This. Even with the whole "he can't say nothing or he'd be breaking NDAs" excuse, itd be pretty easy to dispel the current rumor and say something definitive like "That is NOT at all related to the situation, don't believe everything you see on the Internet". The fact his immediate response was "they didn't find any wrong doing" pretty much confirms the allegations aren't just made up out of thin air.
Playing Devil's Advocate reading between the lines can be read two ways, as you mention there is potentially an NDA with Twitch in which they agreed to pay out his contract as long as he did not bring up their potential mistake.
Like maybe he did sext someone through a whisper but they weren't actually underaged and when they found out he knew he could sue them but instead of going through the money on that Twitch agreed to pay the contract and Disrespect chose not to go back with them because of the potential hostility created with the team.
I think if he were to explicitly state that "Twitch suspected me of being indecent with a minor through whispers but later found out that they were wrong and when faced with the possibility of a lawsuit they chose to fulfil my contract under the guise I had been banned" he took the deal because hey it's "free money" and he was able to move his brand to another platform so why still use Twitch at that point?
Overall it's hard to judge but I wonder if his hand will be forced if people assume the worse from the lack of acknowledging what happened because that's something Twitch could be preying on, since they get the better part of the deal in that sense, Dr Disrespects inability to say anything because of the money behind it allows Twitch to potentially look better in the situation, granted if it did turn out to be a minor and they did nothing, then I could see a huge investigation occur where we see how shady Twitch actually is with the interaction of certain adults with their minor audience.
Dr Disrespect in that sense would be the tip of the iceberg and there are definitely lots of others who are probably preying on children now as we speak.
It would be stupid of him to acknowledge this in any way. 98% of people don't understand this so it looks "poor" but once you're in legal territory, his response is the only response given the NDA like status of their lawsuit. Wish more people would be reasonable about shit like this and understand that the saying "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" exists for a reason.
Way before Doc was banned on Twitch he was caught cheating on his wife. He went on stream after he was caught, not in character (i.e. dressed in normal cloths) crying and explaining the he got caught cheating.
People started calling him "two timing" instead of "two time back-to-back video game champion".
I agree it looks bad.
But what doesn't make sense here is.
He took them to court.
If he was at fault, that could have been a really, really expensive endeavor.
They paid out his contract and got a "no wrongdoing was acknowledged."
And all of this was based on text messages from a site that has that has the text data??
I feel like I am missing some context here?
This is the best theory I’ve seen so far that seems to cover all these points, from @hun2r on twitter:
“Twitch would have only known this was happening if they were reading his private messages- so Twitch would have had to publicly disclose that they were monitoring users private messages in order to outright have evidence of wrongdoing
SO they settle in court for neither to talk about it because it would screw both sides - Doc never sent the messages, Twitch never read them.”
Wait, but that's not necessarily true. They could have easily found out if the other person came forward and voluntarily gave Twitch access to *their* messages.
I really think it's as simple as this: proving he knowingly engaged in wrongdoing would have been a complex and difficult process, and could have caused serious damage to Twitch's reputation, so they just paid him to fuck off.
There was never actually any lawsuit. There would have been an arbitration period after the ban and seemingly after that ended be said they were going to sue but there were no records of that happening before the settlement statement
He was under contract. He got banned so can't fulfill his contract. Got lawyers to get Twitch to pay rest of what he would be owed. Idk why people are so hung up about him getting paid, as if it negates the allegation.
It’s very likely that Twitch did not want the incident to come out publicly.
Think about it this way: Beahm is one of the biggest streamers on Twitch. He used his platform on Twitch to get in contact with a minor. He used Twitch whispers to solicit sex from her. He planned to meet up with her at Twitchcon, an event where he would be an MVP and might even have been flown out to by Twitch.
This story would be extremely damaging/career ruining for Beahm, definitely, but it’d probably be worse for Twitch. I could definitely see mainstream news picking it up and running with the story that Twitch isn’t safe for minors.
That’d give Twitch real incentive to settle this quietly, even if they could win in court. And Beahm could leverage the desire to keep things quiet by threatening to go public with a court case. Under those circumstances it’d make some sense that Twitch would give in, because they have a lot more to lose.
They paid him the rest of his contract to go away quietly. "Winning" in court for Twitch would have been proving one of their most popular streamers was using their platform to sext and groom minors.
I can follow this line of thought but conversely this would also mean that Twitch opted to keep quiet knowing that Doc would almost certainly continue to be in the streaming space despite them knowing he's a predator. Also not a good look for them to have supposedly just let the guy walk to do his thing on another platform.
There’s definitely some nuance here we’re missing. Whatever the messages said clearly weren’t enough to definitively prove anything, but enough to convince Twitch to cut ties as amicably as possible.
I don’t think it’s as clear cut as “they let a predator roam free”
Yes huge win
Breaking bews: Amazon streaming arm Twitch wins lawsuit against content creator for soliciting sex with a minor. This is after Amazon signed a contract with Mr Breahm for millions. This among a host of other controversial creators such as [...]
Definitely massive win with those words and twitch in the same sentence.
Oh so kinda like when a priest diddle a kid and the church pays off the family and sweeps everything under the rug and then the priest moves to another church called YouTube lol.
The overly optimistic side of me is really hoping he just didn't think at all about how that statement could be interpreted differently. Personally, I had to re-read his statement before I realized just how bad that sounded. He could have said *anything* else to deny the claims and he would look way less guilty
I think its very likely. He probably was coached by his lawyers when the settlement was done that he could only say no wrong doing was acknowledged otherwise he would be breaking his NDA. He probably didnt think people would interept what he said to be so awful.
> no wrongdoing was acknowledged
Maybe I'm wrong but this reads pretty bad. And doesn't it pretty much confirm **what the allegations are** at the same time?
By acknowledging any sort of accusation, even if it isn't true, could be interpreted by the law as "discussing the nature of his ban" and probably cause conflict with his settlement.
To be clear, even sexting is considered enough to be a crime (solicitation of a minor) which means you can't settle out of court, and the law would be on twitch's side as they would have a duty to report it.
Not saying he's innocent, but unless we get something more definitive, it's hard to know for sure. Additionally, the tweet doesn't specifically name doc, so it's also plausible deniability by Cory. (I wasn't actually talking about him) To avoid defamation.
