Justin Roiland used his ‘Rick and Morty’ fame to pursue young fans, text messages show
In the years following the 2013 debut of Adult Swim’s cartoon phenomenon “Rick and Morty,” its star and co-creator Justin Roiland became a titan of the animation and video game industry and a rock star of youth counterculture. His artistic style and caricatures became ubiquitous in cannabis culture, and his career expanded into producing other animated series, creating NFTs and leading a virtual reality gaming studio. In 2017, a “Rick and Morty” collaboration with McDonald’s led to such a viral frenzy that police had to be called to at least two locations.
But as he partied with Los Angeles’ superstars and traveled the country for conventions, he also found he could use his fame to strike up conversations and develop relationships with young fans, including some who were underage. This is according to interviews with 11 women and nonbinary people who shared thousands of messages with Roiland from 2013 to 2022 — with nine of the people saying he turned the exchanges sexual. Of those nine people, three said they were 16 when they started talking to Roiland. To corroborate their stories, the 11 women and nonbinary people also shared pictures, videos, social media posts, emails, and plane ticket and Uber receipts with NBC News.
Warning: Lengthy and graphic details
"Young" could be misinterpreted as 18. "Underage" is the right word.
Yeah, this story needs way more precision than it has.
"Were 16 when they started texting him". Ok, well how old were they written the allegations occurred, and what is he alleged to have done?
The imprecision is by design. Modern journalism is trash.
Not to defend it, but in situations like this I think they have to be vague for legal reasons. There's a fine line between reporting the news and defamation (regardless of how true it is).
It's bullshit, and people will use defamation and lawyers to attack people accusing them. But I can see why you'd want to be extra careful how you worded the title.
Eeeeeexactly
Seems like he waited until they were 18 before meeting them, although he would send sexually-charged texts to women as young as 16.
So did he actually groom them? Because the way this is written it sounds like he asked them their age, and then waited for them to be legal, which is creepy, but I wouldn't call it grooming.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages\_of\_consent\_in\_the\_United\_States
Lmao age of consent laws don't mean it isn't statutory rape.
They totally do. By definition. What do you think the "statute" in "statutory" is referring to?
Tshh it's when you rape a statue silly.
I think it's Betrayal at House on the Hill where you lay out all the tiles to build the house, and one of them has permanently become the Statutory Corridor according to our house rules (because we've misread it so many times).
I think you're missing the double negative I used. Lol I'm saying that even if someone is above the age of consent, statutory rape is still an applicable charge.
By definition, it isn't
That's the whole point of the law
Take it up with Virginia; age of consent there is 15. Intercourse with a minor above 15 as an adult can still give you statutory rape charges, as referenced here: "The age of consent for intercourse is 15 years old in Virginia; however, there are other sex acts that set the age at 18. These acts include cunnilingus, fellatio, and anal intercourse, which means that minors cannot legally consent to certain sexual activity. Additionally, if you are an adult and have sex with a person under 18 years of age, you may be prosecuted for statutory rape. Statutory rape is generally charged as a Class 4 Felony, but the exact charge and penalties will depend on all the factors and ages involved."
Pulled from https://www.roanokecriminalattorney.com/how-does-virginia-define-consent/
It isn't always the case, generally age of consent precludes it, but not always. Age of consent isn't a get out of jail free card. Additionally, it doesn't specify about relations between people in positions of power.
It's all moot anyway, Roiland lives in CA, and he was inviting a 17 year old to his house in Los Angeles. Age of consent there is 18. Did he assault her? No, but what 36 year old man is inviting a 17 year old to his house? Multiple other reports of girls at 18, still in high school, also receiving advances from him.
If there are exceptions then "age of consent" in Virginia doesn't mean the same thing as it does in other states, so all this shows is that they're re-defining the term.
I don't think that tracks; I've always been under the impression that age of consent was just when you could consent to sexual activity. It didn't account for age differences, power dynamics, or other factors that push it towards statutory rape. It was "at this age, they are able to consent to activity", and then you would have the limiting factors of age difference, power imbalance, family, etc applied through other statutes.
