Emotions Running High

[Frank4202]

There are a million reasons he could have left and of course one of them is he's guilty. Other reasons could be he was bought out, pushed out, bullied out or he's just sick of it all. He also has other problems he's dealing with. Substance abuse etc. It doesn't look good at this point but what do we really know for sure except he's gone.

We know NOBODY on the team has defended Pete. We also know Pete himself hasn't tried to defend himself which is rather odd given his personality.

 

[HokieRaven5]

Hope that helps. (And I hope that you do not consider my reply to be "mansplaining" by a condescending poop. )

Thanks for a well thought out possible explanation there. You should treat yourself. A pretzel perhaps, or are you more of a sundae person?

 

[JimmyV_2.0]

Thanks for a well thought out possible explanation there. You should treat yourself. A pretzel perhaps, or are you more of a sundae person?

I'll check my credit limit. I might be able to afford both!

 

[khertz]

Didn't Sean say he was a prostitute and a customer of his. Maybe there's sour grapes if Pete stopped giving him gifts during their relationship. Who really knows the truth here. A jury would throw this out in a minute. Dustin says that he was drunk and allowed it to happen. After he felt abused. This is probably why they didn't file charges. Also Sean went into business with Pete and it didn't go well; the other Loved being on the Dis but hated Pete. This is all very strange. Maybe some gaslighting or Drama Queen stuff happening here. One fact is for sure they could both have beaten the hell out of that old man if they wanted to. I sure as hell wouldn't take an unwanted SA from a short Old Man well without a fight. He would be the one crying not me. These are not innocent little women getting abused by an overbearing ogre.

Your victim blaming is atrocious.

 

[Yankee626]

Damn, you might be the worst poster on this board.

Thanks for the Compliment !
On with the Dis Soap Opera !

 

[Yankee626]

Your victim blaming is atrocious.

Hey I watched the Dis Unplugged because of Pete. Yes there are others on there that are pretty good too. I'm from his neighborhood in Jersey . I get his dumb humor. Thought he had good insights into one of my favorite topics (Disney). What I Don't watch the Dis for is cry babying about how everyone hates him. Just like I Don't complain about Johnny Depp being a jerk when I watch Pirates of the Caribbean. But about Victim blaming - They made those comments not me. go after them. I can blame a car for hitting me but If I run into the middle of a highway I'm probably some at fault. And a relationship with PW or J Depp probably can be considered Interstate 4 .

 

[soniam]

Didn't Sean say he was a prostitute and a customer of his. Maybe there's sour grapes if Pete stopped giving him gifts during their relationship. Who really knows the truth here. A jury would throw this out in a minute. Dustin says that he was drunk and allowed it to happen. After he felt abused. This is probably why they didn't file charges. Also Sean went into business with Pete and it didn't go well; the other Loved being on the Dis but hated Pete. This is all very strange. Maybe some gaslighting or Drama Queen stuff happening here. One fact is for sure they could both have beaten the hell out of that old man if they wanted to. I sure as hell wouldn't take an unwanted SA from a short Old Man well without a fight. He would be the one crying not me. These are not innocent little women getting abused by an overbearing ogre.

This is exactly why Sean decided not to go before a jury for civil litigation. His attorney agreed that his previous profession would undermine his credibility with a jury. He couldn’t bring criminal charges, because it was beyond the statute of limitations. However, I suspect you don’t care about any facts and will continue to believe what you want. Good luck with that.

 

[JimmyV_2.0]

Hey I watched the Dis Unplugged because of Pete.

I guess this is goodbye then.

 

[soniam]

I guess this is goodbye then.

Lately, I watched despite him

 

[*NikkiBell*]

If you believe someone is guilty before innocent than your in the wrong place.

One word: you’re.

Didn't Sean say he was a prostitute and a customer of his. Maybe there's sour grapes if Pete stopped giving him gifts during their relationship. Who really knows the truth here. A jury would throw this out in a minute. Dustin says that he was drunk and allowed it to happen. After he felt abused. This is probably why they didn't file charges. Also Sean went into business with Pete and it didn't go well; the other Loved being on the Dis but hated Pete. This is all very strange. Maybe some gaslighting or Drama Queen stuff happening here. One fact is for sure they could both have beaten the hell out of that old man if they wanted to. I sure as hell wouldn't take an unwanted SA from a short Old Man well without a fight. He would be the one crying not me. These are not innocent little women getting abused by an overbearing ogre.

