Lol this made me remember about the time when i made a fake chat log of one of my classmate in middle school that he did goofy stuff and i trolled him so bad he got clowned for the whole year
It's the fact that the guy who tweeted it was a twitch employee for like 8 years. It's not some random bozo, and other insiders have sort of been hinting at the same thing. Do you really think this guy would risk a massive defamation lawsuit against himself just for the lols? I'm not saying Dr Disrespect is guilty, but the whole situation is really odd.
Yet when there is evidence of wrongdoing, the internet suddenly doesn't care and replys with "It's YOUR fault this happened" to the victim (Logan Paul's cult). Twitter is the mistake, not everyone deserves a voice.
Personally, I think Doc should've responded by making a song about how he does NOT diddle kids. Give it a catchy hook like "Do not diddle kids, it's no good diddling kids."
@@dhdixjrnedndjd9672 He can't deny because of the NDA, if he says that he was not banned because of that he is breaching the NDA, from what I understand.
@@Aethelbeorn He also disrespected his fans by telling them he's making a game, scamming millions from them, then never releasing it. Just another grifter getting his crypto bag on the back of his fans 🤣
“He tried to take advantage of a minor, so we did the best thing possible, we didn’t alert the authorities, instead we banned him from twitch and decided to dredge it up years later after any legal action could have been taken”
Well shouldn't this hypothetical person's parents really be the ones to pursue any action? If it were true they would have sued twitch into oblivion loooong ago
@@kenon6968Parents could not have the money, not be in the picture, or just shitty. No one knows so no assumptions can be made either way. Just have to wait and see if it’s true. Would hope not but at this point I wouldn’t be surprised. 2024 been proving Katt Williams right so far.
It makes sense bc Twitch only found out bc someone at Twitch looked at Doc’s whisper, which is supposed to be “private” so it doesn’t look good for Twitch as well.
As someone living under a particularly bizarre NDA, I can tell you from experience that NDA's can be weirder than you thought possible. Freedom in 6 months....LOL.
Yep. A lot of jobs use NDAs but the people in the jobs I’m familiar with failed talk about what they aren’t supposed to. Word gets around fast and cats are out of the bag but no proof of whodunit since so many talk. All the time.
For those unaware, crimes cannot be covered by an NDA. So even if these acusations were true but nothing ever came of the conversation in question it would still be endangerment of a child (something like that) which is a crime. So most likely Twitch banned him because he was discussing contracts with competitors
Why would a company report it? Look it up, Subway knew about Jared's interest in children and didn’t do anything or report it. They came out with a statement after the fact when it came out. Corporations don't have to do anything.
@@BroadBeanSoup no. Obstruction is a specific thing that has to do with stopping a law enforcement agent from doing their job. Failing to report on potential crimes are our prerogative. Now if thy had went out of their way to say suppress the minor from coming forward that might be a form of obstruction. But companies just like people do not actually have to report crimes. It could open them up to being sued but it isn't obstruction.
@@BroadBeanSouptwitch wanted to axe dr disrespect for trying to work a deal with mixer. Easiest way to do that with any employee in any industry is to find a way to fire them with cause and not have to pay them. My guess is they used a loose (possibly even entirely fabricated) incident to cut ties with him, leak it to the media, and hope the doctor would just step away based on the threat of being cancelled. Huge miscalculation by twitch and now they are have been caught in a really bad look. Doc gets paid big in exchange for silence and twitch is saved the embarrassment. Everybody wins and this whole thing could have stayed buried if it wasn’t for one little former twitch employee who needed his 15 seconds of fame on twitter
I understand people's concerns over advertising these energy drinks to minors and gamers that most likely sit on their ass all day, but damn that claw machine is rad
@@oneautumnleaff2119 NDAs can be tough alone, settlements can be borderline insane. I've heard of ones that prevent ever mentioning the company by name for the rest of your life (obviously difficult to prove if you're a private person but in this scenario could happen), otherwise you are liable for breaching the terms of settlement.