I very well could be wrong or just applying knowledge of my own local area to places that don't operate that way, so I'll bow out on that. I do know that age of consent isn't just a blanket shield against statutory rape in some locales or situations, though. The "statutory" part of statutory rape isn't limited to only age of consent.
"Statutory rape" just means rape by law, not necessarily by any kind of consent (since legally they can't).
These are anti-gay laws btw. That's the entire purpose of these specific exceptions.
No, it isn't.
There is further conversation with another user below this, but that isn't the case in some places, namely Virginia.
Additionally, statutory rape isn't just bound to age of consent. There are myriad other statutes it can apply through, namely family, age difference, and positions of power over minors above the age of consent.
The statutes (and therefore the term statutory) define the age of consent. Sometimes the age of consent can vary and isn't as simple as one number.
Legal expert spotted
Literally in the second paragraph of the article and the summary at the top of this post.
The article then goes on to discuss his conversations with underage fans. The article uses "young" because his conversations with of-age but teenaged fans were also bad.
The fact that these women and enby folks were underage is like the most important part of the story. Calling underage girls "young" and not correctly calling them underage in the title of the story is called burying the lede.
Justin Roiland used his ‘Rick and Morty’ fame to pursue young and underage fans, text messages show would have been a better title.
For most people, except apparently many in this thread, "young" heavily implies underage. When character limits matter, it's okay to start by saying "young," which is accurate, then clarify further in the article.
Lemmy has an unusually high concentration of people who have an inability to understand context.
For example, every joke, the top comment is "I don't understand, can someone please explain?"
I tend to give jokes a pass. Humor is often contextual and cultural so some jokes really do require an explanation.
Per the article, he explicitly did not pursue underage fans, though.
Talking about the title
I think you must have missed their last sentence. The title uses young because it wasn’t just underaged girls he was texting, and texting the 18 and 19 year olds at his age is also a pretty bad look.
Still creepy if not illegal at just above 18. Turns out he was more than just creepy though.
"Underage" in which locale, and for what? If you're referring to age of consent, 16 isn't underage in most places, as it shouldn't be.
Fuck off pedo
What makes you right and a lot of the rest of the world wrong? Why is 18 the right number instead of 16?
I'm not arguing with a pedo
From the article, really buried: "Roiland usually asked people how old they were, if they were single, and if they were “into girls.” In three cases, when the person said they were under 18, Roiland would message them again months or years later. Those three conversations started with people who said they were 16 at the time, and continued for years, until they were 18 and older."
After reading the whole article it doesn't seem like he did anything sexual with anyone under 18. My takeaway is that he's a creep, abuses his fame and power (part of a big club there), he's manipulative, and he plies underage people with alcohol to get them to sleep with him, but it appears he's not a pedo. Or at least smart enough not to get caught.
Not a pedo, just a regular rapist. Talk about low bars.
Don't mistake my comment as a defense of him as a person. He's been accused of domestic violence, forced oral sex, and taking advantage of intoxicated women under the drinking age. Despite him getting off on the DV charge, where there's smoke, there's fire. He's obviously a pretty terrible human being.
I just don't like people throwing around 'pedo' unjustly, because it waters it down and takes away the impact when used against even worse monsters.
Even the "forced" oral sex seems really suspect.
But he should have been able to read the situation as well as anyone. If she seems to be setting a trap, maybe don't fall for it?
Either way, the dude seems to be tiptoeing around the borders laws that nobody should be near. Dude's sitting and watching the clock for when his prey turns 18. Even if he might comply with the letter of the law, he's clearly violating the spirit.
16 is not prepubescent which is what pedo is there is another term for teens but i forgot.
Ephebophilia I believe. He's also a groomer, how fun...
Libertarian?
The only people who care about this distinction are pedophiles / whatever that term is.
No, by grouping children in with postpubertal humans who engage in age appropriate sexual acts you downplay pedophilia. You're an idiot and you insist on being one.
Lmao a 16 year old being hit on by a 30 year old is not age appropriate sexual acts, it's about mental maturity
You're saying fucking a two year old is the same as fucking a 16 year old you sicko. I never mentioned 30 years anyway, you're also putting words into my mouth.
