Women: Placido Domingo abused his power to sexually harass us

[jserraglio]

Women: 'Placido Domingo abused his power to sexually harass us'

Associated Press Investigative Report

By Jocelyn Geckler

For decades, Placido Domingo, one of the most celebrated and powerful men in opera, has tried to pressure women into sexual relationships by dangling jobs and then sometimes punishing the women professionally when they refused his advances, numerous accusers told The Associated Press.

https://apnews.com/c2d51d690d004992b8cfba3bad827ae9

[lennygoran]

Wow, I wasn't prepared for such a long graphically detailed article. Regards, Len

[maestrob]

Yes, Len, neither was I. Been hearing rumors about Domingo for years, but nothing concrete the way I have about Pavarotti. Frankly, this doesn't surprise me the way I was surprised about Bill Cosby when I first heard of his behavior.

Exposing corruption seems to be all the rage nowadays. Thanks to the brave women who are speaking out. One of them said "How do you say no to God?" I think that sums up the situation nicely. I wonder how Domingo's wife feels about all this?

[jserraglio]

LA TIMES on Domingo @ the LA Opera

https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-a ... d-la-opera

NYT

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/13/arts ... opera.html

"How do you say no to God?"

Hand him an article on toxic masculinity and ask him if he recognizes himself.

[Belle]

Half a dozen 'toxic males' saved the lives of Sydney-siders yesterday when a nutcase wielding a knife went on the rampage in the CBD killing 1 woman and badly injuring another. They held him down with cafe chairs and a milk crate over his head until police arrived. So enough of the politically-motivated epithets!!

Sorry, no use in making historic claims of abuse. It is a denial of the most basic justice in our societies: the presumption of innocence. Away with the witch hunts. BTW, I'm sure my hero Kleiber did much the same. Obviously it worked and there were willing participants. There is nothing "brave" about making allegations unlikely ever to be tested in court. Unless you subscribe to the idea of somebody doing the same to you. I am no fan of this power abuse from anybody but I am a fan of Justice and the rule of law.

[Beckmesser]

Could this mean that we will never see him at the Met again . . . if Peter Gelb handles this the same way he dealt with L'affaire Levine?

[jserraglio]

Sorry, no use in making historic claims of abuse. It is a denial of the most basic justice in our societies: the presumption of innocence.

In other words, if you are attacked, society says you are on your own. If you speak out, you are likely to be "blown off", humiliated all over again, or lose your career. Precisely why many of Domingo's numerous accusers refuse even now to give their names. I suppose, as Domingo claims, they are all "inaccurate".

Nowadays, women who dare to point to specific instances of toxic behavior are said to be making mere "historic claims of abuse", as if there was some sort of statute of limitations on boys behaving badly, or they are even told they are engaging in an hysterical "witch hunt". Twaddle.

[Belle]

Go to the police if you have a case. Using the media to punish is just cheap and a denial of Justice for the perpetrator. And a witch hunt. Let us talk about Mick Jagger and the many hundreds of stars who dealt with female groupies in a sexual way. Not to mention past Democrat Presidents.

Society has courts and won't "blow people off" if they have evidence. The truth hurts: for every male who behaves like this there are willing females. Unless they're doing it alone..?

And take responsibility for the way you interact with others. They'll soon enough respect you if you stand by principles and values. No more excuses and victimhood. Avoid creeps. Of both sexes.

[jserraglio]

Let us talk about Mick Jagger and the many hundreds of stars who dealt with female groupies in a sexual way. Not to mention past Democrat Presidents.

So whataboutism is now in order. A cop pulls me over for speeding and I protest: "Whoa there, officer, what about those dozen other cars you didna stop?" Things have come to a sorry pass indeed when the conduct of a distinguished classical music artist is measured by that of rock stars and politicians.

So far, no one has accused Domingo (or a certain sitting President for that matter) of a crime. Instead, he is said to have abused his authority over female subordinates by imposing his unwelcome toxic impulses on them. I find no "willing females" here.

