Wow
You wanna know what I hate?
The fact that everything that showed he was innocent, was basically contorted into proving he was an abuser.
She texts him sorry for instigating? "Well victims say that a lot."
She says on the stand that he never hit her before the March incident? "Well victims sometimes protect their abusers".
He's putting her in the car to get away from her? "He violently threw into the car".
He literally RUNS AWAY FROM HER? "Victims sometimes chase after their abusers as a form of reactive abuse".
Driver witness says he didn't see him hit her, and that she was more aggressive? "The driver didn't know/may have been paid off".
People at the club literally say she seemed fine, didn't see any bruises? Crickets.
It's like no matter what, he was already the abuser to some people.
And the worst part is that if things were flipped around, NONE of them would paint him as possibly being a victim.
You're right, if it was reversed no one would see him as a victim...
None of the things you showed prove innocence though, and thats the thing, if you're in a situation where nothing proves innocence
or guilt, you're as good as guilty anyway...
The thing is . U can’t put u and him in the same boat because number one. There’s no evidence of that whatsoever. And number 2. U don’t know him behind closed doors. All u know is what has been presented. Which is that he was dating a lying crazy alcoholic drug addict white bytch who parties too much for her own good. And got jammed up by trying to grab his phone back and get away from her.
You're right that in a sense I can't put us in the same boat, because I had an even harder road to get the charges off me. He came with an esteem, a previously unblemished public image, and longer money...
I walked into it with much less money, a felonious background of almost entirely violent crimes, and the threat of The bytch if I went to trial...
You know what was similar, though?
There was no evidence that I did anything to this woman. She had red marks on her neck that were unproven to have come from me, as it was only she, I, and our daughters present. I had scratch wounds on my neck and arms and a ripped shirt (all that came before choked her), wasn't viewed as defensible at all...
I'm trying to tell you brothers how this shyt goes...
If photo evidence that she had red marks on her neck, with no other wounds, was admissible, should've been admissible that I had visible wounds and a shirt ripped in half. It wasn't, though, and I specifically was assigned a DA who was "tough on domestic violence", high ass conviction rate...
No video that showed any altercation between her and I, no text messages of me telling her to lie about her wounds, no witnesses to ANY conflict ever with her and I, nothing...
And yet I was backed into a corner I had to accept a plea (2 years probation, restitution, restraining order, limited visitation with my girls, domestic classes, 2 years suspended), or go to a trial I knew I couldn't win and take 10+. And yes, I hired and paid for my own attorney...
I fought my case because the story she presented isn't what actually happened---->that I went haywire after finding her talking to another man and beat her up. That she never assaulted me, nothing...
Another similarity is that my oldest kids' mother is white-passing (she is similar in appearance to Mariah, just with dark brownish-black hair). She was listed as white on the initial police report, and if that worked against someone like Majors with pristine image previously, I guess it had to work against me, a nobody with a terrible image in the eyes of The Law. That a black man beat on this "white" woman...
You're right dog, lot of differences, a few similarities, but one thing I know is this. I've dated women, including afterwards with the mother of my youngest daughter, and women befire my first BM, that I didn't run into any conflict that even borders this kind of catastrophe. Which is why I'm placing the onus on the man here, not only can he choose better but he could behave better should a situation arise...
She took his phone. You're Jonathan Majors, rising Hollywood star. Call that shyt a fukking loss and peel out, is that shyt worth getting into any kind of tussle about? You and I can afford a new phone, we know this nikka could've...
Not to mention the text messages and recorded audio, none of this shyt looks good on him----->nor the ex-girlfriends who later came out to say that he was abusive with them too...
So while I don't think he's "innocent" in the purest sense of the word, even if he is, it's on him to avoid these situations or be more responsible on the off chance some random crazy shyt happens to him...
And again, maybe unlike some guys here, I've got the backdrop of having to fight a DV case to give a reasonable take on---->not just what I wish were true...
So my question is, as it has been from the very beginning, what is a man supposed to do in the eyes of the law? If you’re in a vehicle with a woman and she snatches your phone out of your hands and then decides she wants to get physical. What course of action is supposed to be acceptable?
Have the car pulled over, like he did, and get out. Once you decide to "restrain" her it can go any kind of way, and no, I don't think a man should let her hit him repeatedly (been there, the women who tend do that will look at you as a bytch). But you can't do anything other than let her have it, have the car pulled over, and hop out...
No tussle over the phone, no putting her back in the car, leave her the fukk alone. Is it easier said than done, yes, I've been there. It's really not worth the cost to do otherwise--->the financial cost, emotional cost, and damage to your reputation. And if you're like me, 45 days of zero contact with your kids, followed up by 365 days of partial visitation...
It's not worth the cost, let her keep the gotdamn phone and if you know the chick you with is prone to aggression when she's drunk and/or angry, maybe you should think about twice cheating on her, or going out with her and yall aren't in a good place...