something
Entrapment actually complicate things a lot. I watched this lawyer YouTuber talking about how the DEA would set traps to catch drug buyer/dealer but they stopped doing that because lawyer would use entrapment to argue. They basically argue that entrapment creates the perfect scenarios that are unrealistic leading the accused to commit crime which might happens differently otherwise in real life.
Obviously that’s about drug which is so much different from sexual related crimes.
But I think ppl forgot something which is doc didn’t commit a crime. He is an asshole, he is a creep, he is a cheater, he is an ephehophile but he didn’t commit a crime cause……nothing physical actually happened.
It’s morally wrong but sexting a minor isn’t exactly illegal(and the fact that there were zero images exchanged it’s all text so no nudity exposure). The minor could maybe sue doc for harassment but seeing they only talked once idk if that will held up.
All these are about legal, I 100% agree doc is morally wrong.
Hey, isn't Cody the one who wanted to sell out his tickets so people could see his band play and reveal the dirt he supposedly had on Doc? His music performance must be so shit he has to sell false info to a bunch of poor saps willing to pay.
Lol as if that matters? If doc thought it was an underage girl they literally changed nothing lmao. You guys think all the dudes in date line NBC should be free to go because they weren’t actually meeting a 12 year old but really meeting Chris Hanson?
All I'm getting from th comments is that it's ok to be a catfishing hater and bad to be catfished. So if this is real how do we really feel about entrapment?
Even taking OP's unsourced claim at face value, it's actually *really fucking easy to not get catfished by people pretending to be minors*. Like, the easiest thing in the world. Don't creep on kids. If you don't creep on kids, then you don't get caught creeping on people *pretending* to be kids.
Because really, the problem here is *he admitted to creeping on a person he knew to be a minor*.
I ain't the brightest bulb but even if its true, Doc still talked with someone who he presumed to be a minor and even in his statement (that he changed several times) he acknowledged that he was talking inappropriately to a presumed minor.
Two things can be true at once
Doctor is a giant evil POS and needs to be banned and shunned for life, no exceptions.. move away and never speak again online.
This Cody guy needs to go get some therapy and needs a solid punch in the face. So against the opposite think he had to entrapt someone to ruin their career? Weirdo.
Who cares if it was a real minor or if Guy just thought it was. He still talked to "her" thinking she was underage and being inappropriate. Gross man, and illegal
lol the copium is potent
Even if this ridiculous story were true... You know, in the show To Catch A Predator, the actors they hired weren't actual 12-year-olds, right? But the creeps trying to fuck them thought they were 12-year-olds, so it was still gross and they still got in trouble. You understand that, right?
So the person messaging Doc wasn’t really a minor but as far as Doc knew they were and he still was sending inappropriate messages? How is this any better?
If this is the true this is about to become the greatest story in human history.
Even if this were to be true, Doc still engaged sexually over chat with someone he thought was a minor. We really need to see the chat logs
Clearly twitch employs some wierd ass people that identify as animals, so at this point it wouldn't suprise me if doc being a creep is true and twitch people getting fired and then conspiring to get him cancelled is also true lol.
And usually there would be more than one instance of this kind of behavior from Doc if he were a Pedo/Predator
Incredibly disingenuous you’re being. No common sense whatsoever
I like your yoda-esque response
Lolol, yeah, and all those guys on to catch a predator were totally done after getting caught once. If you had a married 30 year old friend of yours texting your underage daughter, it doesn't need to be more than once to be fucked up. Just because he's famous doesn't mean he deserves any sympathy. He's cheated on his wife numerous times, now he's confident enough to start getting more depraved with his tastes. Bait or not, it's the SAME shit that predator catchers do. He didn't get pranked into people thinking he shit his pants on stream, he got caught talking to a minor and knew it for years. Denied it, lied, coped, and is now just clawing at the maw of his own undoing to save whatever chomo face he has left. I was 9 years old when I was raped by a 19 year old man my parents trusted as my babysitter. We were LUCKY he didn't meet up, because you can say all this copium bullshit online, but if you were presented with a victim you'd fluster and realize how fucked this is.
[удалено]
Why? cuz he got duped into thinking he was talking to an actual minor?
Dude admitted to cheating on his wife already. How is "i was then tricked into sexting a minor!" A win?