Nah, I'm just saying I don't feel uncomfortable calling someone who preys on children a pedophile, cause they're gross either way
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child words don't seem to be your strong suit. You're also fine with calling a young woman a child, which is in line with bigoted religious and woman hating people. Nice company you're in.
Allow me to recite the third sentence of that Wikipedia article you linked since reading comprehension doesn't seem to be your strong suit:
"The legal definition of child generally refers to a minor, otherwise known as a person younger than the age of majority.[1] Children generally have fewer rights and responsibilities than adults. They are classed as unable to make serious decisions." such as sex with a grown man
Yes, and let me cite the first sentence: "A child (PL: children) is a human being between the stages of birth and puberty,[1][2] or between the developmental period of infancy and puberty."
Let me also cite "Pedophilia (alternatively spelled paedophilia) is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophilia. By using the non-standard legal definition of "child" you weaken the meaning of pedophilia and normalize it, and you perform mental gymnastics to justify normalizing pedophilia.
The fact that you think that young women of 16 years don't have the mental capability to make decisions is very revealing, and contradicts the law in many places in the US and the west in general.
The term is "ephebophilia"
Now you've read my comment
Now you know what that term is
Now you're a pedophile
It's that easy! See you in Thailand!
I said people who care about the distinction, not people who know the term
lol whatever pedo
This is textbook grooming
"Hey how old are you?"
(ends conversation)
That's not grooming.
This is a quote from the comment you're responding to... It IS textbook grooming. He didn't stop talking to them when he found out they were underage.
Except he didn't end the conversation. Read the article, fuckwit
You kiss your daddy with that mouth?
Only below the waist
And continued for years is the key.
He made sexually explicit comments to minors for years. And solicited pictures? That's solicitation of child pornography
The guys a pedo. Rather or not he gets charged with something related to under age girls, we'll see.
https://www.sportskeeda.com/amp/pop-culture/who-allie-goertz-justin-roiland-underage-girls-dm-screenshots-surface-wake-musician-s-accusations
No, dude's a pedo. "Starting the conversation" with someone who's underage then waiting til 5 minutes after their 18th birthday to make a move doesn't make you not a pedo, it makes you a pedo who doesn't want to go to prison. Even then, there are at least two documented cases where he didn't wait. Because he's a pedo.
No he's a pedo that just barely skirts the law so he doesn't get gang raped in prison.
You say he abuses his fame and power. I don't really see and power accept money and fame. If people are attracted to fame and power, then why should he not be allowed to use his? Why is that different than a woman who shows off her breasts to get a date?
You don't see why unbalanced power dynamics lead to abusive situations?
So you are saying that all golddiggers are automatically victims now because there is an ‘unbalanced power dynamic’?
Yes, that's what OP is saying.
So now I have to feel sorry for girls who choose to only date old millionaires? Crazy…
Welcome to 2023. Accountability went out in the 90s.
I don't really get the people that bitching about using their fame to get laid either. Are we only allowed to date within our own social class? If they're being coercive, yea, that's a problem but it's possible to have a relationship without coercion.
I'm not defending this dude but the problem with him was that he was pursuing minors not that he was famous and successful.
Man, why’d he have to be such a fuckin’ gross creep? Why couldn’t he just have been creative and weird and depressed?
If you add funny to that list you get Dan Harmon.
Dan Harmon was super problematic in his own way. His difference was he apologized to the people he wronged in a way that they accepted, and seems to have changed his behavior. His change in behavior seems to be part of what left Justin out to dry as Dan no longer came to work intoxicated, but Roiland just kept doing it.
Well the subtype of funny that Rolland had (and Harmon still has to a degree) had was from being creative and weird and sad. Smart, dark, absurdist, existentialist humor. I think that’s a pretty reasonable way to roll it up.
Edit: crossed the names up, derp
That sick son of a bitch! There needs to be repercussions.
GET A ROPE!
Lmao
Aww geez, Rick.
This really has me wondering how many people are doing the same thing but haven't been caught.
