Myron GainesX and Jack Denmo dissect a Canadian sexual assault conviction, arguing it is a feminist witch hunt fueled by Bill C-51 and Gomeshi rules. They highlight critical discrepancies where the accuser admitted lying about aggressive clothing removal and fabricated injuries, yet prosecutors secured a three-year sentence despite redacted evidence. The discussion suggests that rating systems incentivize aggressive tactics, potentially sending innocent men to jail while exposing flaws in Canada's rape shield laws and therapy-influenced victim narratives. [Automatically generated summary]
Every single time, every single crime, every single lie, early lie.
Every single hour, every single day, every single night, early lie.
I know it's hard to believe it's the whole forest, not one tree.
And it's every branch and leaf, they're born to deceive.
But I'm telling you the truth: it's not just one or two, it's every single Jew, they all hate you.
And it really breaks my heart, but their lies are off the charts.
And they only bring us home, when I get so if you want to be safe and don't want to quit the place, it's best you start being based, or you'll get yourself.
Every single time, every single crime, every single lie, early life.
Every single hour, every single day, every single night, early life.
I know it's hard to accept that all the ones you've met lie with every single breath.
They want you dead.
But you must not be weak.
Just open your eyes and see.
They always explore the me, see their vampire tea.
And it can make you cry to learn your life is full of lies.
And their face was a disguise.
But you must die.
If you want to live and protect all of your king, you have to grow thick skin.
Only one every single time, every single crime, every single life, early life, every single hour, every single day, every single night, early life.
All right, and we are live, guys.
What's up?
Welcome to the stream.
What's up, ninjas?
All right.
Guys, we got a good show planned for you guys today.
We're going to be talking about something a little bit different.
I think it's a pretty serious topic.
I came aware of this information yesterday.
Shout out to my guy, Michael Sartain, and a couple others that came out with this information.
We're going to spend maybe an hour or so covering this because I think this topic is extremely important, and guys need to wake up and realize what type of environment we're in nowadays.
It's actually a very scary time to be a man because honestly, dude, it's, you know, I've told you guys this before.
I'll say it again.
This is what feminism does, man.
Media Frames the Situation00:03:46
It gives women all the authority with very little responsibility for their actions.
And you might be the one dealing with the responsibilities of their actions.
So it's a pretty serious topic.
It concerns a guy named Jack Denmo.
Now, for those of you that don't know, this guy is a very popular Canadian YouTuber.
I knew him.
He reached out to me actually back in like 2021.
He reached out to me to do a collab.
This is when I had my old Instagram account.
And we were planning something because I think he did like skits or whatever.
And he just kind of like disappeared.
And I never knew why.
And now, like, I find out this information that he's been, you know, at the centerpiece of a very basically a witch hunt.
And I was like, oh, crap.
And I looked and it's basically, I'll turn the, hold on one second.
Let me turn off the microphone.
All right.
My bad.
The mic was a little low there.
All right.
That should be a lot better now.
Should be better now.
So like I was saying, I find out that he's been at the centerpiece of this like, you know, trial or whatever of a criminal case up in Canada.
So craziness, craziness.
But let me look.
Give me one sec.
me grab.
All right.
Sorry about that.
Okay.
So let's see here.
Let me read some of these chats.
Yeah, audio should be better now, guys.
Abdul says, hey, Myron, have you heard that Larry Silverstein recently purchased to purchase LA's USA Bank tower with $430 million?
Very suspicious sign predicted a false flag attack on that building with the blame being put on Darren to rally the people.
Well, we'll see if that happens.
But I did hear that he bought that.
Yes.
Buzz Killington donated 90 bucks.
Appreciate you, bro.
Yo, Buzz Killington, let me know in the chat.
Did you subscribe for the year just now or did you just donate 90?
I want to know because I'm trying to figure out from the Rumble studio how it is.
So let me know, dude, if you donate a 90 or if you actually subscribe for the year.