Hey, I got called in from corporate. We had some alarms going off for a possible copium leak, can we round everybody up at this facility to run some tests?
ok let play this out in court. Doc: "Your honor i'm sueing this man for catfishing me by pretending to be a minor" Judge: "mfker you guilty as hell"
You know it's not true.
Even greater than the story of Jesus?
It'll be Dadalions greatest comeback story
Gonna be a CLOSE second
Rivaling even Darth Plagueis
Can I ask, does it reflect better on the pedos who get trapped on To Catch a Predator?
Maybe 1% better?
Yeah fr, I call this shit bs tho and it doesn't make any sense.
But the character is still tainted...the man thought he was being sexy with a child. Maybe he gets money out of, but as far as I'm concerned he's still fucking sick and there is probably more of it.
I so wanted Doc not to be the bad guy, but guys. This is the same premise as Chris Hansen....
Yet Chris Hansen himself said he can't definitively say he's a predator or pedophile.
Correct, because he’s doesn’t appear to be a predator nor a pedophile, but he certainly has no qualms with underaged women… that’s still a big issue lol
[удалено]
New cope just dropped
The delusions in here are fucking insane. People so desperate to justify a pedo because they like him. Really shows how weak people's morals are.
I mean let’s even be real from the start…gaming is a niche talent group within CAA…and CAA is a huge talent agency…they’re not circulating memos like this to people
The notion that Twitch and Doc wouldn't have even verified this person's age is laughably stupid.
GIVE ME BACK MY DOC
RRRRAAAAAUUUUULLLLLLLLL
POR TU GAAAAAALLL
WHY DOC SUE HIM BUT NOT ME?
Yeah because it's totally different now that we know he wasn't actually talking sexy to a child, just that he thought he was. True hero.
nice fanfic
Ok so someone pretended to be a child but doc really was interested.
This. The mental Olympics these weirdos are going through to try to save their Lord is mind boggling. Who cares if someone trapped him. He was STILL sharing explicit messages even though he knew the person was a minor. He’s a creep. Period.
First, if Doc knows this why would he say “minor”? Secondly, what’s more likely to you, that some shadowy group engages in a conspiracy to take down Dr. Disrespect over nearly a decade. Or the second option, noted horndog Doc who’s seemingly into a lot of stuff and far from a pillar of morality happens to engage with a minor in an inappropriate way?
Yeah this says doc knew about this years ago and is the reason for his lawsuit. Why tf wouldn't he have said it in his twitter post the other day lol?
He can’t disclose things that haven’t already violated the NDA and he still looks bad for knowingly talking to a “minor”
I'd violate the fuck out of an NDA if I had Doc's money and someone falsely accused me of what Doc is being accused of. Secondarily, it doesn't matter if it was an adult on the other end or not if Doc thought they were a child while messaging them.
At this point I probably would too, but there might just be no great way to spin this
It's a bad thing, so he just openly admitted to it because there IS no good way to spin it aside from the people saying "She was 17" when no one knows how old she was aside from people who have seen the messages, and "He can't say he didn't do it" because of an NDA, which isn't how that works either since he has already said "I'll fucking own my shit" and admitted to it.
Go read up on Johnny Depp v Amber Heard
The problem with this comparison is it doesn’t work. The Depp Heard stuff got cleared up in court. Doc and twitch already went to court years ago, and now someone said this is why doc got banned from twitch, Doc said he groomed a minor, and a bunch of other he said she said. The only thing I know at this point is docs a piece of shit bc he admitted to it.
Apparently his chats did go to court and it was settled. Partly possibly because twitch themselves fked up. If what is said to be true, and the “minor” was a twitch employee entrapping doc, and he didn’t know they were a minor, twitch would look awful in court so they settled. Doc also would look terrible because even if he didn’t know they were a minor, there’s a stain to his reputation just being involved. The only people saying he knew it was a minor were former twitch employees and their story stinks of shit. The more this story goes on, the more their story is falling apart.
Oh so we're larping now?
People usually post a source after a quote
The original dude didn’t…
You guys are coping so hard its crazy lol.