@@aaaaaaaa-gu1md You're absolutely correct. I have just seen a lot of excuses already, which means that a lot of people who said they were waiting for proof actually didn't care whether or not there was inappropriate conduct. I fear that you're one of the few people who approached this situation in a principled manner.
I mean its proof something happened. I'm just still super confused on why Twitch had to pay a settlement to Doc if Doc is the one in the wrong. That little piece of info is making this whole thing confusing.
"Journalists" who withhold potentially fucked up info like this for YEARS should lose all credibility regardless of whether these allegations turn out to be true or not.
Doc wasn’t the one being sued, he was suing Twich for the remainder of this contract. Twich paid BUT THEY DIDNT ADMIT wrong doing or were’t found to have unfairly terminated him. Doc has NEVER SAID HE DIDNT KNOW SHE WAS A MINOR or ever say that he thought she was an adult. He tried in his first replies to suggest his lawsuit against Twich somehow cleared him of any wrongdoing when it was a civil suit where he wasn’t even the defendant. The tweet isn’t from some random gossip anon account, it’s from CODY whos a known Verified Twich Partnership Manager. Who was very specific with the allegation that he would have been a first hand source being a Partnership manger at the time. And would obviously know he would get hung in court by Doc for defamation if there wasn’t logs. IF ANY OF YOU CANT UNDERSTAND WHAT IM SAYING AND ARE READING IN REVERSE. I THINK DOC KNEW HER AGE. AND SEXT HER ANYWAY.
@@nick191088 cause it's not a good look to have a pedo on your payroll either. Especially when you gave him access to a messenger app with the ability to text minors
@@nick191088 essentially they settled and used vague language to get out of bad publicity about it, kind of a "it wasnt legal but wasnt wrong for us to do that" type deal, most likely gave him a NDA/Gag order to not speak on it so he could keep the full payout, but now this ex employee wants to try and seemingly force him to talk about it, thus costing him the payout he got as to why though? well it is an ex twitch employee, they are all pretty fucking dumb/vindictive about pretty much everything
@@nick191088 If the reason they're cutting ties isn't explicitly against the terms of the contract. They could take a moral stand but still owe for the terms of the contract.
Why isn't he talking about it? Simple, they reached a court settlement amounting to "Okay, we pay you to make this go away, we don't admit we did anything wrong though. Also, you're not allowed to talk about the details of the case or settlement itself." Sounds fishy? No, these are pretty bog-standard settlement terms. Neither party "officially" admits wrong-doing but you can tell what's what from which way the money flows. I'd wager he was paid more than his contract was worth in exchange for never speaking of this again.
@@hazeion No criminal case was ever brought. Which isn't shocking, since no evidence was ever brought and no "victim" ever actually came forward. DrDisrespect sued Twitch for breach of contract.
You can't do that with criminal activity, though. If you have an NDA that prevents you from "talking about the company in a negative way" but you have knowledge of criminal activity YOU CAN GO TO THE POLICE WITH IT. If the company tries to execute the NDA, the judge will THROW IT OUT, AND CHARGE THEM WITH WITNESS TAMPERING AND CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY.
@@Null_Experis Yeah, but that's the thing isn't it. All they did was terminate his contract prematurely based on a nasty rumor (presumably to avoid bad PR). That's just what I'm saying, if Twitch had evidence that DrDisrespect did in fact try to solicit a minor (which they would have, if it took place on their messaging system as the rumor claims), they would NOT have settled the case. All of it points to the whole root of this story being horseshit. And he got shitcanned for it, so he took Twitch to court and got a massive (undisclosed) payout.
You guys are trying so hard to justify this. In what universe would any settlement term prevent him from simply saying he is not guilty of the sexting charges. This isn't info of the case at all, especially if he really wasn't sexting.
You’re falling the HR bad narrative put out there by big business. HR is human resource, and are literally there to protect the employees. In most companies HR operates in its own org chart, and isn’t beholden to upper management, but instead is the only thing above upper management. Thus upper management wants you to hate hr. They make you think HR is only there to tell you can’t call people names. When in reality they’re telling management you can’t do mandatory OT, it’s bad for the employee. You can’t take benefits away it’s bad for the employee, and will hurt productivity.
