Until you can prove that the glove fits…
I’m actually not sure that’s the case here. I don’t know law that well and California law even less so, but I’m pretty sure this is a civil case, not a criminal one. There’s multiple levels of proof depending on the crime with “beyond a reasonable doubt” being the highest one. That’s not generally used in civil cases.
Be that as it may, I think that it is significantly more likely than not that the allegations are true, just basing it off of my read of the situation as an unrelated layman. However, I don’t think that deprives Blizzard of their right to defend themselves so I’m not really willing to pass judgement until that happens or this whole thing shakes out one way or the other. Plus putting aside the matter of whether or not the allegations are true, that’s not the only function of the courts. The other thing to be determined is who exactly is culpable and to what extent. I don’t want to condemn the entire company for the actions of a few.
1 Like
If that poster who claims to be a lawyer in the megathread is legit, this can come back to bite them if the family pursues additional damages in civil litigation.
I hope they do.
3 Likes
Because former employees never lie or exaggerate circumstances at their former workplaces.
Nope never happens…
1 Like
Once again, AGs don’t sign off on things to go to court if they’re not confident in the investigation.
You refusing to use logic.
… do you seriously know nothing about these things and how juries are chosen? 
Good God, you people need to stop trying to pretend you understand the judicial system.
My IQ continues to drop with this. I’m done.
3 Likes
Maybe it matters because for 730 days they looked at this and at the end decided that there was enough evidence to take this matter to court??
1 Like
Employee’s typically don’t talk to state attorneys unless some shady business is going on.
Oversized gloves were definitely how I got away with murder.
1 Like
The list of former employees doing this is pretty long, my dude, and caught the attention of a California state agency that investigated for two years and then filed a civil suit based on the evidence.
At this point, the only way you could defend Blizzard would be to claim that every voice on that list is engaged in a conspiracy to bait the CDFEH into suing Blizzard, or that the CDFEH itself is a party in said conspiracy.
1 Like
Two years and charges brought forward. Sorry but that is two years worth of work and testimony’s. they admit to it in the “i’m sorry letter.” Can’t really defend them on this one. They clearly screwed up.
2 Likes
Here is a REAL LAWYER’S opinion on Blizzard’s public statement.
They basically say that the letter is projecting, and written by someone who is angry, rather than someone who is a lawyer. In fact, it seems as if whoever wrote the statement did so without any legal oversight whatsoever.
Most people who take someone to court are confident that they are correct. Still doesnt mean they are
By saying that we should wait to hear what Bliz has to say and give them a chance to defend themselves from an accusation that was placed on them TODAY? What is illogical about that compared to
“Whelp Cali says their guilty so they are guilty”
From a selection of their peers aka citizens.
If this mindset of “accused = guilty” spreads then you wont really be able to get a fair unbiased jury for anything…since accused = guilty.
1 Like
I don’t think that the confidence of the AG is a substitute for actually going through the process. I don’t think there’s a very large possibility of the allegations being untrue. But I do think that it’s premature to pass judgement. And to give the other poster some credit, it’s not impossible for ex-employees to exaggerate the sins of their former employer.
I do think that there’s a fire behind this smoke. Even though I broadly think that the allegations are true, I do think it’s important to allow Blizzard their day in court and determine the exact extent to which they’re true and who exactly is responsible. I’m not willing to let allegations serve as a substitute for the entire judicial process no matter how credible they may be.
They publicly admitted at least some of things in the suit happened.
It’s beyond allegations when the company in question releases a public statement that says yes those things were happening but are working to fix that.
Because I find it more likely than not to be true, and it’s corrobated by former and current Blizz employees posting online.
The Blizz rebuttal that the “beuracrats” at the state of CA have it out for them doesn’t seem very plausible to me.
1 Like
You got the numbers on that one for us?
Ok well let me restate
I AM NOT DEFENDING BLIZZARD
They could very well have done some, most, or all of the things in the suit
They could also have done none of them.
WE DONT KNOW.
You can say
“Looks bad for bliz”
You can say
“I think they are screwed here”
But you cant say (with any sort of logical/reasonable backing)
“Bliz for sure did those things beyond a shadow of a doubt”
If you want to prove an accusation you have to give the other side a chance to defend themselves.
My issue is not with people saying “I think Bliz is in trouble here” or things like that. My issue is with people trying to stir up mob rage and assign 100% full no-doubt guilt to Blizzard less than a say after the suit is brought forth.
And again I am no Bliz fanboy. I think this is HILARIOUS given Bliz recent SJW branding. But I also extend to them the same "“innocent until proven guilty” as I do everyone else.
4 Likes
this would not surprise me in the slightest
1 Like
Blizz FOR SURE let Alex go in June 2020 VERY QUIETLY and then tried to scrub him from their records. Literally removed him from their linkdin, which is CRAZY right? Because he’s a big gun. One of the old guard. Why on earth would they want to erase his memory from the entire company lexicon? HRMMMMM. Plenty of other former employees, that weren’t nearly as important, are still connected to Blizz’s linkdin. How weird. 
1 Like