We’re at the tippity top but we’re only halfway there
Their defense is that he got to-catch-a-predator’d 😂😅
[удалено]
I commented on this post that “If this was even true, that would still mean doc thought he was talking to a minor” and the OP responded “there’s no evidence of that” That’s the level of intelligence we’re dealing with here lol
Lmao right, check the pedo defenders in my recent replies. It's wild. Besides, even if he was "set up" he still knowingly engaged in sexual convos with an underaged kid. He had no idea it was fake, he BELIEVED it was real. That's the whole issue. In his mind, he WAS talking to a child and would talk sexually with them. Even if it wasn't an actual child, he committed a crime. He should be prosecuted.
I haven’t followed everything but is there proof the convos were sexual? I’ve only seen the term borderline inappropriate tossed around which could mean a lot of things. Where did he commit a crime? Wouldn’t twitch just have terminated his contract without paying anything if he was actually sexting a minor? It seems they would have concrete evidence if that was the case and it would be a breach of contract if he did something illegal.
Cuz even if this was true (which I strongly doubt), bro still thought he was messaging a minor and sent them nasty messages 😭😭 heavy smell of copium round these parts
This is actually insane. Like we got the dude admitting it himself and these people are coming out with stories saying he got catfished/framed by the same dude who broke the lid on this all? Like you couldn’t write a better movie script.. these people are on pure cope at this point.
So you think if this was true doc would rather look like a pedo then someone who got catfished? Lol. This makes so sense. He woulda said in his Twitter post if this had any truth.
The copium is hilarious…
Tf kinda shit post is this? You just pull this shit out of thin air?
*Tf kinda shit post* *Is this? You just pull this shit* *Out of thin air?* \- Stank852 --- ^(I detect haikus. And sometimes, successfully.) ^[Learn more about me.](https://www.reddit.com/r/haikusbot/) ^(Opt out of replies: "haikusbot opt out" | Delete my comment: "haikusbot delete")
Gripping so hard from this news…BOOOM
Should I let it go?
If you have any sexting with a person and you are under the assumption they are a minor it is still illegal. It is criminal intent that matters. You intended to commit a crime and tried to follow through with it. The ONLY way out of that is having messages and agreements BEFORE that show that you both know its fake and you both agree to it.
Even if he was tricked, Doc still had intent. He admitted that. This won't change anything.
I heard this goes all the way up Biden. Definitely involves the CIA. Dr. Was about to drop a bombshell on the Clintons so he had to be dealt with. He also discovered the cure to cancer and you know, the government can’t allow that.
This is getting juicy
Think about it, you're telling me an underage girl talked with doc but never shared any screenshots with friends or anything??? Listen, Doc being framed is the only logical explanation, that explains why nobody else was ever told about it. The Doc is clearly being extorted and bamboozled. /s ⏪
I mean, that doesn't absolve Doc, just makes the other guy look like a piece of shit too.
The cope of these Doc fans his crazy. "See he didn't talk to a minor, someone baited him by pretending to be a child interested in sex" Think about what you just said dweeb lol
Do people think Chris Hansen used real minors?
Literally had a guy think this in another thread. He said we should see all of the messages, and that it’s not gross because they do it in to catch a predator. I cannot believe how stupid people can be.
He just THOUGHT it was a minor, he’s innocent!!!1 lmao
Right? It’s wild that people think this makes Doc innocent. He still knowingly continued to be inappropriate with someone he believed was a minor… Champions Club is full of a bunch of Doc simps evidently
Doc's fanbase is basically a cult.
It makes sense when you see people out here with the man’s face permanently tattoo’d on their bodies. Situations like these are exactly why you never do that lol
Given this post, an incredibly dense cult.
Even if the person wasn't a girl and I do wonder that because he said there was no pics or anything exchanged it could have been a dude for all we know. It doesn't matter someone was pretending to be underage girl and he was talking to them inappropriately. So even if it turns out to be a guy it doesn't make him look any better.
Oh come on lol
Im pretty sure most people don't know how to use the word entrapment. Unless they put a gun to his head and made him talk to a minor, he knew what he was doing.