Domingo is not yet in a court of law where he would be entitled to a presumption of innocence. Serious charges have been made, and the LA Opera has decided today to investigate them further. This is not a investigation of an alleged criminal but of a big boy accused of behaving very badly indeed.

One thing we might agree on though: If a God of classical-music hits on you, you might wanna kick him in the balls.

[Belle]

Aided and abetted by many women who did it "for my career". The statute of limitations is dubious. Faulty memory and unreliable evidence has seen many acquittals. Easier to make untested allegations than bother with pesky courts. We had the Rush case fail here as well as a 40yr case of an Aussie actor. Imposing 2019 values on 1975 is never going to fly, nor should it. Just as people identify bad drivers, everyone knows who the creeps are. Been there, done that. Didn't need nanny to help either.

I wish Arthur Miller was here to write a play about courts punishing men " who behave badly". I'm sure there are far more aspects to that than just sexuality and it intrigues me where all this could land. Who is going to decide the definition of "bad"? Answer: the very last people you'd want to decide!

[jserraglio]

The "witch hunt" trope has been worn out actually, by the POTUS and other celebrities as a way of ridiculing their accusers.

Herd of suggestible females shrieking hysterically about how they were taken advantage of.

It works every time.

[Belle]

A witch hunt is a hunt, not a trope. And it's obvious why folks would disavow it as a witch hunt!! Why would they not feel uncomfortable about hounding people the way McCarthy did? Process exactly the same.

No person of wit needs to knee a sexual aggressor anywhere when a few well chosen words can wound more effectively. Your penultimate line might have come right out of Richardson's "Pamela".

[jserraglio]

right out of Richardson's "Pamela".

I've always preferred George Eliot and Edith Wharton. And currently, Penelope Fitzgerald and Ann Petry.

Sorry, I admit to supposing the classic-music God's anatomy was normal. I forgot. he is a tenor.

[Beckmesser]

The reaction has already started.

[Belle]

The reaction has already started.

What a surprise!! Fortunately for him, Domingo is yesterday's hero.

And my final word on this topic: if you make a pact with the devil don't complain about the devil.

[barney]

Go to the police if you have a case. Using the media to punish is just cheap and a denial of Justice for the perpetrator. And a witch hunt. Let us talk about Mick Jagger and the many hundreds of stars who dealt with female groupies in a sexual way. Not to mention past Democrat Presidents.

Or the current Republican one.

[lennygoran]

Not to mention past Democrat Presidents.

What about our current Republican president? Regards, Len

[lennygoran]

Or the current Republican one.

In the video, Trump tells Billy Bush about a failed attempt to seduce Nancy O'Dell, who was Bush's co-host at the time (circa 2005) of the recording:[9]

I moved on her, and I failed. I'll admit it.

I did try and frig her. She was married.

And I moved on her very heavily. In fact, I took her out furniture shopping. She wanted to get some furniture. I said, "I'll show you where they have some nice furniture." I took her out furniture—I moved on her like a bitch. But I couldn't get there. And she was married. Then all of a sudden I see her, she's now got the big phony tits and everything. She's totally changed her look.[3]

Later, referring to Arianne Zucker (whom they were waiting to meet), Trump says:

I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know I'm automatically attracted to beautiful—I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the ***. You can do anything.[3]

[barney]

I suppose it was quite easy for Domingo (if the allegations are true) to persuade himself there was consent. They weren't likely to say to him, "I do not want to do this, but I realise that if I do not you may ruin my career." So often the powerful tell the exploited the exploitation is for their own good - lie back and enjoy it.

[barney]

I know, Len. America (like any country) has had a cavalcade of deeply unpleasant politicians. But there has never been one I consider so personally vile and intellectually negligible as the incumbent.

[barney]

Joseph Heller wrote a brilliant parody in Good as Gold of Ronald Reagan, who was (in his account) too busy either sleeping or writing his memoirs to actually do any work. I wish Trump would be the same.

[jserraglio]

Fortunately for him, Domingo is yesterday's hero.