A person who otherwise wouldn't be noticed suddenly getting attention they never received thrown at them can easily abuse it if they don't control their behavior with a moral compass, which is becoming less and less a priority. When something feels good, many indulge. When you overindulge, you justify. When you get good at justifying, you can make anything okay in your head. If you don't have a line drawn, it's wild how far people will go... he went way too far and he should endure the consequences.
I think getting to be super famous is much easier if you have no moral compass to begin with.
Or a successful politician
I contend it's not that it's less of a priority but rather we're (as a society) getting better at collecting evidence, identifying un aceptable behaviour, and taking people seriously when they present an accusation. I firmly believe humans have done and do worse all the time.
I agree, actually. It's actually unreasonable to think people were any better or worse before, there's always good and bad... The difference is what's accepted by the rest of us. Great response, I appreciate it!
Everyone is doing that. That's the whole point of being famous.
Women DM famous people all the time and randomly fuck them. I personally some that have done it. They are just like meet me at this hotel.
Which there's absolutely nothing wrong with, provided both parties are over 18
No one is upset that he fucked fans, there upset that he at least tried to fuck underaged fans.
Frankly if you don't see a difference, I'm scared for you
Plenty of folks arguing now that literally any imbalance of power is unacceptable -- I've heard people argue that it is also not time-limited. So rich people can't fuck poor people, a professor can't ever fuck a former student even if they meet years later at a conference, and don't even think about workplace romance ever again if you are talking about college educated folks. The insane rules mean that you're only allowed to date someone precisely the same as you in every way. These are the same cis het allies that helped alienate and target the trans community through absolute absurdity.
Oh muricans... Have to be 18 to fuck and have to be 21 to drink. The hell is wrong with you, prudes?
Found Polanski's account.
The comment chain didn't imply any of what you said about my comment. You're putting words in my mouth, I'll leave it at that.
You're only just now wondering this?!
Glad to see more reporting on this. The way they swapped out Roiland's voice in Solar Opposites was absolutely perfect, it really hasn't lost anything imo.
I still fucking laugh thinking about it.
It was so unexpected for me that they would make a change to a hoity British accent and just run with it like nothing happened.
Brilliantly handled. I’m actually looking forward to how they are going to make the change for Rick and Morty now.
Maybe a cockney British accent. Oi Mor-y iss time for nother venture get in da car cunt.
It's an adventyah, innit?
What the the hell was that supposed to be? It sure as hell isn't cockney. There's not one bit of rhyming slang in there.
Not just any hoity British accent, that's Dan Stevens. Main character in Legion if you've seen that show.
They've said that they're using soundalikes for R&M, so no British Rick.
"This is what my voice sounds like now. I don’t care if it’s jarring, get over it. And that Voice Changer Ray had chronotons in it, so this is what I’m gonna sound like in flashbacks too. You got a problem with that? Then tough shit, it’s called science!"
Wait, he was voiced by Roland? I thought they were just taking a shot at Roland and Rick and Morty, that's 10x funnier
Grooming is more than just convincing a minor to not tell their parents.
The actual definition is grooming a minor for a later sexual relationship (not fully restricted to them still being a minor)
As with any scummy/horrible behavior, there are levels of scum/horribleness.
Fucking disgusting, I will never understand people like this.
That's a man in a position of power
There are plenty of men in positions of power that don’t abuse minors.
AMIPOPAB
?
All Men In Positions Of Power Are Bastards
Lol
What a cringe lord.
I just assume anyone remotely famous is some kind of foul person behind the scenes.
😭
Oof.
I've seen your secret plans for a space station capable of destroying entire planets, Margot Robbie! It's bad engineering and is going to get a ton of your workers and soldiers killed!
That's Academy Award nominated character actress/part time Dark Lord of the Sith Darth Margot to you!
Yes, the use of the Mass Shadow Generator on Malachor V was necessary to end the Mandalorian War once and for all, and no, I refuse to elaborate further.
No, Paul Rudd, nooo! You're too pure!
High positions of power/money/fame tend to attract those types unfortunately.
And gradually create them too.
Imagine being so lucky that you become a household name off of animation of all things but then deciding to do exactly what John K did. At least Rick and Morty won't go the way of Ren and Stimpy. Not yet, anyway.