@@thekurtrussell4007this is bs, the most disgusting people I've ever dealt with in my life was HR. Like, never been late once and barely ever took a vacation style my parents house burnt down and I had to take off to help them and the company attacked me and HR did nothing, I failed a breathalyzer test for work and it was proven it was low blood sugar, there was no alcohol in my piss, they said they already filled out the paperwork so kick rocks. Fuck HR. And piss off defending them.
@@thekurtrussell4007 Yeah that's some bullshit. Every company I've worked HR is a massive asshole. Like the one in the last place I worked was perfectly fine with upper management cussing us out in front of patrons. When employees became friends, she would tell us about how unionizing is bad for the place as a whole, and management isn't happy about us being friends (even though we didn't have a union). She would also talk about how being paid $8 (I was a much higher position than floor, so I received more but others didn't) an hour is a good wage, and said we're lucky to be working at this place. The state even came in since it was a pseudi-government position and she defended the low wages. One time she talked a Jewish employee out of suing the company after the Director in charge threatened to fire the lady over her not eating pork and not attending a Christmas party. HR does not care about the employee. They only exist for the company.
there’s probably an agreement between doc and twitch stating he can not state details of his case nor make disparaging comments towards the platform EDIT/UPDATE: nvm doc is a cradle robber
nah, just read between the lines : no wrongdoing, everything has been settled = come on guys, I didn't sleep with her, twitch had to pay me full to just f*ck off so it doesn't make any waves.
Charlie was saying on stream that there's no way Dr. Kidinspect's wife would stay with him if she knew about these allegations, but I think it's very believable when you remember that he brings in millions of dollars to their family. A lot of people would be okay with it if it means they get to keep a comfortable lifestyle.
If a person is capable of lying to their spouse, they're capable of lying to anybody. It would not surprise me if there's (at least) some truth to the allegations. It may not have been criminal, but something went on. Twitch are not dumb; They're losing millions by not having him on the platform.
@@chuckp342 yeah exactly. They wouldn't have let him go in the way that they did unless it was something like this. Plus as my grandma used to say 'once a cheater always a cheater'
@@baphomette3234 One thing I've not seen mentioned is the age of consent in a lot of states (e.g. not illegal). To me, a minor means under 18. I'm not saying the guy did or didn't do anything, but when you're a celebrity of his caliber, you have to be careful. Innocent chats could be turned against you easily. Hell, his audience is probably half minors.
@DabDabGoose Yeah. Unless there is something I'm not understanding here. This is either a massive cover up and a lot of people are getting in trouble for illegally hiding a crime. Or a lot of people are getting sued for defamation and libel
@@ki5895 nah they knew he was sus, yet people were so quick to come to his defence and make all kinds of excuses as to why he didn’t do what the employee said he did
@@Sofus-fu4ro here's one of the comments in his defense 2 days ago "That allegation, without proof, is hearsay. Dr. Disrespect not acknowledging it and saying he did nothing illegal is the best way to go about it by dismissing the claim while skirting any NDA." They're not defending what he did to the minor, they're not saying pedophilia should be allowed, they're not saying any of that, they're simply saying he approached it in a very professional manner, and that its the best possible approach. So no... There is no way they could've known, because if you read the comment, they weren't even defending what he did, but how he approached it.
I could not handle being a well-known individual on the internet nowadays. It's so easy for some random to just blurt out something without proof that will put pressure on you, even if you haven't done anything wrong. It's like being a lonely woman in the late 1500's, and some guy shouts "witch!", and you got the whole village coming after you
FR. I like being able to walk around in public with nobody knowing who I am or saying things behind my back. Living like that would make me age faster from the stress alone. If I was famous then all the privacy I would of gotten if people did not know or care who I am would be gone.
it’s more so that e celebs don’t view themselves as full fledged celebrities with everyone paying attention to them, so they don’t expect to get caught doing bad things, most of these e celebs are straight up evil
but they still have a forever lasting affect unfortunately even if the claimant were to say he was lying.. this would still have a huge affect on his life.