Okay, Pete.

Hey I watched the Dis Unplugged because of Pete. Yes there are others on there that are pretty good too. I'm from his neighborhood in Jersey . I get his dumb humor. Thought he had good insights into one of my favorite topics (Disney). What I Don't watch the Dis for is cry babying about how everyone hates him. Just like I Don't complain about Johnny Depp being a jerk when I watch Pirates of the Caribbean. But about Victim blaming - They made those comments not me. go after them. I can blame a car for hitting me but If I run into the middle of a highway I'm probably some at fault. And a relationship with PW or J Depp probably can be considered Interstate 4 .

I’m from Jersey and thought he sounded like a pompous twit.

 

[Yankee626]

This is exactly why Sean decided not to go before a jury for civil litigation. His attorney agreed that his previous profession would undermine his credibility with a jury. He couldn’t bring criminal charges, because it was beyond the statute of limitations. However, I suspect you don’t care about any facts and will continue to believe what you want. Good luck with that.

I don't Care about the facts ? You are making my case!

 

[sayhello]

Hey I watched the Dis Unplugged because of Pete. Yes there are others on there that are pretty good too. I'm from his neighborhood in Jersey . I get his dumb humor. Thought he had good insights into one of my favorite topics (Disney). What I Don't watch the Dis for is cry babying about how everyone hates him. Just like I Don't complain about Johnny Depp being a jerk when I watch Pirates of the Caribbean. But about Victim blaming - They made those comments not me. go after them. I can blame a car for hitting me but If I run into the middle of a highway I'm probably some at fault. And a relationship with PW or J Depp probably can be considered Interstate 4 .

The issue here is consent. You can't have sex with a prostitute without his/her consent (and prior consent does not equal current consent). You can't have sex with your boyfriend without consent. You can't have sex with your wife without consent (finally!) Your argument is so full of holes. It's pretty obvious you have no clue what you are talking about, or you are deliberately talking out your ***.

Sayhello

 

[RedHead0186]

I don't Care about the facts ? You are making my case!

You are cherrypicking facts that support your argument.

You conveniently have not mentioned that Charles knew about Dustin's SA. Pete admitted (to Charles) that he drugged and raped Dustin. That's more than he said/he said. Now there's corroboration.

You stated Dusting said he was drunk and allowed it to happen. First of all, "allowing it to happen" is not the same thing as giving consent. Secondly, if you are intoxicated, in the eyes of the law you are unable to give consent. Thirdly, he wasn't just drunk, he was actually drugged (he didn't know at the time he was drugged, as that was just disclosed about a week ago).

Sure, this could be a giant conspiracy to get Pete out. But given the level of detail, and the corroboration, and the number of people who have expressed support for the victims (instead of Pete) as well as the number of people who have commented on the toxic environment under Pete's ownership, that would be a pretty massive conspiracy. Especially considering some of the supporters have been away from the DIS for years. It's not like they all sat around the break room one day and said "hey, let's all concoct this story to get people out."

 

[nolypops83]

Didn't Sean say he was a prostitute and a customer of his. Maybe there's sour grapes if Pete stopped giving him gifts during their relationship. Who really knows the truth here. A jury would throw this out in a minute. Dustin says that he was drunk and allowed it to happen. After he felt abused. This is probably why they didn't file charges. Also Sean went into business with Pete and it didn't go well; the other Loved being on the Dis but hated Pete. This is all very strange. Maybe some gaslighting or Drama Queen stuff happening here. One fact is for sure they could both have beaten the hell out of that old man if they wanted to. I sure as hell wouldn't take an unwanted SA from a short Old Man well without a fight. He would be the one crying not me. These are not innocent little women getting abused by an overbearing ogre.

Just put a sock in it, will you?!

 

[PUSMMA]

The issue here is consent. You can't have sex with a prostitute without his/her consent (and prior consent does not equal current consent). You can't have sex with your boyfriend without consent. You can't have sex with your wife without consent (finally!) Your argument is so full of holes. It's pretty obvious you have no clue what you are talking about, or you are deliberately talking out your ***.

