Rolling Stone also launders Tortoise's language.
Tortoise: "Tortoise understands that Gaiman’s account is..."
Rolling Stone: "Gaiman told [Tortoise]..."
Where in these two paragraphs does the article DIRECTLY attribute anything to Gaiman?
In other words where does the article actually say that Gaiman said any of this directly?
Yeah, they are actual journalists and if they'd made those quotes up, Gaiman would be suing by now. Come the fuck on, is rape culture so very precious to you that you are willing to embarrass yourself like this? WTF?
The issue is that there actually aren't any quotes at all really.
It's all hedged as "Tortoise understands..." "Tortoise believes..."
Even under UK libel laws this would be a tough suit. They're VERY careful to NOT say these are directly attributable to Gaiman himself.
You're lying in defence of a stranger. Get a fucking grip. If it's because you've pulled this sort of shit yourself, just 'fess up and ask forgiveness. It really is that easy.
Identify what you think are lies.
As for your accusation, is that you're regular mode of operation? Someone disagrees with you and you accuse them of being a sexual predator?
This has nothing to do with whether Gaiman is guilty. He may very well be.
But this isn't "we don't believe the accusers" it's "we don't have a credible report on what the accusers actually said."
Not a single journalist involved has actually TALKED TO THEM at all.
Having now listened to and transcribed the first episode, they absolutely did speak to at least Scarlett, and she appears on the podcast in her own voice.
That she speaks at length in the podcast is honestly not something that was at all clear to me until I read your transcript.
Everything prior to that had led me to believe that the podcast was just the hosts talking about the allegations.
Same. Everything I saw made it seem like they made messages btw the accusers and Neil etc but not that they actually had an interview with them directly.