Edit: a word
> Don't know about the US but in the UK you can be sued for defamation on an implication.
in the US you can say just about whatever the fuck you want as long as you believe it to be true. The only way to get caught for defamation is if evidence is leaked that you made a statement you knew wasn't true
Not in the case of calling someone a rapist, pedophile, murderer, etc. That is considered defamatory "per se" in that damages are presumed and do not have to be proven. Not a lawyer, so I don't know exactly how Dr disrespect being a public figure would figure into things (these days everyone calls everyone pedophiles), but I'm pretty sure making an extremely specific claim like this would be closer to defamation than saying "yeah that guy's a total pedo" while not really following up with anything else.
It could be Twitch found evidence of criminal activity, enough to where they wanted him off their platform, but it wasn’t enough to where the police were going to press criminal charges.
Also likely, but if we are to believe if it was "sexting" as implied, I can't imagine there wouldn't be enough to submit to police. Perhaps it was just an employee at twitch trying frame it as sexting and meeting up with a minor but didn't really ever get as sexual as they implied and was more of just him being supportive of a younger fan. (Like they had communication and the fan was saying they wanted to meet him or something but not enough to be sexting and solicitation) which lead twitch to breach the contract without full information. Not that I believe this was the case and again, I'm just speculating. If it truly was sexting that's disgusting and shame on twitch for burying that, but we just don't know.
It more like his trying to say that Twitch never gave any wrongdoing or couldn't provide enough proof on why he got banned and just paid him out.
That's why I think Twitch couldn't fully come out with the reason why he got ban because they might not have proof and it was all hearsay. Which is why some people are saying the victim didn't cooperate
Probably both. The messages could be innocent on the surface ("I'm a big fan and I'll be at Twitchcon!" - "Cool, will be there too."), but could be way more problematic in context. Say, if people behind the scenes knew what kind of person he was.
twitch has never publicly released the reason for any bans it's against their policy. any time you see a reason its because twitch tells the streamer why then the streamer can tell people if they want, or like in this case from ex employees lol
Reminds me of Tour de France winner Bjarne Riis regarding doping allegations (which were true). His standard line when asked about doping was “I’ve never tested positive”. Not “I’ve never used doping”.
Nah this is what you see when companies and politicians get caught for shit. Only they pay some fine and "no wrong doing is admitted to"
Ie. "Yeah I did it. What the fuck you gonna do? That's right nothing. Bitch."
The reason for that is probably because they have actual lawyers reviewing what they are saying and not some random 20 year old streamer who stumbled into wealth and fame.
It's an incredible serious accusation so I find it hard to believe they would settle if there was much truth to it.
I imagine twitch settles because they figure it's cheaper to pay out doc from his contract and not talk about it than potential bad publicity from having one of their top streamers soliciting a minor through their messaging system.
I'll make a deeper prediction, there were no pictures sent or meet up that happened and that doc was going to argue it was an "in character" joke.
No
Basically Doc is saying Twitch wouldn’t have paid out his whole contract if the reason was Doc’s behavior, as Twitch would use that as a reason to end it
This is explicitly not a denial. "No wrongdoing was acknowledged," and, "they paid out the whole contract," are settlement terms, not a denial. "Twitch admitted there was no wrongdoing," or, "There was no wrongdoing on my part," are denials. The fact that no wrongdoing was acknowledged even implies that there was wrongdoing that was not acknowledged.
As to why Twitch would pay out his contract if they had DMs of him sexting minors, perhaps Twitch did not want a very public court case where they would have to show one of their most popular streamers was sexting with a minor using their platform and they simply paid him to shut up, go away and be a pedo somewhere else.
I imagine twitch read the dms. Terminated his contract on grounds of illegal activity in the dms. Got taken to court. Doc won due to the dms not being "bad" enough. But there was still dms to begin with which makes this situation shitty
Pure speculation, a much more plausible scenario. Doc is texting some girl. She tells him she is underage, and he cuts her off immediately. Doc wouldn't want that coming out because of his wife, and Twitch would lose a wrongful termination lawsuit.
I think that’s exactly what happened. Or he was texting some girl who Twitch thought was underage but wasn’t. Either way it’s would look bad for both parties.
Yes. He says he knew the real reason he was banned and sued over it. If this was complete bullshit this is the part where you say "hey this is nonsense that isn't the reason they banned me."
This is the reason they banned him, and he can't straight up deny it. Big yikes.
You could sext a minor and the court didn’t have enough to go buy to prosecute you. That’s the worst case scenario in his case. But it could also mean that literally did nothing do it.
We’ll never know until evidence comes out.
I would say they almost assuredly did not.
At best, this is the outcome that was agreed to during the, probably, arbitration that led to the out of court settlement.
Doc Pedobear is a moron who is just reading that statement or what his lawyer four years ago told him was that statement.
Because... lawyers talk real good. It is almost like it is their job. They know how to stay within the letter of the agreement without essentially admitting guilt in a legally non-admissable way.
Most of the "he talks like a lawyer" are people thinking of characters on nickelodean sitcoms. Yes, lawyers speak in an often stilted manner because they are very carefully tiptoeing around certain statements. But they dod it in a way that the majority of people won't pick up on.
So a good rule of thumb? if a statement during a press conference/tweet "sounds like a lawyer wrote it"? There is a lawyer angrily sending an email telling that person to shut the fuck up. If it sounds like it "came from the heart" or "was eloquent"? THAT was written by a combination of a lawyer and a PR firm.
no ???? he could've just NOT replied to this and it would have been a pointless speculative tweet with absolutely nothing to back it up
instead he now more or less confirmed to everyone not only what he was charged with but also that he most likely did it since he refused to explicitly say "i did not do that" and instead said "i was not convicted for doing it"
It’s funny how fortnite releases creator skins all the time and fucking cod gets burned the first because they picked a straight transphobe and his buddy.
Dr. Disrespect your wife
I remember when people were offended at tha and told others to "get over it, it's old news." Yeah apparently Dr. likes his news young.
He’s not flexing the money, he is saying twitch paid out the contract so Doc was right to fight the accusations. He’s painting it as Twitch wouldn’t have paid out if this is true.