@@darthasavage7213 sadly thats the point its just a EX employee randomly saying it without any proof. People really wanna believe twitch paid to cover up a child SA issue its legit braiddead
@@darthasavage7213defaming to a degree, true. But if you can find the person who first started this rumor, they can be sued for defamation if the claim has no backing to it.
Unfortunately, you'll probably have a hard time trusting some Australians, New Zealanders, Tongans, Samoans, Fijians, some other Polynesians, rugby players, dykes, and any time travelers from the 80's
@@The_Zeta_Male Not really even if you settle out of court yada yada you get slammed with a bunch of "okay now dont talk about this this this or this. k thanks."
That allegation, without proof, is hearsay. Dr. Disrespect not acknowledging it and saying he did nothing illegal is the best way to go about it by dismissing the claim while skirting any NDA.
@@g-g43 or maybe if you know how the legal system works, this happens in most cases of such nature, where a company messes up and settles by paying rather than public backlash - considering how big and loyal some Doc fans are, it makes sense they slapped an NDA on the paycheck so that they don't get their wrath.
@@redb8053 Because private companies have the right to ban someone at their discretion. If it is justified or not doesn't really matter to indicate if someone did something illegal or not.
In my opinion, an ex twitch employee saying it, and then all of the sudden a bunch of other people "heard a similar story" holds no water. This is like blindly believing all of the negative things someone says about their ex after a bad breakup. There is bad blood. There may even be personal drama. Maybe He just doesn't like the Doc. A lot of people don't. A lot of people would love to see him be taken down. As far as I'm concerned, he is innocent until there is proof. The fact he was also never in legal trouble says a lot too. His name is out there and all that would be public record.
but he hasn’t said he hasn’t done it which is weird. if he hasn’t done it why doesn’t he just say that. he is dodging the question which makes him look guilty which he probably is
@@imapug_playz2907 if twitch forced an NDA for the payout he got then legally he cant give details on it, even if its squashing rumors because that would be giving details by denial remember he was shown that he wasnt terminated for any illegal action when he got the payout, if they had any sort of evidence about sexting a minor he most certainly wouldnt have been given a payout at all and before anyone claims they could have been covering it up ... that would make Twitch as a company a cohort to a crime, and fuck them over WAY harder then you would believe
@@TheMessiah1337 Umm what? What exactly is morally disgusting about what he did? A judge declared there was no sexual intention behind the messages. Do you understand what that means?
I don’t think Charlie has ever settled or received a settlement. To this day, 2 years later, I am still contractually obligated to never talk about what I did at my last job or risk losing my settlement. Just in case I haven’t told anyone. Only my wife knows.
@@shaboingboing1 Lol it was a government job but it’s what I actually did and saw in there I can’t talk about. Idk how far the government would go so I won’t risk it. They’re probably reading this right now lol. It’s not too crazy tho just some government bs.
sexting a minor would be a crime, there would be no way in twitch would pay that out, and it would have been easily proved in discovery. baseless accusations imo.
The minor would have been exposed doc keep that in mind also remember the pro jarded situation. Let's go do doc like that just to look stupid at the end
"Legal obligations" could literally be an NDA saying you cannot talk about anything specific pertaining to the ban or you owe us all of the money back.
@@kingkunta3753 Doc got his money and signed an NDR, thats information we have. If Twitch won they wouldn't pay so they either lost or settled, since the Doc signed an NDA it was almost definitely settled. We can't with 100% certainty but its pretty darn close.
If there's anything I learned about internet drama is this. Don't trust anything that comes from a former employee with no proof. If he texted minors through the whisper system, there's breadcrumbs in the system and twitch had no reason to settle. On the other hand, something unmistakenly fishy must've happened for twitch to have pulled the perma trigger without a care and fishy enough for twitch to prefer settling the case and die on that hill than unbanning him. Either way, either bring the evidence or stop with the "I heard this guy did this and that".