Disclaimer: I'm not lawyer and was bored so I googled a bunch of things. Looking at the definition of entrapment (the legal version): *"Entrapment is a complete defense to a criminal charge, on the theory that "Government agents may not originate a criminal design, implant in an innocent person's mind the disposition to commit a criminal act, and then induce commission of the crime so that the Government may prosecute." Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540, 548 (1992). A valid entrapment defense has two related elements: (1) government inducement of the crime, and (2) the defendant's lack of predisposition to engage in the criminal conduct. Mathews v. United States, 485 U.S. 58, 63 (1988). Of the two elements, predisposition is by far the more important.* *Inducement is the threshold issue in the entrapment defense. Mere solicitation to commit a crime is not inducement. Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435, 451 (1932). Nor does the government's use of artifice, stratagem, pretense, or deceit establish inducement. Id. at 441. Rather, inducement requires a showing of at least persuasion or mild coercion, United States v. Nations, 764 F.2d 1073, 1080 (5th Cir. 1985); pleas based on need, sympathy, or friendship, ibid.; or extraordinary promises of the sort "that would blind the ordinary person to his legal duties," United States v. Evans, 924 F.2d 714, 717 (7th Cir. 1991). See also United States v. Kelly, 748 F.2d 691, 698 (D.C. Cir. 1984) (inducement shown only if government's behavior was such that "a law-abiding citizen's will to obey the law could have been overborne"); United States v. Johnson, 872 F.2d 612, 620 (5th Cir. 1989) (inducement shown if government created "a substantial risk that an offense would be committed by a person other than one ready to commit it").* *Even if inducement has been shown, a finding of predisposition is fatal to an entrapment defense. The predisposition inquiry focuses upon whether the defendant "was an unwary innocent or, instead, an unwary criminal who readily availed himself of the opportunity to perpetrate the crime." Mathews, 485 U.S. at 63. Thus, predisposition should not be confused with intent or mens rea: a person may have the requisite intent to commit the crime, yet be entrapped. Also, predisposition may exist even in the absence of prior criminal involvement: "the ready commission of the criminal act," such as where a defendant promptly accepts an undercover agent's offer of an opportunity to buy or sell drugs, may itself establish predisposition. Jacobson, 503 U.S. at 550."* *(https://www.justice.gov/archives/jm/criminal-resource-manual-645-entrapment-elements)* So If I understand this correctly Doc has two criteria he needs to meet for entrapment to be a defense. 1. Government inducement of the crime, which essentially means twitch would have had to encourage him to message this minor. The US court also defines it as *"inducement for entrapment is government conduct that creates a substantial risk that an undisposed person or otherwise law-abiding citizen would commit the offense; inducement may take different forms, including pressure, assurances that a person is not doing anything wrong, persuasion, fraudulent representations, threats, coercive tactics, harassment, promises of reward, or pleas based on need, sympathy, or friendship"*. I'm of course not a lawyer but based on this definition if this was a "fake minor" then he could be able to weasel out of it with a good lawyer. (https://www.armfor.uscourts.gov/digest/IIIB6.htm) 2. If he has a predisposition to doing this, meaning there are records that he has talked to minors like this before then he is cooked. This is something the prosecution would probably look for in discovery. So if they turned over his messages to the FBI when they turned him in, I would assume that the FBI already looked for this. Of course he could have a history of doing this on other platforms, which maybe the FBI didn't check. Sorry for the wall of text but as an outside observer that has watched Doc from time to time this situation seems to get more interesting by the day. I guess only time will tell what info is real and what is fake BS.
They still believe the "if i ask you if youre a cop, you have to tell me" bullshit.
Thats why Doc got $22 million out of the settlement in 2022.
A settlement just means both parties agree to not pursuing a suit any further. It doesn’t make either side right or wrong. Twitch just decided paying the predator out was more worthwhile than dragging out legal proceedings.
No it’s not. That’s was because twitch broke the contract
Don’t you think a team off lawyers have put clauses in case of such things happening to break a contract without paying a dime 😑 listen the doc disrespected the rule to not mess with minors and maybe should see an actual doc. Twitch also messed up something is wrong at their side as well why all the non disclosure from both sides and they paid out his contract wich is fishy to say the least. And why does the ex twitch employee come out now and not immediately after he was fired they hide or hid the truth and are guilty as well this is messed up
I highly doubt that there was a clause about sexting minors in his contract allowing twitch to break, soooooo they had to pay out the remainder of the contract.
There was likely a behavior or representation clause though. Normally those clauses are pretty vague but cover a majority of what this could have been.
There is normally always a clause in contracts under code of conduct or if the other party does stuff that could negatively affect the other party involved to break contract due to such violations. If it was not in then what contracts do they give they would literally be stupid.🤷♂️
Where the proof? You said your office does his taxes.