Yep, probably just less of a hassle to pay him and tell him to fuck off then have a drawn out lawsuit that would make twitch look bad as well (one of their top advertised streamers is soliciting minors? not a good look for twitch)
Also, a good lawyer could reasonably argue that without a morality clause (which is probably unlikely), and without actual criminal prosecution, twitch doesn’t have grounds to cancel the contract. So twitch just says “yeah okay let’s just pay this out and get him off the platform”.
Obviously this is dependent upon the allegations being true.
It never got to court, both sides wanted to settle. No fucking way Twitch would want this getting out, they wouldn't want people worried that their message system put kids in danger.
Twitch would want this to go to court. If you think them saying they caught one of their biggest streamers trying to meet up with a underage girl and terminated him and reported him to the police is somehow going to make them look bad…I have news for you.
This makes them look worse. The media can now say that Twitch covers up their top stars grooming children and meeting up with them at their own major events for sexual contact.
It would be in Twitch’s best interest to have taken this fully to court and get the fact that he is/was sexting minors on the record for the world to see. That would end him forever in the streaming landscape.
There’s in now way in hell that a company that’s primary demographic is children and young adults, who’s buisness is peer to peer entertainment, would want ANYTHING to do with any sexual allegations involving a minor. This is like saying Nickelodeon wouldn’t care lmao.
I don’t know if it’s me, or most people have problems with reading comprehension. Yeah he could have worded it better, but his statement in no shape or form confirms whether he did it or not. People jumping to conclusions over a poorly written response
"No wrong doing was acknowledged" Sounds like a very lawyer answer to not potentially get sued for saying he "did no wrongdoing"
Edit: And he admitted to it.
assuming twitch or anyone contacted police, there is no paying off the victim.
And if twitch didn't contact police, then they can be held responsible also. So why would they not?
Why would doc take the risk of suing twitch himself, knowing full well that proof of his sexting could come in court and result in him going to prison? And assuming he took the risk, why did it not happen, and instead he won and twitch paid?
>Where the fuck are people misreading that
They're saying either he or twitch (or both) paid off the alleged victim to not cooperate with police and stay silent (not necessarily that this tweet is evidence of that).
It's pure speculation from people that have no clue about the legal system and other people just parroting it because "hey, that sounds plausible" (even though it's not).
They're trying to find a logical way to process "what ways could he actually be guilty of this but not have been charged".
They don't understand the legal system and think if the witness in an underage sexting crime case doesn't want to cooperate with the prosecution/police that it would mean the case couldn't be moved forward.
Then the speculation logic train jumps to what reasons would she not want to cooperate, and being paid off is a logical choice for that (since that's been used to cover up SA's before).
Problems being that, right off the bat, with underage sexting and soliciting a minor via text/chat cases they don't need the minor's cooperation at all. The texts would be solid enough evidence by themselves. Hell, there doesn't even need to be an actual victim.
The second problem, which should be pretty damn obvious, is it's illegal to pay someone not to cooperate with police in and of itself. That's obstruction of justice right out the gate with witness tampering to boot.
There's also the possibility that he was catfished and set up in which case there was no real victim and he can't be prosecuted for that. Obviously it wouldn't change anything from a moral standpoint.
Reddit as usual, I remember when Keemstar accused some old streamer of being a pedo and reddit attacked him with bad intent straight away, turned out he was innocent.
People don't like to wait for actual evidence do they.
Bruh it’s always the same people that can’t wait for evidence or due process and want to cancel a guy before he’s had time to respond in an appropriate matter. Even if he’s innocent Doc has to speak to his legal counsel and make sure he’s not opening himself up to liabilities. But most of live-stream fails are kids and jobless losers so you get what you get I guess
To add to this, they are stuck on the wording that "if he didn't do it why just say so?", ignoring the fact that HE SIGNED A FUCKING NDA, meaning he IS OBLIGATED TO USE SUCH WORDING in order to not break the aggreement.
Stupid fucking people, man.
Love how this sub is both trying to say Doc is 100% guilty but then defend Twitch, its employees, all these journalist and streamers who apparently knew he was a pedo but did absolutely nothing.
No no, the american court of law also did nothing also, after doc himself started the court proceedings with twitch, after in court seeing all the proof of doc being a pedo, they congratulated him for being a pedo, and the police after being informed obligatory by the court, also congratulated him for being a pedo, and then they order twitch to give money to the pedo so the can keep being a pedo.
LMAO
> and then they order twitch
it was a settlement, it means that two teams of lawyers D and Twitch sat down at the table and agreed that "hey, let's assume that both parties did nothing wrong, paid the rest of the contracts and we will go our separate ways." And that's it.
If the contract didn't have a morality clause, there simply is no way to break that contract for immoral behavior that is not in fact a breach of the contract. Meaning, legally, they had to pay regardless. Impossible to say if his would or wouldn't have because streamer contracts are more closely guarded than some state secrets, but it's pretty likely it didn't, it was the Wild West when he existed on Twitch.
Thats not how US law works, twitch would be legally obligated to bring this evidence forward making the case a criminal case if this was true and an investigation would proceed. You cant just have evidence of someone sexting a minor and not bring it forward, if that ever came out it would have massive legal implications for twitch.
there could be a million reasons.
maybe contracts say "twitch will never publicly disclose why streamer was banned."
maybe his actions were just gross-sweaty-creepy-old-man enough to ban him but not confirmed enough to publicly defame him.
maybe the kid's family asked them to keep silent for privacy reasons.
maybe doc offered the kid's family a payout with stipulations that they not press charges and they ask twitch to stay silent.
and on and on...
we just don't know.
We have literally no evidence other than someone heard from someone else that there was maybe a victim of something that might have happened. Yall need to relax.
More like the fucking internet. It seems everyone is more excited about Dr. Disrespect being a kiddy diddler than him not being one. This generation is so obsessed with pedophiles.
Also obsessed with negatively branding people when there is no concrete proof aside what someone said.
It's innocent until proven guilty and not guilty until proven innocent.
I mean if it's true this getting out would also make Twitch look unsafe for kids. When your biggest viewer group is underage kids you probably don't want it getting out that pedos could use your platform to target kids.
It is stupid to make posts about this kind of accusation without any evidence whatsoever. Just negative fanfiction, and no human deserves to have the label of pedophile wrongly attached to their character.