Men have minds like moral flypaper. They will forgive a woman almost anything except the loss of her good name. --Edith Wharton, The House of Mirth. But wear their own disgrace almost as a badge of honor.

[jserraglio]

PBS NEWSHOUR

Report suggests Placido Domingo’s sexual impropriety was an ‘open secret’ in opera world

Report includes an on-camera interview with Patricia Wulf who sang at the Washington National Opera in the late 1990s and 2000s: the only one of the accusers so far who has allowed her name to be used.

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/repor ... pera-world

[jserraglio]

Met awaits LA Opera's investigation results before taking action on Domingo.

https://nypost.com/2019/08/13/met-opera ... -case/amp/

[lennygoran]

I suppose it was quite easy for Domingo (if the allegations are true) to persuade himself there was consent. They weren't likely to say to him, "I do not want to do this, but I realise that if I do not you may ruin my career." So often the powerful tell the exploited the exploitation is for their own good - lie back and enjoy it.

Barney wonder if this Met event will now happen-it's coming up pretty soon now! Regards, Len

Soprano Anna Netrebko created a sensation when she made her Met role debut as Lady Macbeth in 2014. Now, she and the legendary Plácido Domingo make history when they join forces for the first time on the stage of the Met, in Verdi’s gripping Shakespeare adaptation. Baritone Željko Lučić, who starred in the 2007 premiere of Adrian Noble’s evocative production, shares the title role with Domingo. Marco Armiliato conducts a cast that also features tenor Matthew Polenzani as Macduff and bass Ildar Abdrazakov as Banquo.

[maestrob]

I have the DVD of Lukic and Netrebko in the original production she starred in: They were both magnificent! I had no interest in seeing Domingo in that or any other baritone role even before this kerfluffle started, and have even less interest now.

Belle: I've been reading your comments above, and the only thing I have to say is that given the toxic environment at the MET during the past few decades, it's only a witch hunt if the allegations aren't true. As someone who was close to the center of things artistic here in NY, I must say your lack of understanding for the young women and men involved is greatly disappointing to me, considering your background in and love for the arts.

New York State has just passed a law doing away with the statute of limitations on sexual harassment, and in my book that's a good thing (See the Epstein case). Sexual harassment has been going on since the beginning of time, and I maintain that given the harm it does in peoples' lives, it must stop. I worked with many young women singers in my studio and NEVER made an inappropriate remark, let alone touched anyone in an uncomfortable way. If I could get good results, why can't other authority figures do the same???

[barney]

I suppose it was quite easy for Domingo (if the allegations are true) to persuade himself there was consent. They weren't likely to say to him, "I do not want to do this, but I realise that if I do not you may ruin my career." So often the powerful tell the exploited the exploitation is for their own good - lie back and enjoy it.

Barney wonder if this Met event will now happen-it's coming up pretty soon now! Regards, Len

Soprano Anna Netrebko created a sensation when she made her Met role debut as Lady Macbeth in 2014. Now, she and the legendary Plácido Domingo make history when they join forces for the first time on the stage of the Met, in Verdi’s gripping Shakespeare adaptation. Baritone Željko Lučić, who starred in the 2007 premiere of Adrian Noble’s evocative production, shares the title role with Domingo. Marco Armiliato conducts a cast that also features tenor Matthew Polenzani as Macduff and bass Ildar Abdrazakov as Banquo.

Perhaps Lucic will do the lot. I've seen him at the Met, and I think he's terrific. I've only seen Domingo in person once, at the Met in 2016, when he played the title role in Simon Boccanegra. Other singers adapted themselves to his fallibilities. There was still some lovely singing, and I'm glad I heard him, but I think Brian is right.

[barney]

I have the DVD of Lukic and Netrebko in the original production she starred in: They were both magnificent! I had no interest in seeing Domingo in that or any other baritone role even before this kerfluffle started, and have even less interest now.

Belle: I've been reading your comments above, and the only thing I have to say is that given the toxic environment at the MET during the past few decades, it's only a witch hunt if the allegations aren't true. As someone who was close to the center of things artistic here in NY, I must say your lack of understanding for the young women and men involved is greatly disappointing to me, considering your background in and love for the arts.