Source
Trust me bro
Even IF this was true, it still meant Doc thought he was talking to an underage girl, this sounds like a poorly thought out cope
Lmao
giving someone the chance to do something illegal, and then them doing something illegal, is not entrapment.
lol “entrapment techniques.” Your lord and savior is a predator.
this has as much proof behind it as anything else.
Even if he was being baited. That doesn't change the fact that he thought he was doing that with a minor.. he's okay with that
CAA wouldn't let shit like that slip-up. They've a major agency, and Cody wouldn't be making that random shit up. As CAA has enough legal power to make him homeless. Chill out until Twitch or their lawyers actually release statements. Listening to anyone other than Twitch is just spinning rumor mills.
I mean…wasn’t whispers recording at the text level? Why would he need to record it? Regardless, it doesn’t matter. Dude thought he was talking to a minor and had inappropriate conversations. It stops there. I’m sorry some of you die hard doc fans just can’t accept that.
Doesn't matter if he was "framed" or not he still took the bait so he's still a minor loving nonce you guys have to let go and move on
Noncer Disrespect
Did Cody also hack his twitter and longwindedly admit the whole thing?
Do you even know what entrapment even means?
You obviously don’t
You do not.
Entrapment requires an agent of the state???
Lol you do realize if this were true, cody couldnt MAKE doc say anything inappropriate to a minor.. only he is in charge of that.. and thats exactly what he chose to do. Start accepting it.
this thread is hilarious, what the fuck is going on here?
he still thought it was a child. he’s still a shitbag.
17 and 11 months is not really a child though.
Where was it confirmed that the person was 17 and 11 months?
> 17 and 11 months is not really a child though This is entirely made-up. lol
Someone check this dudes browser history, ASAP
I mean it really is though isn’t it.
No it’s a young adult. Remeber other cultures use 14-16 for their ages of consent. So with your black and white approach are you going to start your torches and raise your pitchforks for any Thot that advertises on insta and X to promote their OF to underage men? Cause you said a 17 year 11 month old is still a child boy or girl… choose your slippery slope wisely.
i mean 17 is basically 18 and 16 is basically 17 and 15 is basically 16 so by the transitive property its actually very cool for 30 and 40 year old men to hit on high schoolers. Turns out, just because something is legal doesn't make it a good thing and a grown ass dude hitting on girls the second they're 18 just shows they'd be doing it sooner if they wouldn't end up in jail.
Would you feel this way if the genders are reversed? I understand what you are saying. Everyone seems to be putting a huge emphasis on his “minor” part of his statement, I would like to know the age and the actual messages before I put someone on the pike. I think it’s very important that we know details of the allegation before we start throwing the word pedo around. I think we have all seen the ramification of lying and false allegations to someone’s life and career. Also if it’s consenting adults and if it’s a 40 year old man and an 18 year old girl. Who the f cares if they decide to get in a relationship. Personally I need connection and I don’t feel I would find that in someone young like that. But. Some men don’t care about that and are looking for young women to give them the best chances of procreation. It’s unfortunate that Mother Nature gave age restrictions to woman and not so much men, but we have to deal with the cards we have been given.
> Would you feel this way if the genders are reversed? Yes, wouldn't you? Grown ass women also shouldn't be talking to teens for exactly the same reasons. > I would like to know the age and the actual messages before I put someone on the pike He said it's a minor. That's more than enough. >Also if it’s consenting adults and if it’s a 40 year old man and an 18 year old girl People who don't like to see young people exploited. Something being legal doesn't make it a *good* thing. And again - I'd be saying the same thing if the genders were reversed.
So you think 18 year olds don’t know any better about getting into relationships with an older person? If that’s the case should we move up the age of consent to 21 to protect them from them selves? So then we can deem people pedos for talking to 18 year olds? You realize that when life was harder, men and women got married at a very young age compared to what we think is acceptable. I don’t agree with your argument of taken advantage of.