Sayhello

Pretty sure he’s talking out of Pete’s ***

 

[PUSMMA]

Hey I watched the Dis Unplugged because of Pete. Yes there are others on there that are pretty good too. I'm from his neighborhood in Jersey . I get his dumb humor. Thought he had good insights into one of my favorite topics (Disney). What I Don't watch the Dis for is cry babying about how everyone hates him. Just like I Don't complain about Johnny Depp being a jerk when I watch Pirates of the Caribbean. But about Victim blaming - They made those comments not me. go after them. I can blame a car for hitting me but If I run into the middle of a highway I'm probably some at fault. And a relationship with PW or J Depp probably can be considered Interstate 4 .

This might be my favorite argument of all time. “We’re from the same neighborhood” therefore he can’t be a rapist who drugs people. But hey, even if he did we’re from the same neighborhood so it’s all good. . Jersey should be ashamed of you

 

[JimmyV_2.0]

One word: you’re.
Okay, Pete.
I’m from Jersey and thought he sounded like a pompous twit.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I want to be Nikki when I grow up!

 

[KingLlama]

I don't Care about the facts ? You are making my case!

You're doing great.

 

[dachsie]

I didn't say he was innocent ! I just said lets get all the facts first . Lets let this play out in court where it belongs.

The only court case will be the AMEX case. There will be no court case on the SA. The statute of limitations has expired. Charles confirmed the allegations that PW admitted what he did. So stick your head in the sand if you will, but like someone said - we are the jury in this case.

 

[MonaMN]

Lots of reasons. First and foremost, when they said it wasnt't their debt, they did so in an Affirmative Defense which is pretty much a boilerplate response to any suit of this nature. Using a [bad] analogy, if you were to go into a bar and unprovoked, punch someone in the face and got sued by the injured patron, your lawyers would 100% add an Affirmative Defense to the Answer that you file stating that you acted out of self-defense. It's just what lawyers do. So saying that this isn't their debt is a reflexive response and has to be given little weight.

Second, irrespective of fault, DUT is sued jointly and severally with Pete. That means that Amex can collect against either of them, and in so doing, Amex could make life miserable for DUT. They don't want that. The way this would typically play out is that Amex is blameless here, and as the blameless party, it is entitled to get paid by whomever from whatever source. So Amex gets its money from the entity most easily able of making payment. That would be DUT. If DUT then believes that it was done dirty by Pete, it would pursue what is called a "contribution action" against the joint tortfeasor (Pete) so that the debt ultimately rests with the person or persons most culpable. If DUT is actually without fault, it would win its contribution action against Pete and get reimbursed 100% for the money that it paid to Amex. So when the dust settles, Amex gets all its money back and DUT gets paid back from Pete the money it paid to settle the case. The big "if" in all of this is whether Pete has the funds to repay DUT. But that is not Amex's problem.

Now, all that said, DUT could have a complete defense to payment if it could show that it was completely defrauded by Pete but in financial transactions and suits, that is a very, very high bar. Bernie Madoff was a crook. But many other innocent people suffered financially because of what he did. With a small business like DUT where the spending is pretty much right in the open, DUT is going to have rough sledding proving that it didn't know ANYTHING about the card in question which was registered to Dreams, or of the spending patterns of the holder of that card. And if Amex issued multiple cards for that account such that John had one in his wallet as well as Pete, well then it is pretty much game over. Again, the law seeks to compensate the blameless. If Amex is blameless here, the law wants to compensate it and let the cardholders fight amongst themselves.

Bringing us back to why they would work our a payment plan. Even if you didn't think that you did anything wrong but your choices were to spend a solid 6 figures on lawyers fighting this with the risk of having your business ripped away from you, or save the legal fees, avoid the collapse of the business and work out some sort of payment plan to keep the business going, you'd have to seriously consider that. And remember, doing so does not terminate the contribution claim against the ultimate wrongdoer. DUT can work out a payment plan with Amex and still seek reimbursement from Pete. Or, perhaps more likely, it will triangulate the resolution by working out a payment plan with Amex with Pete being part of (or most of?) that solution whereby he liquidates some assets to make payments on a structured basis. I don't know the details, but I doubt Pete has $900k lying around to make a lump sum payment.

Hope that helps. (And I hope that you do not consider my reply to be "mansplaining" by a condescending poop. )

I would imagine there could also be an element of using this necessary repayment to AmEx as part of buying Pete's share of the business... something like we'll (DUT) accept this debt on this repayment plan in lieu of paying out some other amount of money to buy him out. Something like that would resolve all of this more quickly so they could just move on.

I have no idea what Pete's share is worth so it's likely more complicated than that, but I would be surprised if something like this isn't being considered.