Alexandra Waterbury Instagram Post — Page 6

Sutton Ross said: "She is a victim, that's not up for debate. If someone sends out nude photographs of another person without their consent, they can face criminal charges. Many states characterize this as revenge porn that can result in legal consequences. I think only about 38 states have those laws on the books since this time of crime is very new. Keep in mind that even if the victim originally gave the person consent to take the photographs, it becomes illegal when they are distributed without that person’s consent. Mr. Ramasar shared photos of several women without their consent. Again, he is named in this lawsuit for a reason.

The lawsuit is going forward so obviously the judge thinks she has a case."

Well apparently yes, it IS still up for debate (are you reading this thread?) -- and again, please stop making sh*t up about supposed "laws" that you know nothing about. Anyone can sue anyone for anything -- I can sue you for being a troll -- but the suit will undoubtedly be tossed out in court. So yes, we shall see what happens in January.

The men in this thread are hilarious. Defending allll the creeps in this lawsuit. Holy God. Insecure men who hate women should not be allowed on the internet.

Canceled. Officially.

ModernMillie3 said: "Insecure men who hate women should not be allowed on the internet."

Without insecure men who hate women would there even BE an internet?!

Oh good the screaming head has arrived...

Sutton Ross said: "This thread is about Alexandra, which is whom I'm referring to. Her lawsuit. The judge found merit in all of it, which is why it's going forward. There are laws in 43 statesregarding this type of thing. Chasetook videos and pictures of her without her knowing, and emailed/text them to people. If you don't think that he meant to cause harm or that that is illegal, or that Chase is a sexual predator, I don't know what to tell you.

Why the hell do you think he resigned in the middle of the night and fled NYC? Never to be heard from again?"

Within the span of a few minutes you went from saying 38 states to 43 states -- wow legislation must move fast! This thread is not about Chase Findley, and I haven't seen anyone saying that what he did was not abhorrent. The thread is about someone else. Please do some research rather than pulling imaginary statistics out of your as* and then come back to us.

As a sidenote -- WHY haven't the moderators stepped in yet to shut down this entirely off topic thread that concerns an ongoing legal matter?

How many states is it? 38? 43? Which states? Which laws? It feels like you're just making things up.

I said "about 38" before looking it up because I did not know the exact number. I can now state it's 43. I apologize for that.

I have been referring to Amar Ramasar this entire time (as he is the only one relevant to this board). But, referring to Chase, I also don't believe revenge porn laws apply because he sent those photos in secret. It's hard to prove malintent when his intent was for Waterbury to never find out. That being said, I do think he potentially committed other crimes if he filmed Waterbury secretly.

She has a case I believe, and she has stated she was filmed/photographed without her knowledge or consent. I believe he sent those emails and photographs to humiliate her because he clearly does not have any respect for women (calling them cattle, sluts). I believe Chase did commit several crimes.