Refunding subs doesn't just take money away from Dr disrespect, it's money directly out of twitch's pocket, a lot of it. Twitch is run by amazon and has never been a big earner for them, something amazon hates. the only way they'd willing give back that much money to the public is if that money was going directly to a child predator under investigation, something that could get them legally fucked up and in a PR nightmare. Even rape allegations or sexual assault aren't treated as severe, pedos are simply in a league of their own, a universal evil.
I think he was “smart” enough to not get caught red handed. Was probably setting up some grooming situation. Legally speaking, he did nothing wrong, but morally hes guilty. They are all working a coverup. They paid him to pay the victim so everyone goes on “happily ever after”
If he was talking to a minor like that twitch would've reported him to the police. Not just ended the contract and then later admit fault and pay up. I can't believe anyone ever thought that accusation had merit. I think Charlie has personally had a direct effect on dumbing down gen z people. The kids who have watched his videos over the past few years have suffered brain rot listening to him give so many illogical takes. I watch him because he's funny but his inability to think properly has gotten worse and worse over the years
Its a current employee who said the tweet lol And that tweet was liked by several other twitch employees That man is so cooked it's not even funny and I hope this is finally the end for Doc
smells like a gay legal maneuver where a company filled with ideologues like Twitch holds someone's tongue with an NDA, then gets one of their ex employees to deliver the slander. "Don't look at our degen booba business model of luring minors to our creator's OnlyFans, look at how much me care about minors in this imaginary Doc Disrespect scenario"
@@hemipenes As someone under an NDA, there is no NDA in America that would restrict you from denying responsibility for crimes you didn't commit, only crimes that you have committed or crimes in the vein of the crime you've committed. The bare minimum requirements not being met either means he's a) being oddly evasive for a straightforward question for no discernable reason, or b) he's done something similar to what is being alleged and the NDA he's signed prevents him from speaking about it.
@@mojojojo6400 What? He's just saying that the messaging service was likely chosen by Dr. Disrespect because it wasn't well monitored. They aren't defending the action or saying other people should do it. You do understand that, right?
@@The_GeniMeans he’s just critiquing the phenomenon instead of changing it and the guy is basically equating that lack of action as equally negative, which is honestly not a crazy counter.
I'm more shocked that some random guy just literally said "he's a pedo" with absolutely no source and EVERYBODY believed him lol. *EDIT* since a lot of you are misunderstanding me. Im NOT taking Docs side. I just prefer to stay 100% neutral unless there is 100% irrefutable evidence that he did text a minor. If that evidence doesn't surface then my views on Doc will not change. I refuse to paint someone as a predator without evidence. We've seen this scenario MANY times. Let's not repeat the same mistake.
@@Autism_moment_of_all_time if they had anything on him it would be posted by now, it will quietly be forgotten. Pathetic by both charlie and his community guessing sht that can destroy a man's life.
That’s how the internet ends up being like, especially TWITTER. Cannot think of anyone that uses that site that isn’t an asylum inmate with 30 minutes of free computer time.
they didnt believe him until Doc's response that didn't deny the allegations... twitch acted preemptively before he did anything wrong, even if he did have sexts and planned to meet with a minor. you dont catch predators based on texts. you wait until they show up. so, legally, he did nothing wrong, so he could try to sue twitch BUT he wont talk about it... He also won't lie about it, it seems, and flat out say that it's not true... so there you have it. With some logic and above room temperature IQ you can assume he possible did these things, but it wasn't illegal, and the legal proceedings keep him from flat out denying it, but also keep TWITCH FROM TALKING ABOUT IT. That's what you all dont realilze. Twitch is the one with the legal muzzle on them, NOT DOC.
