Singer vs Eagan: In defense of Neither

Singer vs Eagan:  In defense of Neither

While this article doesn't really belong on this site, with four out of every five users on here blindly defending either Singer or Eagan, while tossing the facts out the window, I feel this article is necessary.

Editorial Opinion
By RextheKing - Apr 19, 2014 02:04 PM EST
Filed Under: X-Men

Innocent until proven guilty; rings a bell?  It should, because that's how we handle things here in the United States, and for good reason(even in civil cases like this one).  Anyone can file a lawsuit and anyone can make accusations against another person, which means that an accusation made against someone could be false.  When it comes to rape and sexual abuse cases, it's easier to make a false accusation against someone, than it is for the accused to prove his/her innocence.  That's why the facts are important, because those quick to condemn Singer, whether it's because you're homophobic, don't like his films, or you take rape/sexual abuse cases to heart, due to personal experience, are possibly campaigning for someone to be punished for a crime he may have not even committed.

The facts are, is that there isn't any, not on Eagan's side at least.  Right now, these accusations against Singer, are just accusations; there are no sufficent evidence, as of now, to back them.  This doesn't mean Eagan is a liar though, which is why people should not be attacking him.  What is a fact, is that Singer's name was not brought up in the original case back in 2000, and Singer claims to have new evidence putting him no where near Hawaii during the alleged sexual abuse.  Still as of now, Singer could be guilty, but he could be innocent too, so attacking him is just as wrong as attacking Eagan.  All of this is why I stand by allowing the accused anonymity in cases like these, because if Singer is innocent, he deserve to not have this ruin the rest of his life, and if he's guilty, he's the only one that should be punished.  Allowing anonymity would help with that, for example:  The upcoming X-men DOFP,  wouldn't take a hit, or at least as big of a hit, because you wouldn't have all of this boycotting over one person associated with the film.  It's not fair to the studio, cast, and crew of the film, to be punished over one man's actions.

Bottom line, if this case were to be settle right now, the right thing to do is allow Singer his innocence, without calling Eagan a liar.  Doing so doesn't mean he isn't guilty, and doing so doesn't mean he's isn't innocent, doing so means you're giving him the respect anyone deserves in a case like this, because Singer, as of now, is innocent until sufficient evidence proves him guilty, if any exist.

X-MEN Star James Marsden On Returning As Cyclops For AVENGERS: DOOMSDAY: These Worlds Are Ready To Collide
Related:

X-MEN Star James Marsden On Returning As Cyclops For AVENGERS: DOOMSDAY: "These Worlds Are Ready To Collide"

DAREDEVIL: BORN AGAIN Star Charlie Cox Reveals Which AVENGERS Team He'd Like The Man Without Fear To Join
Recommended For You:

DAREDEVIL: BORN AGAIN Star Charlie Cox Reveals Which AVENGERS Team He'd Like The Man Without Fear To Join

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

CherryBomb
CherryBomb - 4/19/2014, 2:58 PM
This isn't a criminal case, this is civil, it's purely for money's sake.
Singer will more than likely settle (especially considering it's a small amount for the alleged abuse and time that Eagan has received). But settling doesn't mean guilty. Only if he is convicted does it mean guilt.

It's a terrible situation. If he did it believe me I want him crucified but there's just as much chance that he's innocent
And we should all think in the "innocent until proven guilty" mindset because I've seen allegations like this ruin lives even though a person was acquitted.
RextheKing
RextheKing - 4/19/2014, 3:07 PM
@Cherry Yeah I know it's a civil case, going to edit it to make it clear.
Tainted87
Tainted87 - 4/19/2014, 3:24 PM
The one and only time I've ever been selected for Jury Duty, I get put on this month-long (anticipated) case. The criminal (he was already found guilty years ago, but they wanted to revisit the sentence) was a white male in his late 30s/early 40s, convicted of assault, battery, kidnapping, rape, first-degree murder, grand theft auto, destruction of property, and public endangerment.
The story goes that he hijacked a middle-aged Asian woman (a grandmother), beat her, raped her, killed her, and burned her body in her own car, which he parked in a church parking lot.
He was serving life already, but the sentence wanted from the prosecuting attorneys was the death penalty.

There was no evidence for me to see. The criminal was on the other side of the courtroom the entire time, well-groomed in a dress suit, occasionally looking to see what was going on, but didn't seem particularly interested. The potential jurors all had one thing in common - they were willing to do or say anything to get off the case. No one, not one of us, wanted to be the deciding factor, even for that bastard. I got myself dismissed because I told them I couldn't remain neutral and objective because a family member of mine had been raped in the past.

With Bryan Singer - I want it to be over. I don't like hearing about it, I don't like the possibility that the director of movies I enjoyed could be a rapist, yet, I don't feel any kind of loyalty to him that would make me wish he was innocent for his benefit.
RextheKing
RextheKing - 4/19/2014, 3:26 PM
@BlackJack I hope not, I only made mines because I notice in these past couple days, only one editorial has been made related to the topic, so I figured it would be safe to make one myself without sparking hundreds of other ones.
wookiefit
wookiefit - 4/19/2014, 3:41 PM
@ Tainted

I thought you looked familiar from across the room.
Odin
Odin - 4/19/2014, 3:58 PM
Other Comic Book Movie sites don't even offically news about this matter, in here users are writing editiorals about this (hopefully this will be the only one). That being said my opinion is simple; innocent until proven guilty, and so far I have only seen evidence that point to Singer being not guilty.
PAF
PAF - 4/19/2014, 7:05 PM
WorstUserNameEver
WorstUserNameEver - 4/20/2014, 2:52 AM
All they have to do is show that picture of Singer dressed as a Catholic priest surrounded by three male youths...

9 out of 10 members of the public would find him guilty.
SpiderRock33
SpiderRock33 - 4/21/2014, 6:10 PM
@fullmetal So Butt Buddies ruin movies. Got it.
View Recorder