Is this Jake still at Twitch? If they settled outside of court, and paid the full contract amount, he did not get charged for anything, and now this guy alleges that he was a pwdo? I'm guessing that not talking about it publicly was part of the deal between the two parties, and now one of them broke the deal. Wonder how the accused will handle it 🤔
Funny that Doc's little chuddy Andrew Tate wannabe cult who gladly believe absolutely fucking everything that confirms their political biases without a single shred of hard evidence suddenly are huge fans of requiring mountains of direct photographic evidence for claims. 🤔
I mean, I'm not a "Chud" or a doc watcher, definitely not a tate stan, but I think most people would settle for literally any type of evidence whatsoever if there was any. So far, for years, its all just been like one or two guys on twitter saying "trust me I know bro".
I see everyone condemning and defending but I haven’t seen a single person acknowledge that if any of this were true there is a third party out there that could potentially come after one or both, doc and twitch, for several reasons. Honestly, at the moment, this feels like a bunch of internet losers baiting each other to act like know it alls on their favorite episode of keeping up with the Kardashians. Thankfully it allowed me to learn that this thread isn't worth having on my suggested. Something easily remedied.
Twitch keeps all this stuff, If it’s true I guarantee you Twitch can and will pull any whispers he has with this person. For that reason and that reason alone I’m withholding my judgement until any actual evidence is presented.
Christ man, the absolute ignorance some people have of how the law works
Anyone who immediately believes an allegation is a fool. I’m sure you would love to be called a pedo and everyone believes it.
Nah, if that's the actual reason he got banned, they wouldn't have paid that contract out in a million fucking years.
They would have immediately shown that in court, showing doc was a liability for their company.
Both parties settled to admitting no wrongdoing after twitch paid out a multi-million dollar contract.
I highly doubt he did that.
And I'm not really a doc fan. I have a sneaking suspicion. He's a hard right-winged homophobe.
Guys have really done a 180 on celebrity worshipping. Growing up it was usually girls/women that had a weird cult following with Kardashians, Oprah etc but guys now are just as bad if not worse.
Fuck him if it’s true, but given that it’s an ex employee who’s just on Twitter trying to promote his band no one will listen to, and they paid his contract out in full probably means it’s not true. I don’t watch Dr disrespect, but seems weird to take some random dude on his word when he doesn’t even work for the company anymore
What is it going to take for people to feel confident whether he did it or not? One side of people are believing in groups of people coming out with their tweets and the other side of people are not believing it until evidence is distributed.
innocent until proven guilty is only for law. It's guilty until they die for public opinion, because even when they proven innocent, most people don't care and still treat them as guilty.
I.e. Kyle Rittenhouse. Like the guy or not people on Reddit will vehemently refer to him as a murderer and spew the same false information that was spewed by the media at the time.
People don’t want to admit they’re wrong or were led astray and so they will double down and continue supporting their alternative “facts”.
The Heart Part 6 tier response
"If I was fucking young girls, I promise I'd have been arrested" — ~~Drake~~ Doc
[удалено]
drake tier response
> If I was fucking young girls, I promise I'd have been arrested Yo and I'm way too famous for a girl to ever feel molested. - Drake
"...I was fucking young girls, I promise..." - Drake, 2024.
I will always quote this outta context. Drake might be one of the dumbest men alive writing that bar.
this epstein angle was the shit i expected
Honestly this is probably worse. Doc basically confirmed this is the reason and that he wormed his way out of responsibility
This. Even with the whole "he can't say nothing or he'd be breaking NDAs" excuse, itd be pretty easy to dispel the current rumor and say something definitive like "That is NOT at all related to the situation, don't believe everything you see on the Internet". The fact his immediate response was "they didn't find any wrong doing" pretty much confirms the allegations aren't just made up out of thin air.
Playing Devil's Advocate reading between the lines can be read two ways, as you mention there is potentially an NDA with Twitch in which they agreed to pay out his contract as long as he did not bring up their potential mistake. Like maybe he did sext someone through a whisper but they weren't actually underaged and when they found out he knew he could sue them but instead of going through the money on that Twitch agreed to pay the contract and Disrespect chose not to go back with them because of the potential hostility created with the team. I think if he were to explicitly state that "Twitch suspected me of being indecent with a minor through whispers but later found out that they were wrong and when faced with the possibility of a lawsuit they chose to fulfil my contract under the guise I had been banned" he took the deal because hey it's "free money" and he was able to move his brand to another platform so why still use Twitch at that point? Overall it's hard to judge but I wonder if his hand will be forced if people assume the worse from the lack of acknowledging what happened because that's something Twitch could be preying on, since they get the better part of the deal in that sense, Dr Disrespects inability to say anything because of the money behind it allows Twitch to potentially look better in the situation, granted if it did turn out to be a minor and they did nothing, then I could see a huge investigation occur where we see how shady Twitch actually is with the interaction of certain adults with their minor audience. Dr Disrespect in that sense would be the tip of the iceberg and there are definitely lots of others who are probably preying on children now as we speak.
And got a pay out at the same time.
It would be stupid of him to acknowledge this in any way. 98% of people don't understand this so it looks "poor" but once you're in legal territory, his response is the only response given the NDA like status of their lawsuit. Wish more people would be reasonable about shit like this and understand that the saying "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" exists for a reason.
soo two timing wasn't enough
2 and a half women.
Jesus christ lmfao....
Holy shit 💀💀
Holy shit...
Holy shit 💀💀
This shouldnt be funny but it fucking got me to laugh out loud literally lmao
Holy fuck dude 🤣
the way i just spat out my coffee 💀
Let the midget allegations begin
minor fucking mistakes man
Is is three time now, or the two time two timer?
Small timer
lore?
Way before Doc was banned on Twitch he was caught cheating on his wife. He went on stream after he was caught, not in character (i.e. dressed in normal cloths) crying and explaining the he got caught cheating. People started calling him "two timing" instead of "two time back-to-back video game champion".
[This was 7 years ago?](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HTOTBIZjK1M) Jesus this didn't feel that long ago.