You can have a conversation with minors and not be illegal but looked down upon. You can send a winky face to a minor and thats not illegal but most adults would say its inappropriate. Why cant he say my ban had NOTHING to do with minors instead of i didn't do anything wrong or illegal 🤔🤔
If you believe someone with his fame and exposure would do something so stupid on twitch chat then I am not surprised you believe everything that is said on twitter. Out of curiosity, how many times have you handed bank details to "girls in your area looking for fun" 😂😉
Dr. disrespect, per legal agreement, cannot disclose any details about what occurred, and that includes saying what it wasn't. Ex-twitch employee is vindictive and basically wants to put Doc in a hard place by making it so he can't say anything right, because his legal agreements don't allow it
If it didnt happen it would have nothing to do with his termination, how would there be any legal obligation or NDA for something that didnt happen? And denying an accusation, especially one like that, is not a detail, there is nothing stopping him from saying "I did not sext a minor"
@@tewks4458 Litigation is expensive and arduous even in the most clean-cut of cases. It makes sense for him to not want to entertain such baseless claims too much.
@@lukaswithak4443 "So Doc, somebody approached us claiming you sexted a minor and we're giving you a perma ban." *court case happens* "Well, guess that didn't happen after all, here's your contract money and an NDA to go with it."
My friend got paid out from Blizzard after being banned for something then finding a loophole in their policy. He got paid off and signed a document saying he couldn't talk about it for x amount of years
What a crazy pointless lie to tell... blizz has never paid a user for being banned. Since the creation of the first account on any blizz game they have held the undisputable right to close any account with ZERO reasoning. But drop some more pointless lies in the replies if your bored enough
"I found a loophole in their terms of service, so they paid me 1 million dollars to never say anything" (instead of them just changing their policy) ? bruh
No wrong doing found. That's important. Details often confuse people, who, as the internet does, then take the worst selection of details in order to dunk, harass, demonized, etc. the target. No wrong doing found is perhaps the most important detail and people don't like it because they want to juice it up.
@@VioletElite4 Yeah no shit, if something doesn't exist you can't find it. I can accuse you of killing my grandma, and then there would be no wrong doing found, doesn't mean you did it.
I agree. People look for drama in their lives and want to attack others the first chance they get regardless if the person is guilty or not. People just desperately want it to be true to get their fix. Society sucks.
„He made a tweet without evidence but then more people made tweets without evidence so it could be true.“ Gotta disagree with this one Charlie. If we go by that logic then yes everything could be technically true.
The only evidence could be screenshots of the dms and sharing someones dms would obvs be against twitch policies regardless of the situation. Why would so many people come out and tell the exact same lie about a person? Youre being way too charitable to him maybe think about the victim instead of your streamer
It depends on the context of how they received their information. Frankly, I wouldn't be surprised if there were grounds to sue the twitch employee who made the tweet for defamation. As a journalist, you can get these stories all day long but unless it's backed with actual proof, you're risking defamation for yourself and your news publication. I'm guessing there is just very little viewable evidence of the situation. Either because it didn't happen (In Doc's defense) or it's sealed behind NDAs/court restrictions (In the accuser's defense)
Because it's a big "nothing". They would cancel the doc as fast as possible if they could, but they have nothing on him. Nothing. He sometimes get donos from depressed/suicid*l people, and he gives some of the warmest response you could imagine. It wouldn't surprise me if he alone has prevented many suici..s Sad to see Charlie's community be so toxic to a fellow content creator
there's a real moral grey area about it, because if they reported on what happened, people wouldn't believe it until the logs got released, and if the logs get released, then some internet weirdos will absolutely try to track down the person doc was texting
@@blaaa22awwwf The thing is dr disrespect came out to this rumor and said “no wrongdoing was acknowledged” which is the MOST SUS thing to say when asked about sexting a minor
@@oogskskfn and you really think Twitch rather pay to cover up any wrong doing on both ends over you know voiding his payout for committing a crime on their platform? Ipad kids are beyond brainrotted.
@@resjgamer2378 Saying that color is dependent on light and vision is so obvious to not worth being considered. But as to the actual question implied, it's actually light refracting in the atmosphere, seperating out the waves that exist in the UV and upper visible range (ie violet). So unless you don't consider the atmosphere the sky, for some reason, your only "um actually" opportunity is to say "uhm actually it's mostly violet, not blue" and hope no one asks you for details.
I remember when we used to make fun of people for believing random stuff on the internet with no evidence. Anyone remember “would someone do that? just go on the internet and tell lies?” Now if someone tweets something, especially if it’s something negative about someone else, it’s automatically true, no matter what.
