• OpenStars
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      If I were a powerful douchebag, would I allow the release of one of the many documents that says that I did stuff… or the one we made earlier specifically to exonerates me that says that we did not?

            • OpenStars
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              11 months ago

              He has some newer stuff, rebooting that project apparently. I haven’t listened to it yet b/c I was going through the older stuff first to remind me of it, which is how I found this one:-P.

    • athos77@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      11 months ago

      There was some kind of delay in the release, to allow people who didn’t want their names to show up to request they get redacted. So expect anyone that’s still named to be able to spin the narrative.

      • girlfreddy@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        There’s a handful of names from sexually abused women that remain redacted, and only 2 names that have additional time to justify why they should stay redacted. Source

        The judge said a handful of names should remain blacked out in the documents because they would identify people who were sexually abused.

        Two people whose name appears in the records have been given additional time to make arguments to the court as to why their names should stay redacted.