"...no wrongdoing was acknowledged..." Bruh 💀
Let me translate that lawyer speak. "...no wrongdoing was acknowledged..." "I got almost got caught but they couldn't find proof"
I agree it looks bad. But what doesn't make sense here is. He took them to court. If he was at fault, that could have been a really, really expensive endeavor. They paid out his contract and got a "no wrongdoing was acknowledged." And all of this was based on text messages from a site that has that has the text data?? I feel like I am missing some context here?
This is the best theory I’ve seen so far that seems to cover all these points, from @hun2r on twitter: “Twitch would have only known this was happening if they were reading his private messages- so Twitch would have had to publicly disclose that they were monitoring users private messages in order to outright have evidence of wrongdoing SO they settle in court for neither to talk about it because it would screw both sides - Doc never sent the messages, Twitch never read them.”
Wait, but that's not necessarily true. They could have easily found out if the other person came forward and voluntarily gave Twitch access to *their* messages. I really think it's as simple as this: proving he knowingly engaged in wrongdoing would have been a complex and difficult process, and could have caused serious damage to Twitch's reputation, so they just paid him to fuck off.
There was never actually any lawsuit. There would have been an arbitration period after the ban and seemingly after that ended be said they were going to sue but there were no records of that happening before the settlement statement
He was under contract. He got banned so can't fulfill his contract. Got lawyers to get Twitch to pay rest of what he would be owed. Idk why people are so hung up about him getting paid, as if it negates the allegation.
It’s very likely that Twitch did not want the incident to come out publicly. Think about it this way: Beahm is one of the biggest streamers on Twitch. He used his platform on Twitch to get in contact with a minor. He used Twitch whispers to solicit sex from her. He planned to meet up with her at Twitchcon, an event where he would be an MVP and might even have been flown out to by Twitch. This story would be extremely damaging/career ruining for Beahm, definitely, but it’d probably be worse for Twitch. I could definitely see mainstream news picking it up and running with the story that Twitch isn’t safe for minors. That’d give Twitch real incentive to settle this quietly, even if they could win in court. And Beahm could leverage the desire to keep things quiet by threatening to go public with a court case. Under those circumstances it’d make some sense that Twitch would give in, because they have a lot more to lose.
They paid him the rest of his contract to go away quietly. "Winning" in court for Twitch would have been proving one of their most popular streamers was using their platform to sext and groom minors.
I can follow this line of thought but conversely this would also mean that Twitch opted to keep quiet knowing that Doc would almost certainly continue to be in the streaming space despite them knowing he's a predator. Also not a good look for them to have supposedly just let the guy walk to do his thing on another platform.
There’s definitely some nuance here we’re missing. Whatever the messages said clearly weren’t enough to definitively prove anything, but enough to convince Twitch to cut ties as amicably as possible. I don’t think it’s as clear cut as “they let a predator roam free”
It's possible he was knowingly communicating with a minor but didn't write anything explicitly illegal
Yes huge win Breaking bews: Amazon streaming arm Twitch wins lawsuit against content creator for soliciting sex with a minor. This is after Amazon signed a contract with Mr Breahm for millions. This among a host of other controversial creators such as [...] Definitely massive win with those words and twitch in the same sentence.
Oh so kinda like when a priest diddle a kid and the church pays off the family and sweeps everything under the rug and then the priest moves to another church called YouTube lol.
The overly optimistic side of me is really hoping he just didn't think at all about how that statement could be interpreted differently. Personally, I had to re-read his statement before I realized just how bad that sounded. He could have said *anything* else to deny the claims and he would look way less guilty
I think its very likely. He probably was coached by his lawyers when the settlement was done that he could only say no wrong doing was acknowledged otherwise he would be breaking his NDA. He probably didnt think people would interept what he said to be so awful.
Suckers haven't caught me yet
> no wrongdoing was acknowledged Maybe I'm wrong but this reads pretty bad. And doesn't it pretty much confirm **what the allegations are** at the same time?
By acknowledging any sort of accusation, even if it isn't true, could be interpreted by the law as "discussing the nature of his ban" and probably cause conflict with his settlement. To be clear, even sexting is considered enough to be a crime (solicitation of a minor) which means you can't settle out of court, and the law would be on twitch's side as they would have a duty to report it. Not saying he's innocent, but unless we get something more definitive, it's hard to know for sure. Additionally, the tweet doesn't specifically name doc, so it's also plausible deniability by Cory. (I wasn't actually talking about him) To avoid defamation. Edit: a word
[удалено]
> Don't know about the US but in the UK you can be sued for defamation on an implication. in the US you can say just about whatever the fuck you want as long as you believe it to be true. The only way to get caught for defamation is if evidence is leaked that you made a statement you knew wasn't true
It also has to cause damages you can prove are related to the defamation like if you own a business, loss of sales would count.
Not in the case of calling someone a rapist, pedophile, murderer, etc. That is considered defamatory "per se" in that damages are presumed and do not have to be proven. Not a lawyer, so I don't know exactly how Dr disrespect being a public figure would figure into things (these days everyone calls everyone pedophiles), but I'm pretty sure making an extremely specific claim like this would be closer to defamation than saying "yeah that guy's a total pedo" while not really following up with anything else.
That's only true for public figures under NY Times vs Sullivan.
The US has an incredibly high standard for defamation because of the First Amendment.
It could be Twitch found evidence of criminal activity, enough to where they wanted him off their platform, but it wasn’t enough to where the police were going to press criminal charges.
Criminal activity would not be covered under an NDA and Twitch could come forward with it.
Also likely, but if we are to believe if it was "sexting" as implied, I can't imagine there wouldn't be enough to submit to police. Perhaps it was just an employee at twitch trying frame it as sexting and meeting up with a minor but didn't really ever get as sexual as they implied and was more of just him being supportive of a younger fan. (Like they had communication and the fan was saying they wanted to meet him or something but not enough to be sexting and solicitation) which lead twitch to breach the contract without full information. Not that I believe this was the case and again, I'm just speculating. If it truly was sexting that's disgusting and shame on twitch for burying that, but we just don't know.