So, but anyway, someone's saying the volume is low again.
Are you low IQ, bro?
Like, I literally just turned the volume up, dude.
What are you talking about, man?
Literally, it's like damn near on the red, dude.
Like, what?
Like, it's very loud.
People got some shitty microphones.
Or sorry, headphones.
Anyway, so yeah, so that's kind of what I want to talk about.
And then my brother's going to come on in roughly an hour, 45 minutes to an hour.
We're going to chat with him for a bit.
We're going to cover some, we're going to go into the war, go into the politics, as you guys know.
We are in the middle of a 48-hour standoff period.
Okay.
Donald Trump put out a true social post yesterday saying that Iran has 48 hours to open up the straight of a moose completely.
Yeah, me and my brother are going to go into why that's a big problem.
And yeah, it's going to be good.
He had some stuff he had to do yesterday, so he couldn't come on stream.
But me and my bro will be on later to talk about some of that stuff.
But let's kind of go into this real quick.
So I got a video here, kind of give you guys an awareness of what this is.
And I want you guys to watch out the media.
I haven't even watched this video yet.
Let's see how the media frames this situation.
Mainstream Media Reaction00:06:29
A Hamilton YouTuber was sentenced to three years behind bars today for sexually assaulting a McMaster student back in 2020.
Up until just one day ago, Jack Densmore was posting on one of his YouTube channels to hundreds of thousands of subscribers.
Kelly Botello has more.
One day ago, Jack Densmore was uploading his latest video to YouTube.
As long as you have one or two friends or people that believe in you, then that's all you actually need to accomplish the things that you want to.
Today, he was taken to jail after a judge sentenced him to three years behind bars for sexually assaulting a young woman in 2020.
Hey guys, welcome back to my channel.
Today, I'm looking for a back-to-school girlfriend.
Densmore rose to internet fame with videos of him attempting to pick up women on university campuses, interviewing drunk people at Hess Village, and partying with students.
More recently, his content has shifted to him giving men advice.
In this video, I'm going to teach you how to attract women.
What's up, boys?
So, everybody's been through a dry spell at some point.
I'm going to tell you a story about how I overcame a dry spell I had in the past.
Listen, man, women are much more attracted to you than you are aware of.
In 2020, Densmore was on a first date with a McMaster University student.
Now, let me, let me, let me, because obviously you guys can already see how they're framing things or whatever.
And, you know, as someone who just went through the bullshit of a Netflix documentary, right, that tries to cut things into a certain way or paint things in a certain light.
I've said this before.
I'm going to say it again.
Mainstream media doesn't respect male self-improvement.
I'm going to say that again, and I need you guys to really let this sink in, okay?
Mainstream media does not respect male self-improvement, especially when that improvement entails increasing your sexual market value to get women.
I want you guys to let this stew because this is extremely important.
The concept of increasing your sexual market value to be a more attractive man, to get more dates, to get laid more, right?
Or learning female nature to be able to understand, adapt to, and deal with female nature so that you're not in a situation where you don't know where you're doing.
This is all extremely frowned upon in society.
And I'll show you guys why.
More than likely, almost all of you guys watching me, I am willing to bet you probably found me through negative coverage on either TikTok, YouTube, Instagram, or one of the main platforms that normies use.
Let's say 100,000 people saw a clip, right?
The majority of the commenters and the people that watched it probably say this guy is crazy and radical.
But I spoke to some of you because you said, wait, hold on.
I've experienced that.
So you click my channel.
You click my Instagram.
You click my Twitter, whatever.
You start following me.
As the days pass, I say more and more things that resonate with you.
And not only do I say things that resonate with you more, but it's things that other people have never told you that you felt.
And then you get a Eureka moment.
I'm not alone.
And when you get that Eureka moment and you say, I'm not alone, that's what makes you say, I'm going to fucking support this guy.