He knew he could take advantage of the fans. What an ass.
I just watched a great documentary on YouTube about Ren and Stimpy and it's fucking sad how similar the story with John K is as well. I should think there's some obvious lessons about not giving immature manbabies unlimited power in here, but it'd be nice if somebody actually learned them!
I never liked him much, but I had no idea he was a pedo.
According to the article he would text underage women but would refuse to meet them until they were 18. Seems like he was operating within the law.
That's called grooming, it's arguably worse.
I'm pretty sure that having sex with underage girls is worse but that's just me.
The worst thing is the hypocrisy!
Wow. You think that's actually defensible?
You called him a pedo, but he doesn't appear to be one. Correcting your mistake doesn't mean anyone is defending him.
How is he not a pedo when he was sexting teenagers? Just because he waited until it was legal to fuck them?
He is a pedo he's just smart enough to wait until they're 18 to assault them.
Unfortunately making a pass at a minor isn't in itself illegal anyplace I'm aware of.
Touching one definitely and if he tried to meet up with them in person it would show intent.
Soliciting child porn though? Rape, I mean, he fotced oral sex. That's rape.
The guy should be in prison and I suspect with NBC handing thr cops all of this evidence, someone will charge him with something soon.
Sexting minors (under 18) is illegal in most places, including California, even if they're above the age of consent.
....yes? He's waiting till they're 18. Besides the fact that, as someone referenced above, in many states the age of consent is 16, so, if he was really scummy, he wouldn't have even waited at all.
Don't bother, they have a weird way about sexuality and age of consent, puritan nutjob heritage.
Again, I find it very hard to believe that adults can sext teenagers legally. I'd like some evidence for that claim.
They make lists of illegal acts in the law books, they don't generally list the legal ones. I'm curious if this is a crime as well, so please share with the rest of us if you find the answer to this question.
You're curious if this was a crime, but above you're saying it isn't a big deal because he waited until they were 18 to act. Which is it?
Literally nobody said that. Nobody is trying to defend this guy. Suggesting that Roiland was "operating within the law" is a claim of the facts of the case, not a defense of the morality of his actions.
Where did I say that? Please cite the text.
You appear to be projecting a lot of positions onto my comments that I do not hold. All I've said is that he does not seem to have broken the law based on the article and my own legal knowledge, I never said anything about what was or was not, "a big deal." Having sex with 18-year-olds is not an example of pedophilia, legally speaking.
Your response to me calling him a pedo, not a legal claim mind you, was:
That sure sounds like you're saying it isn't a big deal to me.
Does it? I suggest you work on your reading comprehension then, because I neither wrote nor implied any such thing. I made a legal claim in the text you quoted, not a moral one.
A legal claim in response to a moral claim, which, again, sounds pretty dismissive.
If you construe anything short of picking up a pitchfork and loudly virtue signaling alongside you as disagreement, you're going to mistakenly presume a lot.
Morally or legally?
Does it being legal make it okay? And I'm not sure sending sexual messages to 16-year-olds is legal.
I don't think they are defending him, but if they're right he's adhering to the letter of the law, not necessarily the spirit of it.
Is adults texting sexually explicit things to 16-year-olds legal? I find that hard to believe.
The summary did that thing like when FBI agents find a 800 TB harddrive containing a possibly CSAM photo and the media says they found 800 TB of CSAM.
Did he take a conversation with a sub-18 year old to a sexual place? (or not excuse himself from an email gone sexual with someone under age?) I literally mean yes he did take it sexual or no he did not take it sexual or It was not clear from the messages.
There is a difference from acknowledging sex is a thing and propositioning a teenager for sex, but at this point, I don't care. If you are a man or a woman, etc., just devalue the experience of younger people and don't talk to them. They'll be fine with it eventually.
Danny Masterton 2.0.
I don't think so. Masterson seems like straight up rape. Roiland seems like a creep. Maybe a groomer, but I don't know if it's worth watering down the really horrendous groomers.