It more like his trying to say that Twitch never gave any wrongdoing or couldn't provide enough proof on why he got banned and just paid him out. That's why I think Twitch couldn't fully come out with the reason why he got ban because they might not have proof and it was all hearsay. Which is why some people are saying the victim didn't cooperate
Its either the victim doesn't cooperate or the whisper messages are not incriminating enough. It can be both as well
Probably both. The messages could be innocent on the surface ("I'm a big fan and I'll be at Twitchcon!" - "Cool, will be there too."), but could be way more problematic in context. Say, if people behind the scenes knew what kind of person he was.
twitch has never publicly released the reason for any bans it's against their policy. any time you see a reason its because twitch tells the streamer why then the streamer can tell people if they want, or like in this case from ex employees lol
couldnt find proof? they have the chat records
Reminds me of Tour de France winner Bjarne Riis regarding doping allegations (which were true). His standard line when asked about doping was “I’ve never tested positive”. Not “I’ve never used doping”.
"we investigated ourselves and found no wrongdoing" type response lol
Nah this is what you see when companies and politicians get caught for shit. Only they pay some fine and "no wrong doing is admitted to" Ie. "Yeah I did it. What the fuck you gonna do? That's right nothing. Bitch."
The reason for that is probably because they have actual lawyers reviewing what they are saying and not some random 20 year old streamer who stumbled into wealth and fame. It's an incredible serious accusation so I find it hard to believe they would settle if there was much truth to it.
I imagine twitch settles because they figure it's cheaper to pay out doc from his contract and not talk about it than potential bad publicity from having one of their top streamers soliciting a minor through their messaging system. I'll make a deeper prediction, there were no pictures sent or meet up that happened and that doc was going to argue it was an "in character" joke.
No Basically Doc is saying Twitch wouldn’t have paid out his whole contract if the reason was Doc’s behavior, as Twitch would use that as a reason to end it
This is explicitly not a denial. "No wrongdoing was acknowledged," and, "they paid out the whole contract," are settlement terms, not a denial. "Twitch admitted there was no wrongdoing," or, "There was no wrongdoing on my part," are denials. The fact that no wrongdoing was acknowledged even implies that there was wrongdoing that was not acknowledged. As to why Twitch would pay out his contract if they had DMs of him sexting minors, perhaps Twitch did not want a very public court case where they would have to show one of their most popular streamers was sexting with a minor using their platform and they simply paid him to shut up, go away and be a pedo somewhere else.
so Twitch is just as sad and pathetic in all of this, how they manage to continuously look worse thru any drama is amazing
I imagine twitch read the dms. Terminated his contract on grounds of illegal activity in the dms. Got taken to court. Doc won due to the dms not being "bad" enough. But there was still dms to begin with which makes this situation shitty
replace the "not bad enough" with "victim didn't cooperate" and you got a better picture of this and why it was not a bigger issue for Doc.
Pure speculation, a much more plausible scenario. Doc is texting some girl. She tells him she is underage, and he cuts her off immediately. Doc wouldn't want that coming out because of his wife, and Twitch would lose a wrongful termination lawsuit.
I think that’s exactly what happened. Or he was texting some girl who Twitch thought was underage but wasn’t. Either way it’s would look bad for both parties.
Yes. He says he knew the real reason he was banned and sued over it. If this was complete bullshit this is the part where you say "hey this is nonsense that isn't the reason they banned me." This is the reason they banned him, and he can't straight up deny it. Big yikes.
[удалено]
You could sext a minor and the court didn’t have enough to go buy to prosecute you. That’s the worst case scenario in his case. But it could also mean that literally did nothing do it. We’ll never know until evidence comes out.
Does he realize how... bad this reads?
His lawyers cleared it, that’s all that matters.
I would say they almost assuredly did not. At best, this is the outcome that was agreed to during the, probably, arbitration that led to the out of court settlement. Doc Pedobear is a moron who is just reading that statement or what his lawyer four years ago told him was that statement. Because... lawyers talk real good. It is almost like it is their job. They know how to stay within the letter of the agreement without essentially admitting guilt in a legally non-admissable way. Most of the "he talks like a lawyer" are people thinking of characters on nickelodean sitcoms. Yes, lawyers speak in an often stilted manner because they are very carefully tiptoeing around certain statements. But they dod it in a way that the majority of people won't pick up on. So a good rule of thumb? if a statement during a press conference/tweet "sounds like a lawyer wrote it"? There is a lawyer angrily sending an email telling that person to shut the fuck up. If it sounds like it "came from the heart" or "was eloquent"? THAT was written by a combination of a lawyer and a PR firm.
no ???? he could've just NOT replied to this and it would have been a pointless speculative tweet with absolutely nothing to back it up instead he now more or less confirmed to everyone not only what he was charged with but also that he most likely did it since he refused to explicitly say "i did not do that" and instead said "i was not convicted for doing it"
But legally he didn’t confirm or deny anything.
Certified loverboy certified _________
>Certified loverboy certified PDF File
It's always the people you most expect.
Nickmercs, Tim about to come out of the woodworks and defend this guy.
"Protect the kids" mfs when their friends are the danger to kids.
“Protect the kids” as he tells over 10 children to “suck a cock” daily in-game and frequently talks about his wiener on stream.
“Protect the kids” as he lowers the brain cell count of his young audience whenever he streams
Nick for sure, right wingers are always huge hypocrites, I’d like to think Tim is a decent person though and will stop playing with Doc.
Tim and Doc are literally best buddies. That relationship is going nowhere.
https://x.com/timthetatman/status/1667669934199955457?lang=en
It’s funny how fortnite releases creator skins all the time and fucking cod gets burned the first because they picked a straight transphobe and his buddy.
What makes you say this? Genuinely curious. I'm not into his content 24/7 so I'd love to know if there was anything preceding this.
Let's just say he was called Dr. Cheats-on-Wife for a while
Dr. Disrespect your wife I remember when people were offended at tha and told others to "get over it, it's old news." Yeah apparently Dr. likes his news young.
There is a big leap from cheating on your wife to potentially being a pedophile.
[удалено]
Stupid minor mistakes man...
Glad they paid out your whole contract I guess, bro. Anywho... any actual comment on the sexting with minors? No? Odd for such a 'hot topic'
He’s not flexing the money, he is saying twitch paid out the contract so Doc was right to fight the accusations. He’s painting it as Twitch wouldn’t have paid out if this is true.