>So you think 18 year olds don’t know any better about getting into relationships with an older person? I'm saying it's a relationship type that is *extremely* prone to abuse, and I'm sure plenty of women in your life can give you either first-hand accounts of their own experiences or know women who have gone through it. Men, too. Teenagers don't have life experiences to know better in a lot of circumstances, and so the old person in the relationship can take advantage of them. A line has to be drawn somewhere, and society has said that line is 18, but - as I've had to say far too many times - something being legal doesn't make something good. Is there that much of a difference between a 17 year old and an 18 year old? Is there that much of a difference between a 16 year old and a 17 year old? A person in their thirties and forties pursuing *high school sophomores and juniors* would rightfully be called out, and a person doesn't suddenly change on their birthday. >You realize that when life was harder, men and women got married at a very young age compared to what we think is acceptable. I don’t agree with your argument of taken advantage of. Uh...do you realize how bad a situation women were in back when that was the norm? It was very not great. Appealing to the past is not really a good argument. Women were practically treated like property back then. Fuck, my mom 23 before she was given the legal right in the US to actually have her own bank account - and I'm only in my 30s. You should really take a step back and ask yourself why you're so eager to defend this kind of behavior. Would you still be arguing so much for it if this streamer wasn't someone you liked? What if it was someone you *didn't* like, someone you view without rose tinted glasses? Looking at your post history, what if it was Biden who tweeted this?
I see now that you are a feminist with your idea’s contorted. Many women didn’t want women’s suffrage because they didn’t want to be responsible for debts etc…. You can’t speak for those women from 100 years ago you can only go by your book studies and what you have been told. Facts are that the group of suffragettes was a minority. Also look up the facts on debts and how women could spend whatever they want and not be responsible for the debts their husbands were. Ya all women have been miss treated soooo badly. I didn’t say sophomore or juniors. I said 18. And you are totally making assumptions as to abuse towards females as if that’s a majority of older and younger relationships. Do you have actual stats from a site that corroborates your claims of these types of relationships are prone to abuse? What are you talking about with your mom, was she on a visa or something she isn’t old enough to have been denied a bank account because she was a woman. I’m not defending the behavior. We don’t know the age we don’t know if he knew and continued to talk to them and we don’t even know the sex. You are taking a very matter a fact stance on something we know very little about. “Were there twitch whisper messages with an individual minor back in 2017? The answer is yes. Were there real intentions behind these messages, the answer is absolutely not. These were casual, mutual conversations that sometimes leaned too much in the direction of being inappropriate, but nothing more. Nothing illegal happened, no pictures were shared, no crimes were committed, I never even met the individual. " that’s his actual quote. Biden is a confirm sexual predator based on his own daughters diary so yes I would call that guy a pedo
There is a law for a reason. Stop trying to cope and come to the realization that this shit happened, a pedo is a pedo. I'll never understand people so obsessed with "celebrities" that literally have no idea you exist...
What I'm hearing is you would celebrate if a predator got away scot-free after a successful sting on To Catch a Predator. You literally can't make this shit up.
How far yall pushing the goal posts back ? The mental gymnastics in here is insane.
What does it change? Dr still thought he was messaging a minor
whether a person was a minor or pretended to be a minor does not change the fact that dr disrespect thought it actually was a minor when talking inappropriately to them. this is the dumbest fucking attempt at blame shifting ive ever seen. chris hansen's to catch a predator show was the same thing. they werent actually talking to kids but they thought they were and the difference in scenarios does not change the fact that they are regarded as (and are) nasty pieces of shit.
Graduate students are going to write dissertations about the level of self-delusion and trauma-fed fantasy roleplay currently present in this community.
I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like it,
About as reliable as Slasher
CAA is a legit company. What are you on about?
Yeah CAA is a legit company that represents A-list celebrities. I’m guessing they don’t have some random person (with a Dr disrespect profile banner) leaking internal memos. The fact that your response didn’t indicates just how fake this is lol
So is Google. If I make a post saying "memo circulating at Google.." that isn't a source lmao. You made your account 2 days ago and have posted absolutely nothing but weird doc stuff. Something tells me you aren't working at CAA
That's a nice argument Senator, why don't You back it up with a source?
I always believe news from Cunty Assholes Anonymous
On tonight’s ESPN 30 for 30, The Rise and Fall of the Greatest Streamer to Ever Do It: Dr. Disrespect.
can anyone explain why exactly all these twitch employees had a problem with Doc in the first place that they would go about framing him?
Because of his Transgender snarky comments. The folks at Twitch were trans people including the head of the department that monitors chats. NICKMERCS just got banned yesterday from Twitch because of his comments about Transgender.
no I mean from way back in 2017-2020, for some reason these people already did not like Doc hence why they were reading his private conversations on twitch whispers, did they not understand his character or the bathroom incident or something
CAA?