The thing is dr disrespect came out to this rumor and said “no wrongdoing was acknowledged” which is the MOST SUS thing to say when asked about sexting a minor
@@oogskskfni read this as no wrong doing was acknowledged (by either parties) there was wrong doing from twitch, thats why twitch lawyer got them to pay the whole contract lok
@@lylewalker5681 Please tell me how saying "nothing illegal happened" is confirming he did an illegal thing like sexting a minor. Real tired of people willfully ignoring that part as it is a clear cut denial of what was alleged.
What's wild to me is that even though there is ZERO evidence to support this allegation, a ton of people are just automatically assuming guilt. What the hell happened to innocent until proven guilty?
Honestly, I don't think that's been a thing like... ever. At least when talking about opinions outside the justice system, even though the argument can be made it doesn't work so well there either. It's a principle that many of us hold, absolutely. But people have always made assumptions first, usually based on what they want to be the truth, and their confirmation bias gets fed.
I hope Dr. Disrespect sues that ex-employee for libel lmao EDIT: I have learned that since his name was not mentioned he can't really sue for libel/defamation. Bummer. EDIT EDIT: I have further learned that the allegations were mostly confirmed (hard to say he was sexting without seeing the DMs) and he was texting a minor. Yikes!
@@dustinsindledecker154 the said ex employee was trying to promote his thing with saying that he will explaing to ppl why doc got banned if they showed and paid for tickets xd
What about Cody Ko? D’Angelo Wallace’s latest video was very powerful. You’ve always done such an amazing job standing up for females and calling out in appropriate behavior.
It's very common with legal settlements for the parties to not be allowed to divulge ANY information. What it sounds like is that Twitch thought they caught him doing something but then turns out he wasn't doing whatever they thought he was. But the terms of the legal settlement become: "OK we'll pay you what we promised but in exchange you can't go talking about how we fucked up. Not a word."
I made a comment saying that a bit more in detail! I think that's it too, it happens A LOT when companies mess up, there are a lot of cases with google that are public by now where they rather pay people for them messing up rather than have a public trial so that they can just slap them with an NDA or avoid more issues if it comes to light
@jimmytclem Lol yeah let me just "bend over" and take this large sum of money. What are you talking about?🤣 Reading between the lines of his comment, it's clear he was paid what he was originally owed. Which implies that TWITCH was in the wrong to cancel his contract. If he pursued further legal action he very likely could have gotten more for them breaching his contract but he was content with just getting what was owed to him. Companies don't pay out settlements when they're in the right. Keep that in mind
Yup. The fact that twitch paid him when they parted ways means that Dr Disrespect didn't do anything that would have nulled their contract. Giant companies will do anything possible to get out of having to pay a contract. Trying to hook up with minors would likely be against their terms, and if it was in some form of twitch chat, they'd have logs. Also, a bunch of blue haired, nose ringed journalists miraculously coming out of the woodwork with their "my sources said the same thing too!" all at the same time after years of no one knowing anything? Possible, sure, but its not exactly adding up.
@dannyboy5008 I don't doubt that people have actually heard things. Maybe even from people within Twitch. But it doesn't mean that stuff is accurate. And I don't think any journalists are pushing those things as "fact" but merely "that's something I heard as well, for what it's worth." But yeah people do hear random shit all the time and just run with it. I used to work with a guy who swore up and down that George Lucas "discovered" Harrison Ford on the set of Star Wars while he was doing set building (completely false). And don't forget all the poor souls who legitimately believe the earth is flat...
@@stephenpatterson8056 I thought of this too, I was thinking "The chance is pretty high that some idiot asked, and another idiot answered "Probably minors like many others" and then just ran with it as if it was a fact" or you know, how the quiet mail goes, one end says banana, the other Apple.
Yeah I guess twitch just wanted to ban one of their biggest streamers for no reason and both parties refused to elaborate because it was so unjust. There’s a reason things were kept under wraps and why disrespect was so quiet about it. There are also reasons why this information is being released now, all things can be true at once.