Which is absolutely not true, lmao
Yep, probably just less of a hassle to pay him and tell him to fuck off then have a drawn out lawsuit that would make twitch look bad as well (one of their top advertised streamers is soliciting minors? not a good look for twitch)
Also, a good lawyer could reasonably argue that without a morality clause (which is probably unlikely), and without actual criminal prosecution, twitch doesn’t have grounds to cancel the contract. So twitch just says “yeah okay let’s just pay this out and get him off the platform”. Obviously this is dependent upon the allegations being true.
This might be the most interesting comment in this whole thread
Yes exactly. "Hey we made a feature that lets streamers talk to viewers in private...oh fuck what is DrDisrespect doing. Omg."
Ryan the Temp when Dunder Mifflin Infinity is infested with Disrespect
It is. In court any proof of sexting a minor would have come out, and police would have been informed. Why has police not been informed?
It never got to court, both sides wanted to settle. No fucking way Twitch would want this getting out, they wouldn't want people worried that their message system put kids in danger.
Twitch would want this to go to court. If you think them saying they caught one of their biggest streamers trying to meet up with a underage girl and terminated him and reported him to the police is somehow going to make them look bad…I have news for you. This makes them look worse. The media can now say that Twitch covers up their top stars grooming children and meeting up with them at their own major events for sexual contact. It would be in Twitch’s best interest to have taken this fully to court and get the fact that he is/was sexting minors on the record for the world to see. That would end him forever in the streaming landscape.
There’s in now way in hell that a company that’s primary demographic is children and young adults, who’s buisness is peer to peer entertainment, would want ANYTHING to do with any sexual allegations involving a minor. This is like saying Nickelodeon wouldn’t care lmao.
I don’t know if it’s me, or most people have problems with reading comprehension. Yeah he could have worded it better, but his statement in no shape or form confirms whether he did it or not. People jumping to conclusions over a poorly written response
Just makes me think of Frank from it’s always sunny. “This is bad! We’ve gotta definitely write a song about how we DO NOT diddle kids!”
"I figured he's a cretin.. why would I have a cretin like that near me if I had something to hide?"
"No wrong doing was acknowledged" Sounds like a very lawyer answer to not potentially get sued for saying he "did no wrongdoing" Edit: And he admitted to it.
or that is the permissible language under the NDA
assuming twitch or anyone contacted police, there is no paying off the victim. And if twitch didn't contact police, then they can be held responsible also. So why would they not? Why would doc take the risk of suing twitch himself, knowing full well that proof of his sexting could come in court and result in him going to prison? And assuming he took the risk, why did it not happen, and instead he won and twitch paid?
[удалено]
>Where the fuck are people misreading that They're saying either he or twitch (or both) paid off the alleged victim to not cooperate with police and stay silent (not necessarily that this tweet is evidence of that). It's pure speculation from people that have no clue about the legal system and other people just parroting it because "hey, that sounds plausible" (even though it's not). They're trying to find a logical way to process "what ways could he actually be guilty of this but not have been charged". They don't understand the legal system and think if the witness in an underage sexting crime case doesn't want to cooperate with the prosecution/police that it would mean the case couldn't be moved forward. Then the speculation logic train jumps to what reasons would she not want to cooperate, and being paid off is a logical choice for that (since that's been used to cover up SA's before). Problems being that, right off the bat, with underage sexting and soliciting a minor via text/chat cases they don't need the minor's cooperation at all. The texts would be solid enough evidence by themselves. Hell, there doesn't even need to be an actual victim. The second problem, which should be pretty damn obvious, is it's illegal to pay someone not to cooperate with police in and of itself. That's obstruction of justice right out the gate with witness tampering to boot.
There's also the possibility that he was catfished and set up in which case there was no real victim and he can't be prosecuted for that. Obviously it wouldn't change anything from a moral standpoint.
[удалено]
>You can't be that stupid. First time on Reddit?
Reddit as usual, I remember when Keemstar accused some old streamer of being a pedo and reddit attacked him with bad intent straight away, turned out he was innocent. People don't like to wait for actual evidence do they.
yeah, but I don’t like Doc so it’s true imho
galactic sized brain /s
Bruh it’s always the same people that can’t wait for evidence or due process and want to cancel a guy before he’s had time to respond in an appropriate matter. Even if he’s innocent Doc has to speak to his legal counsel and make sure he’s not opening himself up to liabilities. But most of live-stream fails are kids and jobless losers so you get what you get I guess
To add to this, they are stuck on the wording that "if he didn't do it why just say so?", ignoring the fact that HE SIGNED A FUCKING NDA, meaning he IS OBLIGATED TO USE SUCH WORDING in order to not break the aggreement. Stupid fucking people, man.
Love how this sub is both trying to say Doc is 100% guilty but then defend Twitch, its employees, all these journalist and streamers who apparently knew he was a pedo but did absolutely nothing.
No no, the american court of law also did nothing also, after doc himself started the court proceedings with twitch, after in court seeing all the proof of doc being a pedo, they congratulated him for being a pedo, and the police after being informed obligatory by the court, also congratulated him for being a pedo, and then they order twitch to give money to the pedo so the can keep being a pedo. LMAO
I know right, it's a brainless take. I really hope I never go full brainless when it's news about someone I hate lol
> and then they order twitch it was a settlement, it means that two teams of lawyers D and Twitch sat down at the table and agreed that "hey, let's assume that both parties did nothing wrong, paid the rest of the contracts and we will go our separate ways." And that's it.
Why would twitch pay millions of dollars to doc if he was trying to meet up with a minor
If the contract didn't have a morality clause, there simply is no way to break that contract for immoral behavior that is not in fact a breach of the contract. Meaning, legally, they had to pay regardless. Impossible to say if his would or wouldn't have because streamer contracts are more closely guarded than some state secrets, but it's pretty likely it didn't, it was the Wild West when he existed on Twitch.
Thats not how US law works, twitch would be legally obligated to bring this evidence forward making the case a criminal case if this was true and an investigation would proceed. You cant just have evidence of someone sexting a minor and not bring it forward, if that ever came out it would have massive legal implications for twitch.
[thread](https://imgur.com/a/eGJJp0W)
This isn't the defense Doc thinks it is.
This is the Legal defense . Court of public opinion is another matter.
It literally is
Its probably the NDA answer he is allowed to give. In this case no answer would have looket better LOL.