New York State has just passed a law doing away with the statute of limitations on sexual harassment, and in my book that's a good thing (See the Epstein case). Sexual harassment has been going on since the beginning of time, and I maintain that given the harm it does in peoples' lives, it must stop. I worked with many young women singers in my studio and NEVER made an inappropriate remark, let alone touched anyone in an uncomfortable way. If I could get good results, why can't other authority figures do the same???

You are obviously not a predator, Brian. Nor, may I say, am I. Mind you, my short-lived period in charge of many staff (as chief sub-editor) was over journalists, not young singers, and women journalists have personalities every bit as strong as the men. There were a couple of affairs at the paper (not me) involving senior men and more junior women, but there was never any suggestion of anything other than mutual attraction. And that will always be part of the equation.

[lennygoran]

Perhaps Lucic will do the lot. I've seen him at the Met, and I think he's terrific.

We've seen him alot and agree he's wonderful! Regards, Len

[Belle]

I have the DVD of Lukic and Netrebko in the original production she starred in: They were both magnificent! I had no interest in seeing Domingo in that or any other baritone role even before this kerfluffle started, and have even less interest now.

Belle: I've been reading your comments above, and the only thing I have to say is that given the toxic environment at the MET during the past few decades, it's only a witch hunt if the allegations aren't true. As someone who was close to the center of things artistic here in NY, I must say your lack of understanding for the young women and men involved is greatly disappointing to me, considering your background in and love for the arts.

New York State has just passed a law doing away with the statute of limitations on sexual harassment, and in my book that's a good thing (See the Epstein case). Sexual harassment has been going on since the beginning of time, and I maintain that given the harm it does in peoples' lives, it must stop. I worked with many young women singers in my studio and NEVER made an inappropriate remark, let alone touched anyone in an uncomfortable way. If I could get good results, why can't other authority figures do the same???

Firstly, I've worked in the media with the type of men described here and many women wouldn't have a bar of them. But there was also a continual retinue of groupies who'd sleep with them and fawn over them all the time - particularly if they thought there might be a career advantage in it. The same names cropped up all the time. So, I'm fully aware of the culture of sex used as a means of career progression. I'm simply saying men and women have agency and are not hapless victims as is suggested here. There always has been a cohort who'd go along with anything and clearly these men (like Domingo and, yes, Carlos Kleiber) continued doing what they did BECAUSE IT WAS WORKING FOR THEM.

The statute of limitations can be removed but the fact is that evidence after about 10-15 years is very unreliable and unlikely to succeed in a prosecution. We have had cases here in Australia where that has happened very recently. In one case, an Australian actor was accused of rape in, I think, 1978. The woman in question said she shared a house with Jarrett and his (then) wife when the actor came home late one night, drunk, and raped the victim. That she didn't yell out SOMETHING when his wife lay sleeping in another room absolutely beggars belief. The case against Jarrett was dismissed. He probably is sleazy, but the law most provide evidence 'beyond reasonable doubt' about guilt.

And there's a contextual element to historic 'abuses': the era of the late 60s/1970s saw free love and open relationships; in the cultural world that was particularly so. I remember my sister observing at the time, "this must be manna from heaven for males". What sort of message do you think 'free love' gave to men? What is sexual 'harassment' anyway? "Would you like to come up and look at my etchings?". That was the joke during my youth. I worked with a director who was a womanizer par excellence. He was Italian and any time we'd go out on a day's shooting he'd say to me, "watch this". He'd go over to a young, attractive woman with his viewfinder and tell her she could be a model and use this as a seduction scene. They were always enchanted and totally taken in by him. This is a subject I happen to know something about from first hand experience. At the Australian Opera during a rehearsal a well-known tenor took a shine to me; he winked and smiled at me and directed all his jokes in my direction. I merely laughed and ignored him the rest of the time. Just as well I laughed because later his wife invited the whole crew to their house in Balmain for a big feast at the end of the shoot for our documentary!!