I feel like this a rare L for Charlie. Dudes stating in the past that no one should be guilty until there's proof, then proceeded to lean on doc kinda being in the wrong for not saying he didn't outright do it.. But I feel like if he did, Charlie would of said "why's he even acknowledging it" or something. Idk man. Seems like charlie leaning on already blaming doc without proof as well 🤦
Charlie, you gotta realize that him saying specifically what he did or didn’t do is him breaking the settlement. Because if he is forced to defend himself online by outright denying each and every allegation then people can narrow it down. The safest strategy is to say what he said because it’s nobodies business and he was found to be legally in the right, thus saving the settlement that he has more interest in keeping alive.
Charlie usually has normal and reasonable takes, in this case he just repeated a rumor from Twitter with 0 evidence. Also while Charlie didn't acuse nor defend dr disrespect hes luke warm response is nothing worthy of a video.
@@pendejadas6933 Yeah, idk when Reddit kids suddenly became legal experts but it should seem reasonable to anyone that outright denying any allegations is not allowed by the settlement. This alone just stops the conversation about “oh but he’s not being direct which is shady” no this is just normal legal talk.
its absurd how many dorks are lighting doc up on twitter when ZERO evidence has been presented and not to mention the main accuser is an absolute burnout in his career.
@@ilovecapybaraanimals9411it sounds like somebody who legally can’t speak about the incident of their ban except for the explicit details of the settlement (no wrongdoing)
You pretty much hit the nail on the head. It's also why there is so much tension on social media. When you bring millions of people together there are bound to be ideas clashing and political discourse. Social Media was a mistake and has only giving the overly sensitive fragile vocal minority to sanitize our media like movies and video games because certain words and things "trigger" them.
No someone wasn't accusing him out of bordedom, he was accused by someone with inside knowledge of the situation, turns out that person was right as DrDisrespect admitted it
Sadly no. Not all lawsuits are made public, especially if you settle. Settling the suit usually means that both parties came to an agreement that has significant legal stipulations for both parties. Something like, “Twitch can’t make disparaging remarks against Doc, and must pay out his contract, but does not have to admit to wrongdoing.” Then Doc having restrictions like “can’t discuss X about this case for Y years, and cannot make disparaging remarks against Twitch.” Again, those are common and general elements to settlement-related Non-Disclosure Agreements; I don’t claim to have any insight or knowledge of this particular case
The same thing why so many Chris Hansen's Yautja being let go despite getting caught red handed showing up at the bait house with transcripts of their chat. Remember, he was just texting and "planned" to meet up
“There’s no evidence that he actually did anything wrong and at this time it’s a baseless accusation” Charlie: so let’s drag this guys name through the mud with nonsense speculation
Person A: "Do you touch kids?" Person B: "I am not comfortable answering that question." Person A: "Why wouldn't you just say 'No I don't'?" Person C: "Well we shouldn't judge Person B until we know why he can't answer." Like bro...
I'm pretty sure the confidentiality clause of a settlement is more restrictive than an NDA so they aren't the exact same thing. What you said probably still applies or at least it should but either way we can't treat this as an NDA. Also, I've heard about some pretty intense NDAs and confidentiality agreements, we usually only hear of the more reasonable ones because they are less restrictive.
the one thing that everyone leaves out is that doc would constantly shit on twitch and twitch employees, the person tweeting probably dislikes him and is stirring the pot. and that in my opinion could also be why he was ban. all speculation obviously
The fact that this shit is still going on despite 0 evidence being brought forward is crazy. Like you'd think if the dude was doing shit like this twitch would jump at the chance to prove their justification with a photo or something. If it happened he deserves what's coming to him but I really hate how we can start witch hunts on twitter with 0 evidence. Though Doc's response doesn't help at all.
The fact that there's zero evidence is the better argument. I think it's pretty obvious why twitch wouldn't want to prove publicly that their platform is facilitating something like that, and that their biggest streamer on probably their biggest contract was doing it. That would just be them trashing their own brand.