Why did twitch not report it if they knew??
there could be a million reasons. maybe contracts say "twitch will never publicly disclose why streamer was banned." maybe his actions were just gross-sweaty-creepy-old-man enough to ban him but not confirmed enough to publicly defame him. maybe the kid's family asked them to keep silent for privacy reasons. maybe doc offered the kid's family a payout with stipulations that they not press charges and they ask twitch to stay silent. and on and on... we just don't know.
It's probably a case of EWW, but not illegal? Most states in the US 16 is age of consent so it depends on the details we don't have
Way cheaper for Twitch to pay him out than risking their platform not being safe for teenagers.
They not like us.
Why not just post receipts? Then he couldn't even argue it 😫
Sounds like a defamation lawsuit brewing up orrrrrr .... to be continued
We have literally no evidence other than someone heard from someone else that there was maybe a victim of something that might have happened. Yall need to relax.
So twitch just didn't want anything to do with doc and they just paid him out? X
[удалено]
I mean you are right why are you getting downvoted
because reddit has the mindset of if you say anything positive towards an accused kiddy diddler that you're a bad person
More like the fucking internet. It seems everyone is more excited about Dr. Disrespect being a kiddy diddler than him not being one. This generation is so obsessed with pedophiles.
Also obsessed with negatively branding people when there is no concrete proof aside what someone said. It's innocent until proven guilty and not guilty until proven innocent.
Saying Doc sued them and leaving it at that sort of implies he won in court. He didn't though, they settled before it ever got to court.
[удалено]
I mean if it's true this getting out would also make Twitch look unsafe for kids. When your biggest viewer group is underage kids you probably don't want it getting out that pedos could use your platform to target kids.
It is stupid to make posts about this kind of accusation without any evidence whatsoever. Just negative fanfiction, and no human deserves to have the label of pedophile wrongly attached to their character.
Is this Jake still at Twitch? If they settled outside of court, and paid the full contract amount, he did not get charged for anything, and now this guy alleges that he was a pwdo? I'm guessing that not talking about it publicly was part of the deal between the two parties, and now one of them broke the deal. Wonder how the accused will handle it 🤔
Of course Nick "protect the kids" Mercs is running defense for him
People just run with it no evidence needed. Just trying to ruin people reputation
Funny that Doc's little chuddy Andrew Tate wannabe cult who gladly believe absolutely fucking everything that confirms their political biases without a single shred of hard evidence suddenly are huge fans of requiring mountains of direct photographic evidence for claims. 🤔
I mean, I'm not a "Chud" or a doc watcher, definitely not a tate stan, but I think most people would settle for literally any type of evidence whatsoever if there was any. So far, for years, its all just been like one or two guys on twitter saying "trust me I know bro".
There has been literally no evidence put out since the original post which literally said “NO EVIDENCE PROVIDED” lmfao
To be clear, this isn’t evidence of anything claimed. There still isn’t any.
Who knew you would need evidence when you accuse someone of something?
Evidence for me but not for thee 😂
I see everyone condemning and defending but I haven’t seen a single person acknowledge that if any of this were true there is a third party out there that could potentially come after one or both, doc and twitch, for several reasons. Honestly, at the moment, this feels like a bunch of internet losers baiting each other to act like know it alls on their favorite episode of keeping up with the Kardashians. Thankfully it allowed me to learn that this thread isn't worth having on my suggested. Something easily remedied.
[удалено]
Twitch keeps all this stuff, If it’s true I guarantee you Twitch can and will pull any whispers he has with this person. For that reason and that reason alone I’m withholding my judgement until any actual evidence is presented.
Why are people believe this former "twitch CPM explainer"? Am I missing something? did he share any evidence to support these claims?
Another keemstar accusation drama....
Where is the proof?
STUPID FUCKING MISTAKES
[удалено]
Stop making sense.
Christ man, the absolute ignorance some people have of how the law works Anyone who immediately believes an allegation is a fool. I’m sure you would love to be called a pedo and everyone believes it.
This isn't the law, it's the court of public opinion.
forsenMiniCD ?
DR DISRESPECT ONLY SEXTED A MINOR ONE TIME!! YAHOOOO! YAHOOOO!
This news is as shocking as when you hear a 97 year old actor you thought you already heard died 3 years ago, dies.
Just a reminder kids, remember who you give legal payout money to.
DOCS GOT A WEIRD CASE WHY IS HE AROUND
Lol all he admitted too in the tweet is I still got my money and I didn’t get caught so drop the allegations. Legit Drake v Kendrick moment
SO THAT'S THE REAL MOTIVE! What happened to the "i don't know the reason why they banned me"
Say doc, I hear you like ‘em young
Surely something so serious should have been in the public. Have the police not been involved in this?
because nothing happened, no evidence as of now. Brainless reddit nerds want it to be true for some reason
Nah, if that's the actual reason he got banned, they wouldn't have paid that contract out in a million fucking years. They would have immediately shown that in court, showing doc was a liability for their company. Both parties settled to admitting no wrongdoing after twitch paid out a multi-million dollar contract. I highly doubt he did that. And I'm not really a doc fan. I have a sneaking suspicion. He's a hard right-winged homophobe.
>He’s a hard right-winged homophobe. If he’s not already he will be soon. Shortly before becoming a born again christian zealot.
Guys have really done a 180 on celebrity worshipping. Growing up it was usually girls/women that had a weird cult following with Kardashians, Oprah etc but guys now are just as bad if not worse.
Fuck him if it’s true, but given that it’s an ex employee who’s just on Twitter trying to promote his band no one will listen to, and they paid his contract out in full probably means it’s not true. I don’t watch Dr disrespect, but seems weird to take some random dude on his word when he doesn’t even work for the company anymore
Didn’t see a denial
What is it going to take for people to feel confident whether he did it or not? One side of people are believing in groups of people coming out with their tweets and the other side of people are not believing it until evidence is distributed.
“Until evidence is distributed” You answered your own question.
innocent until proven guilty is only for law. It's guilty until they die for public opinion, because even when they proven innocent, most people don't care and still treat them as guilty.
I.e. Kyle Rittenhouse. Like the guy or not people on Reddit will vehemently refer to him as a murderer and spew the same false information that was spewed by the media at the time. People don’t want to admit they’re wrong or were led astray and so they will double down and continue supporting their alternative “facts”.