The case of minors is criminal and a matter for the police and the responsibility of institutions which enable pedophiles. History will take care of those institutions. I would expect to read any day now about drastic drops in enrolments at those institutions - if they are teaching academies - and significant declines in patronage of they are opera houses or theatres. Sexual abuse of children should never be tolerated and the perpetrators need to rot in jail after trials.

It's not a matter of having no opinion because of "a love of the arts", maestrob. It's about natural justice and, who knows, somebody could accuse any of us on any day and we'll be looking for a similar presumption of innocence.

[jserraglio]

these men ... continued doing what they did BECAUSE IT WAS WORKING FOR THEM.

And when it didn't, they are accused of using their considerable authority to apply pressure and punishment. Elaborate whataboutery is simply a smokescreen to divert attention from that.

[Belle]

Rhetoric.

[jserraglio]

If so, it supports what I see as an uncomfortable truth.

[lennygoran]

Elaborate whataboutery is simply a smokescreen to divert attention from that.

Joseph had to look up whataboutery.

Etymology

what about +‎ -ery Originally used in describing political discourse during the Northern Ireland troubles, it has also found use in discussions of the origins of other prolonged sectarian conflicts, such as the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.Pronunciation

IPA(key): /wɒtəˈbaʊtəɹi/, /wʌt-/

Noun

whataboutery (countable and uncountable, plural whatabouteries) (informal, derogatory)

Protesting at hypocrisy; responding to criticism by accusing one's opponent of similar or worse faults. quotations ▼ Protesting at inconsistency; refusing to act in one instance unless similar action is taken in other similar instances. quotations ▼

I also looked up the HD schedule for the Met and see the Macbeth won't be done at the cinemas-ironically for us we ordered 2 flex subscriptions to get the 10% discount but passed on the Domingo Macbeth because of a time scheduling issue-I admit I really wanted to see how Domingo would handle Macbeth. I wonder if there'll be picketing or a disruption in the opera house if Gelb decides to let Domingo go through with his performances or if he'll find a way to drop him until the matter is investigated more-this is so troubling. Regards, Len

[jserraglio]

Just my opinion, no doubt distorted by firsthand experience.

"Men have minds like moral flypaper.": a vast over-simplification by one of Edith Wharton's less than reliable characters. Still, there is a certain kernel of truth in it.

[maestrob]

Belle:

I mean no disrespect, but not all people are built the same as you. Young men and women may "have agency" as you say, but not all are able to talk or think their way out of a difficult situation, especially when trapped by a predator in a practice room.

'Nuff said.

[Belle]

If so, it supports what I see as an uncomfortable truth.

Looking up the meaning of 'rhetoric'. It doesn't 'support' anything.

[Belle]

Belle:

I mean no disrespect, but not all people are built the same as you. Young men and women may "have agency" as you say, but not all are able to talk or think their way out of a difficult situation, especially when trapped by a predator in a practice room.

'Nuff said.

We cannot have a social system based upon character type; a person is guilty or he/she isn't. Put offenders before the law; that's my argument. Finger-pointing, name-calling and reputational destruction have no place in a modern democracy which is built upon the rule and processes of the law. It's just cheap. This doesn't mean I'm defending predators or creeps. And I know you're not being disrespectful; it's not your style.

I take your point about people not always able to 'talk or think their way out of a difficult situation', but I hardly think opera singers and professional musicians are the shy, retiring type!! You are, I presume, referring to students. See my previous comments about the appropriate treatment for pedophiles.

I've worked in the business world, the media and education. Of all the workplaces the least 'safe' was media (television). It was full of entitled narcissists, and fiercely competitive as well. The business world is renowned for the 'office romance' (no doubt completely verboten in this day and age) but I found it the safest of all three environments. In the university arts faculty there were 3 creeps well known as such - but, again, they had no shortage of defenders and groupies. Many times in life we are forced to speak up; forced to defend ourselves when we would much prefer not to. I've had to do my share of it and pay the consequences. It was a million times better than the alternative. I'd take a deep breath and convince myself it was 'character building'!!