But you all more than likely probably found me through negative coverage from mainstream media because mainstream media demonizes guys like me who teach you and tell you the truth when it comes to increasing your sexual market value and what it takes to actually be able to get a dating life and or deal with women in a manner where it is not damaging to you.
Because the status quo of dealing with women in Western society is almost always a situation where the woman has all the leverage, has all the advantage, and you are on your back foot dealing with her.
Not the other way around where you have the advantage, you have the leverage, and she's dealing with how you do things.
Here's another ugly reality.
Male and female intersexual dynamics is an adversarial dance.
Why do I say this?
I say this because the things that you need to do to be an attractive man and have a woman in your frame inherently put her at a disadvantage.
You must be the leader.
You must be the dominant individual.
What you say goes.
You must maintain a leverage, etc.
This obviously puts the woman on her back foot, which is what society does not like.
You've probably heard some of these bitch ass terms that they use.
You're controlling.
You're toxic.
You're insecure.
These are all buzz terms to describe men that have standards and hold women to that standard unapologetically because those guys understand that if you don't hold limits to standards, they are going to ruin your life.
This frame of mind and dealing with women in this manner is extremely demonized.
And when someone rises to prominence and tells men the truth about female nature, the dating marketplace, what it takes to increase your sexual market value, the mainstream media's reaction to that is to ensure that you are put in a box as a misogynist, an asshole, a woman hater, toxic, insecure, whatever the fuck they want to use.
You guys saw with the Netflix documentary.
I filmed hours with these guys over multiple days, but they only chose to use maybe eight, nine, 10 minutes of content.
And wildly took things out of proportion.
Vulnerable Innocence Facts00:14:58
Which, by the way, video is going to come out tomorrow, guys.
I pushed it back a day because we had to add a little nice little ending for you guys to make it a little bit more entertaining.
I think you guys will enjoy it.
We had to add a little bit of something to it at the end.
That's why we didn't drop it today.
So, and I had my guys in the OSS put that message out.
But it'll be out tomorrow.
We added some extra stuff to it.
So this is where we are, right?
This is where we are.
So, as you guys could see, they're already framing this in a negative light where, oh, guys, teach do like, because society looks at it like, wait, you need to learn how to get women?
What's wrong with you?
Not knowing that a lot of guys struggle with this shit.
And they don't want you to know this stuff.
We're going to be honest.
They just don't want you to know.
Student, when they became intimate, at first it was consensual until Densmore pulled out his phone to start recording.
Densmore argued he was recording a consent video, while the woman said it was his attempt to make a sex video.
Densmore then had forced intercourse with the woman, sexually assaulting her.
The judge decided.
The judge reiterated today that a sexual assault is a very serious act of violence.
One.
Also, thank you to Real 3 Diggless with the 10 gifted.
Shout out to you, bro.
Appreciate you, my friend.
That requires a penitentiary sentence.
Although he did take into consideration that this is Densmore's first offense.
Mr. Densmore maintains his innocence.
His family maintains his innocence.
I maintain his innocence.
Densmore's lawyer, Mark Famy, says the conviction will yeah.
Uh, lawyers wear that weird shit, by the way, chat.
I know it's like, I think they're called crowns or whatever.
Attorneys in Canada, if I'm not mistaken.
Be appealed.
The notice of appeal has already been filed with the court of appeal, and we are awaiting a decision about bail pending appeal.
Densmore is facing another charge of sexual assault in an unrelated case involving a different woman.
That trial is pending.
Kelly Botello, CHCH News.
Okay, so he made a video, guys.
Let me grab it for you guys where he kind of details everything.
It's an hour long, but we'll kind of go through it.
But we're going to hear his side.
And honestly, people never get to have their side heard.
Kim Jungoon, thank you so much for the gifted sub, my friend.
Appreciate you, sir.
My name's Jack.
I'm a content creator, or I used to be until I had my life torn apart by a false accusation.