He's a creep who regularly took advantage of his fame to manipulate young women into sex. And it looks like in at least one the manipulation went both ways.
He deserves to be fired. He deserves to be known as a creep.
Also, John Kricfalusi 2.0.
No fucking shit what do you these writers think celebrities have been doing since the silver screen came out.
One last people for the shlubs in the fucking back.
This Country Runs On Money And Power Period.
And before that it was, being of a certain "status" with power and wealth.
This is so QAnon-adjacent as to be laughable
Cute attempt at a gaslight, rich people don’t spend as long in jail as compared to the rest of the world, if they even get time and not just a slap on the wrist that’s facts not some bullshit pizza parlor copy pasta.
Great job standing up for criminals.
The elites aren't drinking kids blood.
Nobody said they were, you’re reeeeeally bad at gaslighting and should probably take up another hobby
This is not what gaslighting is. Words have actual meanings.
You continue to dodge the point, which is that the rich do not receive the equal and just punishment.
You continue to press strawman points but because you chose to target QAnon nut jobs, I made that very reasonable jump.
Best of luck with your Bobert jerk sesh, sycophant.
It's wrong to kink-shame. I didn't kink-shame you over your conspiracy theories. I just informed you that they're nonsense.
JFC, you know it's bad when you use GPT to summarize the article and it thinks you are violating policy.
Yeah. It's kind of gross, but whole genres of porn are barely legal 18-20 year olds. Sounds like that's what he's into. And he went about it in a very creepy way unlike Leonardo DiCaprio that uses the prestige of the model and hollywood industry.
Sounds like he is into 16 years olds to me.
Yeah, but it sounds like he waited until they are 18.
Oh, so it's OK then 👎
Legally, yes.
That doesn't make it much better...
Well it makes it legal. So that's empirically better.
Well obviously it's better legally. It's pretty terrible from a moral standpoint though.
Legal is significantly better than illegal
Did you read what I wrote below?
No I read what you wrote above.
Having read the below now, I do agree with this
Fucking an adult, and a teenager are not the same thing.
Yeah. Fucking a 18 year old that is pretending to be 15 is creepy, not criminal.
If they are 18 or 19 it is the same thing.
What mentality do you think someone who only chases 18 year old girls has? If the age of consent was lower, they'd go lower.
But it's not lower and he didn't go lower. I think he's a creep. Just not sure he's technically a pedophile or doing anything super illegal based on the article. And being into 18 year olds isn't that out there. Just look at porn, strip clubs, the model industry, film industry etc... Also, not sure if he only chases 18 year olds. That was just the topic of the article about the 18/early 20s.
Whys it talking about 11 people? The hell are the other 8 alleging?
This is journalism
Something about people in power or fame that brings out the worst in people. Hope this dude rots in prison and goes broke.
not gonna lie, after reading the article, there's not a lot there. I understand that people can be put in positions where they feel like they "have" to say yes, but they literally don't? I think this is more of a case like Louie C.K. These guys are likely autistic and lacking the ability to really clue in on social cues. Guys that have always been unattractive and lacking in attention from women, suddenly has all the attention of women! So they do dumb stuff, that they should have learned not to do when they were young, but again, nerds gonna nerd, and nerds have not always been celebrated like they are today. I think he just going through a slutty phase because he finally can. from his texts he doesn't come off as a predator, but as a person who's so used to being told "no," that he doesn't know what to do with himself or how to act once they started saying "yes."
You tell me you say that the guy who literally waited for women in their dressingroom naked and started to masterbute as they walked in was just "lacking the ability to really clue in on social cues".
I don't know anymore with these apologists like you. Are you trolling or really this misguided?
If I remember correctly he asked them first and wasn't just in their room naked. They just felt they couldn't say no because he was in a position of power.
Although I think this is a little different because it involves children who may think they know what they are doing but don't fully understand yet. So a little different
Can you cite where CK was accused of that? I'm not saying it didn't happen, but most of what I saw indicted he asked but the woment felt like they had to say yes.
I thought he invited the women to his room, and never tried to force them to show up or stay. I'm not trying to defend Louis, the most charitable thing you can say is that it was creepy and weird AF. But If there is more to it, this is the first I'm hearing of it.