One of the distinguishing features of modern western democracies is the centrality of the individual before the law. At a moment or moments in time they are front and centre in a hugely expensive legal system, given the time, resources and respect which forms part of the judicial system. No matter how heinous the crime, a person in our society is afforded the right to defend him/herself. I have plenty of disagreement with the judicial system and its decision-making, prejudices and partisanship. But it mostly works in terms of individual rights to a fair trial.

[jserraglio]

Looking up the meaning of 'rhetoric'. It doesn't 'support' anything.

Cf. Cicero's Orations against Cataline. A clinic on rhetoric: used profusely there in support of Cicero's argument against those he saw as subverters of the Republic. Or Shakespeare's Marc Antony's rhetoric in defense of Julius Caesar, accused of similar anti-republican ambitions. Or in our own day, Alan Dershowitz's brilliant deployment of a rhetorical device he called "Planet Chomsky" in defense of the state of Israel during a public debate with Noam Chomsky (on YouTube). Rhetoric need not have purely negative connotations.

[barney]

Rhetoric is one of the key themes of my favourite of Plato's Dialogues, the Gorgias. Rhetoric in Athens was one of the essentials of statecraft, and Gorgias was highly expert. But Socrates insists it must serve moral ends. I recommend it - it's relatively short.

[lennygoran]

Or in our own day, Alan Dershowitz's brilliant deployment of a rhetorical device he called "Planet Chomsky" in defense of the state of Israel during a public debate with Noam Chomsky (on YouTube). Rhetoric need not have purely negative connotations.

The way Dershowitz defends Trump sure is negative for me! What Trump and Netanyahu did today was outrageous imo. Regards, Len

[jserraglio]

The way Dershowitz defends Trump sure is negative for me! What Trump and Netanyahu did today was outrageous imo.

One can disagree (as I do) with the purpose served by Dershowitz's rhetorical ploys but still admire their sheer persuasive power. Dershowitz was up against no mean opponent in that debate about the Middle East and won it hands down, due in no small part to his virtuoso use of a 'Chomsky Planet' trope of his own invention to ridicule his opponent's argument.

Jonathan Edwards's 18th-century 'spider' sermon is another celebrated case of rhetoric serving what Edwards, if not Socrates, would've seen as a high moral purpose:

The God that holds you over the Pit of Hell, much as one holds a Spider, or some loathsome Insect, over the Fire, abhors you, and is dreadfully provoked; his Wrath towards you burns like Fire; he looks upon you as worthy of nothing else, but to be cast into the Fire; he is of purer Eyes than to bear to have you in his Sight; you are ten thousand Times so abominable in his Eyes as the most hateful venomous Serpent is in ours. You have offended him infinitely more than ever a stubborn Rebel did his Prince: and yet ‘tis nothing but his Hand that holds you from falling into the Fire every Moment: 'Tis to be ascribed to nothing else, that you did not go to Hell the last Night; that you was suffer’d to awake again in this World, after you closed your Eyes to sleep: and there is no other Reason to be given why you have not dropped into Hell since you arose in the Morning, but that God’s Hand has held you up: There is no other reason to be given why you han’t gone to Hell since you have sat here in the House of God, provoking his pure Eyes by your sinful wicked Manner of attending his solemn Worship: Yea, there is nothing else that is to be given as a Reason why you don’t this very Moment drop down into Hell.

The word 'rhetoric' has gotten a bad rap in contemporary usage. Of course, like any other tool of argument, it is open to abuse. But used skillfully it can also serve to persuade.

[lennygoran]

The word 'rhetoric' has gotten a bad rap in contemporary usage. Of course, like any other tool of argument, it is open to abuse. But used skillfully it can also serve to persuade.

This makes me think of Trump, Hitler, Mussolini. The power of skillful rhetoric to persuade scares me a little-maybe more than a little. Regards, Len

[jserraglio]

Trump mostly uses not pure rhetoric but ad hominem name calling and logical fallacies like tu quoque, e.g.,"You're the puppet!". One rhetorical trope he does like to use during the rallies is praeteritio ("I'm not going to say" what he goes on to say). Other than that I think he finds rhetoric to be a weak sister to naked threat and open intimidation.

