.png)
-022
Hey everyone, here's another newsletter!
This one had some controversial topics, I'd love to hear your thoughts on these matters.
HMU!
Madison
My Pod
This week's episode covered the story of Marianne Bachmeier. And her story included the murder of her 7 year old daughter Anna, as well as the murder of Anna's murderer, Klaus Grabowski. And in this situation, Marianne is also a murderer herself.Please consider watching me break down this messy tale! You can watch or listen to this episode on Apple, Spotify or Youtube.And maybe subscribe to us on youtube, if you want :)
Speaking of vigilante justice
Having spent a whole week ruminating in Marianne's story, it had me thinking a lot about vigilantism. There are a lot of cases, both old and new involving individuals or groups of people seeking justice outside of the law. And in most of these cases, the vigilante takers feel justified in their actions, and often the public agree.
While researching for my podcast episode this week, I couldn't help but feel like Marianne had done something heroic for her daughter.
On the other hand, the reason that we have the court of law, and an entire system to deal with perpetrators of violent crime, is because human beings are flawed, and emotional, and more than capable of being wrong. When someone takes justice into their own hands, it's not only possible that they make a mistake in some aspect of their plan, but how they are then handled by our justice system then sets a precedent moving forward. And that can get muddy af.
It's not that I have any real sorted opinions on that matter, I guess I'm interested in hearing what you guys think. HMU okay?
Here is a super interesting list of cases of vigilantism, Marianne is at the top of the list, of course!
Armie Hammer
I briefly touched on Armie Hammer in my second and third newsletter, which can be found here and here.
This article came out recently by a journalist named James Kirchick for a publication called Airmail (never heard of it!). And this is Armie's first interview since the his sexual abuse scandal broke (which is outlined in the discovery series House of Hammer). I certainly encourage people to read the whole article before forming an opinion, but it is a long read so I know that's hard.
What this article seems to be is Armie's attempt to defend himself. Some aspects of it are more convincing than others... James casts doubts on some of the claims that the alleged victims made, including the worst one which was that he raped a girl, referred to as Effie. Effie made put out a video statement on that matter, but did not want to be involved in the documentary. There are receipts provided that add more context to some of the receipts provided by his accusers, including Effie, but these things can be doctored and honestly, I don't know what to believe.
I'm super curious to hear other people's thoughts on this matter. I feel like this is such a touchy and difficult subject to dissect. On one hand, there was definitely AT MINIMUM some coercive behavior on his part, which in this article, he admits to. But the rest of it is not so clear, and it wasn't from the get go.
And the messed up part is that if we believe the girls, than this man's career and public life are essentially ruined and he gets shunned from polite society (at least for now). So, pretty high stakes. If we side with Armie, when we shouldn't, than there are some real victims of sexual assault and rape who aren't going to get justice. Mind you, no charges have been pressed thus far.
This is not a topic that I have much insight on, other than, some women (and men for that matter) become victims of sexual assault and are not taken seriously, and that is heart breaking. At the same time, there have been cases where people lie or exaggerate claims and in the process ruin lives.
I do think at MINIMUM, Armie Hammer is a dick. At MINIMUM.
Thoughts? Am I missing anything? Maybe this isn't even any of my business...
More controversy
Okay. To add another controversial topic to the conversation. Sex offender registries. What do we think about those?
We put out a Youtube Short recently that brought this back to my mind. I even discussed this very documentary in a previous newsletter.
It's become apparent to me that there is a pretty large faction of people, I assume mostly academics, who take issue(s) with the sex offender registry. I listened to a podcast/debate the other day where the two participants argued over the notion "does the sex offender registry do more harm than good".
Now I myself would tend to want to fall on the side of wanting SORs for sure. And I do have to say that the man in this debate who was arguing for registries, did not do a very good job... Doesn't mean he was wrong though...
This is another topic that I would love to have a conversation about. I think that if there are things we can do to improve the system and make the whole situation more effective, than great. But I also think that being on the registry is a punishment, and some of these people who advocate for them to be more relaxed, tend to forget that.
I also think that most of these policies/systems/laws etc, absolutely have unintended consequences. It's not crazy to want to make sure that the SOR is doing what we want it to be doing, and maybe that means making changes.
But if someone is out there sexually assaulting children, I think people should have a right to know that and be aware when that person then moves into their neighbourhood. But what the hell do I know????
Isn't that a pleasant subject to ruminate on this fine Friday?
Thank you so much for subscribing! Please feel free to reach out with feedback and suggestions, and tell your friends!If you were forwarded this email and would like sign up please do so here.
xx
Madison