Since this situation went public, I've received death threats.
I've been banned from establishments.
All of my YouTube channels have been taken down.
I've lost friends.
I've lost work opportunities.
Pretty much everything.
I'm innocent.
That's all I got to say, really.
Everybody knows I'm innocent.
I did not want to have to make this video, but I've been silent on this issue for as long as possible, and enough is enough.
My appeal was for damn near six years.
This month, and I'm waiting on the decision.
So I still have to be extremely careful about and I think he's gonna get a decision tomorrow, guys.
And when you guys find out the facts of this case, it's gonna fucking blow you away, man.
What I say.
My goal with this video is to share what happened in a non-biased a way as I possibly can.
I'm gonna try my best not to be emotional and just be completely neutral here and share objective facts and evidence to show my innocence.
The timelines of the encounter, inconsistencies in the evidence and testimony, and that there are enough inconsistencies to make you go read the full testimony yourself.
Legally, I'm not allowed to say as much as I would like to, but I'm going to do my best to share what I can.
Before anything else, I do want to say this.
I believe survivors of assault and false accusations of assault deserve to be taken seriously and treated with compassion.
I've been through both.
Nothing I'm about to say is meant to minimize real harm.
That being said, let's get into it.
In February 2020.
So he has to give that disclaimer because even talking about this topic and assuming that a woman is lying is considered, you know, evil, which they do all the time, by the way.
So yeah, of course he had to give that disclaimer because we live in such a pussified society.
It's like it should be easy to understand.
Okay, look, he's going to obviously, you know, talk about a topic and, you know, show countering evidence.
But even him defending himself, he has to put this disclaimer in.
21, I was falsely accused.
Which goes to show what I told you guys before.
We live in a gynocentric social order.
Charged with assault from a consensual encounter between myself and a woman in August 2020.
I'll refer to her as the accuser.
My legal team and I spent several years going back and forth to get records and evidence to help my case.
And we finally went to trial in 2024 and the judge wrongfully convicted me.
I say wrongfully as I have always maintained my innocence and I will explain why in a bit.
Based on how things go with my appeal, there are two options.
Either the appellant court will order me a new evil Johan also to campon new trial or I'll have to spend three years in jail for something I didn't do and my life is essentially over.
And in the meantime, there's been newspaper articles, there's been documentaries and all kinds of misinformation put out.
So now I'm going to go over some information to help you get a better grip of what actually happened.
At the time of the incident, I was a YouTuber, actor, filmmaker, and primarily known for pranks.
I've been working full-time and earning a living as a content creator since approximately 2016.
I met the accuser after matching with her on Tinder.
Tinder is an app for people to go and hook up with.
I recognized her from one of my party videos, McMaster Hoko 2019.
On that day, this person managed to find me and my camera crew in a crowd of 10,000 people in order to be interviewed.
After matching on Tinder, we messed.
So she went and pursued him.
Just on Instagram, texting and flirting before agreeing to meet up.
The accuser drove approximately 30 minutes from Oakville to my house in Hamilton, Ontario.
I invited her in.
I showed her around, and then she asked for a tour of my YouTube studio.
I suggested we should go for a hike.
We then left my house and drove to a hiking trail, but upon arriving, it was getting dark.
So we agreed to return to my house and watch Netflix and chill.
Well, we know what that means.
Upon returning to my house, we did just that.
We watched Netflix and we had a consensual encounter.
I'm not proud to admit this, but at the time.
Bro, really slipped into Netflix and chill into a very serious video.
I like it.
At the time, I was sleeping around with a bunch of different women.
The accuser also had multiple different partners recently before me.
There you go.
DNA for four different people were found.
Bruh.
Now, I know what people are going to say.
Oh, rape shield laws.
This is fucked up.
Oh, guys, this is exactly, if you guys remember the Kobe Bryant case, you guys remember the Kobe Bryant case?
Let's go back in time.
