I commented elsewhere that I wondered if they believe he’s innocent. If they truly believe this is a miscarriage of justice could these letters be written with his appeal in mind? There’s no physical evidence as I understand, maybe they’re going for the “this guy is so sober he wouldn’t even know how to get drugs” angle? I’m just talking out of my arse now but I’m so confused by the level of support for him I can’t help but clutch at straws to try to explain it.
If it was drug charges sure, but it's not. Drug use is irrelevant.
He raped multiple women.
He drugged the women so it's relevant in that sense. Implying that he wouldn't know how to obtain the substances needed to do that is an argument for his innocence.
It's a pathetic argument to make, but it's not illogical.
Having worked in the entertainment industry- if a drug exists and you want it, you can get it. So everyone knows how to get drugs. That part isn't all that hard to believe.
I’m just talking out of my arse now but I’m so confused by the level of support for him I can’t help but clutch at straws to try to explain it.
manipulators be manipulating.
Rapists and other abusers are known to very often charm everyone around them. It isn't only a way to lure in their victims, but it's also a great defence against suspicion ("he's such a nice guy, he could never") which has proven to work over and over and over again (and those are just the most famous cases off the top of my head, but the pattern repeats often at all levels of wealth and fame/anonymity).
abusers have to be charming, if they weren't then they'd have no one to manipulate.
I commented elsewhere that I wondered if they believe he’s innocent. If they truly believe this is a miscarriage of justice could these letters be written with his appeal in mind? There’s no physical evidence as I understand, maybe they’re going for the “this guy is so sober he wouldn’t even know how to get drugs” angle? I’m just talking out of my arse now but I’m so confused by the level of support for him I can’t help but clutch at straws to try to explain it.
If it was drug charges sure, but it's not. Drug use is irrelevant.
He raped multiple women.
He drugged the women so it's relevant in that sense. Implying that he wouldn't know how to obtain the substances needed to do that is an argument for his innocence.
It's a pathetic argument to make, but it's not illogical.
Having worked in the entertainment industry- if a drug exists and you want it, you can get it. So everyone knows how to get drugs. That part isn't all that hard to believe.
manipulators be manipulating.
Rapists and other abusers are known to very often charm everyone around them. It isn't only a way to lure in their victims, but it's also a great defence against suspicion ("he's such a nice guy, he could never") which has proven to work over and over and over again (and those are just the most famous cases off the top of my head, but the pattern repeats often at all levels of wealth and fame/anonymity).
abusers have to be charming, if they weren't then they'd have no one to manipulate.