[lennygoran]

Trump mostly uses not pure rhetoric but ad hominem name calling and logical fallacies like tu quoque, e.g., "You're the puppet!". One rhetorical trope he does like to use during the rallies is praeteritio ("I'm not going to say . . . etc."). Other than that I think he finds rhetoric to be a weak sister to naked threat and open intimidation.

Joseph well this is all too technical for me-whatever he's using the most important question right now for me is what weapons can be used to defeat him-Beito is back and his new approach seems to be to go right after Trump. Regards, Len

[pianissimo]

Yes, Len, neither was I. Been hearing rumors about Domingo for years, but nothing concrete the way I have about Pavarotti. Frankly, this doesn't surprise me the way I was surprised about Bill Cosby when I first heard of his behavior.

Exposing corruption seems to be all the rage nowadays. Thanks to the brave women who are speaking out. One of them said "How do you say no to God?" I think that sums up the situation nicely. I wonder how Domingo's wife feels about all this?

What did you mean about Pavarotti , please?

[Belle]

This has just been written today in our national daily newspaper by a female doctor of Jurisprudence:

As The Australian reported this week, there are real concerns that NSW crown prosecutors are running sexual assault trials with insufficient regard for the strength of the evidence. One of Sydney’s most prominent criminal lawyers, Greg Walsh, who has acted for alleged victims and defendants, told this newspaper that the “hysteria”, the “zealous” and “activist” prosecutions had “gone too far”. “They (sexual assault cases) are becoming a cause celebre, they are just out of control,” Walsh said.

Lawyer Chris Murphy, another well-known Sydney criminal lawyer, said prosecutors were undoubtedly feeling the potential threat of public condemnation if they didn’t proceed to trial, and go hard in court. It was leading to especially aggressive tactics, Murphy said, with critical evidence being withheld from the defence in some trials.

Murphy cited the recent rape trial of Wolf Creek star John Jarratt, who was acquitted within hours of the jury retiring to consider the verdict. Murphy, who acted for Jarratt, said he had never seen “a more undeserving, weak” crown case go to trial.

[Belle]

The word 'rhetoric' has gotten a bad rap in contemporary usage. Of course, like any other tool of argument, it is open to abuse. But used skillfully it can also serve to persuade.

This makes me think of Trump, Hitler, Mussolini. The power of skillful rhetoric to persuade scares me a little-maybe more than a little. Regards, Len

The word "skillfull" is key here. I taught rhetoric to matriculation students through studying Socrates. There are two definitions provided for "rhetoric"!! The latter is the one to which I was referring:

language designed to have a persuasive or impressive effect, but which is often regarded as lacking in sincerity or meaningful content.

Alan Dershowitz is skillful with rhetoric. He had O.J. Simpson acquitted; he wasn't a toxic male, or anything. The article from The Australian I placed in my previous comments demonstrates that I was wrong about 'fair' trials; even those are now being jeopardized by show trials, heavily biased against the 'defendant' in an age of witch hunting. (My son could tell us all about it with the Australian Family Court.)

Last night I watched "Black Hawk Down" for the very first time. The film deeply disturbed me, not least because those unfortunate and brave soldiers were displaying their 'toxic masculinity'. And 'racism' - as the woman who introduced the film said. I become daily more dismayed by shallow commentary and ignorant epithets.

It's a long way from a discussion about Placido Domingo, but I'm done now.

[jserraglio]

Looking up the meaning of 'rhetoric'. It doesn't 'support' anything.

There are two definitions provided for "rhetoric"!! The latter is the one to which I was referring

And the former, its primary meaning by the way, is the one I was referring to. Rhetoric used in support of one's position. And, like it or not, disagree with its import or not, there's nothing improper about using it.

[lennygoran]

Alan Dershowitz is skillful with rhetoric. He had O.J. Simpson acquitted

Yeah this is the kind of rhetoric that really scares me. Regards, Len