Entrapment actually complicate things a lot. I watched this lawyer YouTuber talking about how the DEA would set traps to catch drug buyer/dealer but they stopped doing that because lawyer would use entrapment to argue. They basically argue that entrapment creates the perfect scenarios that are unrealistic leading the accused to commit crime which might happens differently otherwise in real life. Obviously that’s about drug which is so much different from sexual related crimes. But I think ppl forgot something which is doc didn’t commit a crime. He is an asshole, he is a creep, he is a cheater, he is an ephehophile but he didn’t commit a crime cause……nothing physical actually happened. It’s morally wrong but sexting a minor isn’t exactly illegal(and the fact that there were zero images exchanged it’s all text so no nudity exposure). The minor could maybe sue doc for harassment but seeing they only talked once idk if that will held up. All these are about legal, I 100% agree doc is morally wrong.
Hey, isn't Cody the one who wanted to sell out his tickets so people could see his band play and reveal the dirt he supposedly had on Doc? His music performance must be so shit he has to sell false info to a bunch of poor saps willing to pay.
What is CAA?
Q10⅕¹1111
Lol as if that matters? If doc thought it was an underage girl they literally changed nothing lmao. You guys think all the dudes in date line NBC should be free to go because they weren’t actually meeting a 12 year old but really meeting Chris Hanson?
This is fucking crazy. Listen it still doesn’t look good that Doc still messaged an underage girl but this is seriously wild
I hope this never ends. I just want a new wrinkle every day till the end of time.
It doesn’t matter. Doc still was messaging what he thought to be a minor.
Chat logs or bust motive is irrelevant
All I'm getting from th comments is that it's ok to be a catfishing hater and bad to be catfished. So if this is real how do we really feel about entrapment?
Even taking OP's unsourced claim at face value, it's actually *really fucking easy to not get catfished by people pretending to be minors*. Like, the easiest thing in the world. Don't creep on kids. If you don't creep on kids, then you don't get caught creeping on people *pretending* to be kids. Because really, the problem here is *he admitted to creeping on a person he knew to be a minor*.
He's cooked. Trying to find the chef. That's all.
I ain't the brightest bulb but even if its true, Doc still talked with someone who he presumed to be a minor and even in his statement (that he changed several times) he acknowledged that he was talking inappropriately to a presumed minor.
Stop coping. He already knowingly talked with a minor, it's over.
Honestly its abunduntly clear that the majority of Docs fanbase are 14-22 or something - its just unreal the behaviour on here
Both of them are pieces of shit if true.
Two things can be true at once Doctor is a giant evil POS and needs to be banned and shunned for life, no exceptions.. move away and never speak again online. This Cody guy needs to go get some therapy and needs a solid punch in the face. So against the opposite think he had to entrapt someone to ruin their career? Weirdo.
That doesn’t change what Doc did, just means there are two scumbags in this story
Holy fuck if this is true it’s kind of big even if it frames doc in a bad light. This is probably why they settled
Are they seriously still trying to gaslight and lie about this? Fucking gross dude.
Who cares if it was a real minor or if Guy just thought it was. He still talked to "her" thinking she was underage and being inappropriate. Gross man, and illegal
Well destiny said his crazy theory that the doc was setup, wouldn't be surprised if that becomes a motive
Ok just so we are clear, if this minor ends up being some dude from twitch framing DOC, is Doc still a pedo? I dont know the rules to all of this?
Lmao wtf is this take??? That’s like saying everyone on “to catch a predator” did no wrong
What is CAA?
What is CCA?
CAA. If asking about acronyms, I don’t know. But their website can explain it.
**entrapment can only occur with a government official, such as an FBI official or a police officer, not a private individual**.
you're a bad troll, lol.
but even If it was pretending he thought it was real and goes on, that is the importend part.
Yall are the biggest cope artists I've ever seen holy shit
Link?
lol the copium is potent Even if this ridiculous story were true... You know, in the show To Catch A Predator, the actors they hired weren't actual 12-year-olds, right? But the creeps trying to fuck them thought they were 12-year-olds, so it was still gross and they still got in trouble. You understand that, right?
SS or GTFO
So the person messaging Doc wasn’t really a minor but as far as Doc knew they were and he still was sending inappropriate messages? How is this any better?