What JDW wrote is what he was accused of. I don't know what else you read that didn't mention those direct allegations.
That doesn't excuse the underage thing.
My wife is autistic, that's not how autism works. You may be bad at reading social ques, but that doesn't mean you don't understand rejection, or that you don't understand that you shouldn't be prowling for underaged women. Most of the times its just not picking up inflections of voice, or they don't know if theyre reading people's facial expressions correctly.
Kinda sounds like youre equivocating powerful old dudes grooming kids to boys will be boys.......
The simple fact that he's talking to several 16 year old about sex is predatory in and of it's self.
Maybe its because I'm closer to his age than most people on here, but the thought of chatting up anyone close to 16 years old is fucking gross. I have nothing in common with a sixteen year old girl, he has nothing in common with a sixteen year old girl.
He just a gross asshole, and anyone who defends him because you like the same shitty played out subculture........ is also a gross asshole.
If I did what I did as a kid now I would find myself an asshole
You're joking... right?
he's insane in the membrane.
Have fun in prison, creep
What is the crime?
Well, the worst crime alleged in the article is rape.
Such allegations should be made to the police/prosecutor.
This is just PR.
Oftentimes police do nothing when people report sexual assault and rape. Bringing these things to public attention can sometimes be the only way to bring awareness to what happened. You can decide to not believe the alleged victims but there's nothing wrong with them coming out with allegations.
Statutory rape at best, and pedophilia/rape or SA at worst.
He lives in California. You're citing wiki articles about age of consent laws in other states when the only states law that matters is where he resides and where the assaults allegedly took place. Allegations seem to mostly or all take place in California. Showing the age of consent and statutory rape laws of Ohio mean nothing in CA.
In CA, age of consent is 18. Some of the women and people were 16. So he is a pedophile.
According to my reading of the article, he would wait to meet said women until they were 18, and I don't know enough about the law to know if sending sexually charged texts to 16-year-olds counts as a crime in CA. I don't suspect it does.
Why suspect anything when you could just iunno LOOK IT UP?!
"As noted, sexting with a minor is illegal even between two minors, regardless of whether they gave consent. Under Penal Code 288.2 PC, it's a crime to send, distribute, or offer, using electronic communication, harmful matter to a minor with the intent to sexually gratify, seduce, or arouse."
You know IANAL but that sure as fuck sounds like it's illegal to me
all around impropriety, [n]o doubt it.
but yeah, legally this appears to be rather flimsy, although i thought there were new laws on books for grooming. not sure how they operate tho.
Well then why victims ain't going to the police?
Do you say that about all rape victims that don't report their rape? Are we victim blaming now?
Not victim blaming. If someone went on a date again and asked for money, then I find it a little hard to believe that they were a victim at all.
If you think people never end up staying with the person who raped them, you know nothing about this entire subject.
It's not airtight proof, but if it happens on the first date and they come back for more several times, that would push me a bit towards 'reasonable doubt'.
If it about someone who has been married 15 years and has 3 kids with the guy it is a very different situation.
Again, you don't understand rape if that's what you think.
only the ones that asked for a trial by the public instead of using proper legal process
"She's lying because she let everyone know about it" is a weird way to victim-blame.
Rape victims don't go to the police for a variety of reasons, even if they tell everyone about their rape. Maybe you trust the police, but many people don't.
You keep saying victim blame... nobody has done that in this posts.
You are being disingenuous while attempting derail any discussion.
You absolutely did. You suggested she was lying because she didn't go to the police. That is textbook victim blaming.
STFU
I didn’t realize he got off on the DV charges.
There are many reasons sexual assault victims don’t come forward. It’s not exactly easy to face the person that raped you in court. Innocent until proven guilty doesn’t matter in the court of public opinion. There’s been enough smoke around this guy for me to write him off without a conviction.
Any number of reasons. Trials of a public figure will forever brand you as "that person who was raped by X". Not to mention the incredible imbalance in legal resources of a regular person vs Justin Roiland.
Trial by social media is far easier. And he doesn’t get a to mount a defence. It’s like the shortcut for those in the know.
No doubt there is some impropriety here.
But the brain dead mob got mobilized on some vague claims...
Where did alleged rape occur? Was stat or forced?
It's right in the article. Forced a woman to perform oral sex. She was not underage at the time. He 'apologized' later via text, saying he thought she wanted to be forced (I'm paraphrasing, but it's still gross). It's still rape.
UNACCEPTABLE!
He is not the first nor is he the last pedo using power who is hiding in plain sight in the animation industry. Bring them all down.
The article says that he waited until they were 18. While I don't condone his using his celebrity / wealth / power to coerce young women / people into sexual scenarios, he doesn't appear to be a pedo. Stop diluting the meaning of the word.
Pedopologist
Justin Roiland is a pedophile.
Hopefully false but plausible so if it is false this might be slander or libel.
I mean, he literally drew a kid sucking an old man's cock.
"Plausible" is an understatement
I did not know. Thanks.
Text messages in this Misinformation age are worth shit. Videos can be fake, where not even professionals can tell the difference and AI is on the rise. All legal charges against him where dropped and the accusators admitted that they made it up.
The domestic violence charges against him brought forth by his ex were dropped, the accusations of child abuse and assault have not be dropped and are currently ongoing. As far as I can tell no one has said that they "made it up," including his ex. The domestic violence charges were dropped due to insufficient evidence, which can be hard to prove 3 years after the fact, when he was acquitted. If you have anything to show something contrary, I'll gladly read it, but if you don't, please don't add your voice to the "misinformation age."
What about the plan tickets and the receipts ?
What about no evidence that he did something illegal? He can fly where the fuck and buy and sleep where he wants. That's no evidence of anything.
Even cartoons are not safe from enshitification. Creatures bait-and-switch us from free-thinking counter-cultural rebels to sex offenders who are every bit as corrupt as the old status quo we thought they were an antidote to.
What a truly stupid article.
Darn right! I sure didn’t need an article to tell me Justin Rolland was a child groomer, I could’ve guessed that.
I'm gonna get downvoted for this, but it's always funny to me how modern society "forgets" that men are literally biologically programmed to be attracted to girls are soon as they start looking "old enough".
And guess what, that doesn't magically happen when they turn 18, it often happens at a younger age.
And no, that doesn't mean men should flirt with and date young girls. I'm just trying to say it's biology. It's science. Facts even.
You’re getting downvoted because it’s irrelevant and honestly quite creepy to bring up. There’s plenty of shit people did in the distant and not so distant past that isn’t ok today because we now know better.
Rockstars would literally brag about shagging a high schooler. Different times and vibes. We know better now that it's predatory and we should move forward advancing society with that knowledge.
In addition he's getting downvoted because this is fucking sexist bullshit. In non-sexually repressive environments most kids get sexually attracted to other kids irrespective of their gender fairly early. Arguably girls might get there a couple of years earlier, arguably. And so throughout the gender spectrum people don't fuck despite their attraction because they have heads on their shoulders as you rightfully point out.
This guy right here, officer.
You do realize people have the ability to not act upon every urge right
So who cares? You've got a brain for a reason
Yo, so why am I attracted to 30's-ish taller women with bush and armpit hair that also look like they could crush my bones?
Don't start pulling biologically programmed out your ass when describing your own tastes.
I think there's too much sexual supression, especially through religion. The 2nd largest serial killer in the world was a paedo because he knew he liked boys at a young age but due to Christianity having a big emphasis on don't be gay, he suppressed those urges and they came back out later in life, except he was still attracted to the boys at the age he realized he was gay.
Girls can look "cute" but if you're well integrated into society in the first place, you can find them attractive, but not sexually attractive if that makes sense.
I think there is too much sexual suppression in the US. Here in Denmark the age of consent is 15, and I honestly think it is a much safer place for my daughter than the US.
Same here in Slovenia. I have two early teenage daughters and will have no problem with them being responsibly sexual with partners of same age or a couple years older when they are 15 if they want to. We will talk about everything of course. In america there seems to be some cognitive dissonance - everything is sexualized but also forbidden.