For the young bucks in here, circa 2004, 2005-ish, Kobe Bryant was faced with a rape case out of Colorado.
I'm not going to go over all the facts, but the most pertinent facts are this.
Essentially, he was at a hotel.
The teller at the hotel, or the girl that worked at the front desk or whatever, he invited her to come up to his room.
They had, say, conceptual sex.
A little bit after the fact, she came out and said that he graped her.
Okay.
Then during the process of the criminal case, right?
And they're in the middle of the playoffs because I remember this vividly.
They're in the middle of the case.
One of the things that came in was she had multiple partners in the same period of time.
So basically, this show is like, hey, this woman's a very promiscuous woman, blah, blah, blah, et cetera.
That right there pretty much made it where they dropped the criminal case and ended up having a civil suit where I think they settled for some undisclosed amount.
Why am I telling you this?
I'm telling you the guys this because that is a pertinent fact when it comes to cases like this.
Now, people get mad and say that's fucked up.
They shouldn't be looking at her sexual history as to, you know, whether she's innocent or not.
But I think if we're going to live in reality and being extremely honest here, a female's promiscuity clearly shows her decision-making and her discernment.
So it should absolutely be put into the totality of the circumstances when evaluating a case like this.
So it is important that he's bringing up this fact, though others might try to say, oh, this is kind of victim shaming.
As per DNA evidence, as well as confirming sleeping with an alleged boyfriend just a few days prior to meeting me.
Now, to clarify, this is not a judgment on her character.
Rather, it's to provide context on our generation's modern culture of frequent hookups.
In retrospect, I definitely should not have been sleeping with these women.
But I was a young guy and I was famous on the internet.
I would often film a quick consent video when having sexual encounters with strangers that knew I had a large following as a proactive way to ensure I had clear consent from whoever I was hooking up with, especially women who have been featured in a previous video of mine.
This is not a normal way to live, but it is common in society and especially amongst athletes, celebrities, and public figures.
So during our encounter, I attempted to film a consent video and she informed me that she didn't want to be recorded.
So I stopped the recording and deleted whatever was briefly recorded right in front of her.
We then continued what we were doing, having a consensual sexual encounter.
I want to be very clear here.
The encounter was enthusiastic, ongoing.
There was no confusion about it.
She was consenting, as was I.
She communicated consent in many different ways, particularly verbally, asking me to spank her and telling me during sex daddy, amongst other things.
I don't want to repeat them, but you can go and read the things that she said to me in the transcripts.
After finishing our encounter, we chatted briefly before I politely told her I had to be up early in the morning and I asked her to leave.
That was the conclusion of the date.
I hate that I even have to tell you guys this.
But this information I'm going to tell you guys might save your life.
Gentlemen, if there's one thing you guys take away from this episode, I want you guys to take this because I don't think I've ever spoken about this really.
And it really pisses me off to I even have to say this.
It's ridiculous I have to say this, but I'm going to say it anyway.
So listen up.
After you have sex with a woman, that is going to be one of the most vulnerable and sensitive times for her psyche.
And it is your job to make her feel incredibly comfortable after.
I'm going to say that again.
After you hook up with a female, that is one of the most emotionally and mentally vulnerable times for them.
If you make them feel like a whore during this period, some girls might use that against you and make you pay for it later.
One more time.
After you have sex with a girl, okay, she's going to be in an extremely vulnerable, emotional and psychological frame.
If you make her feel like a whore at that point, she might respond in a way that will fuck your life up.
Now, the issue here is that if you treat women like adults, this shouldn't be a problem.
However, They reserve the right to be treated like an adult all the time, but also be infantilized for their poor decisions whenever they want.
Do you understand this?
So in other words, they have the capability of consenting, hooking up with you, engaging in said activity.
But if you don't make them feel a certain way after said activity, they reserve the right to fuck your life up and then immediately infantilize themselves, say they were the victim, say they were assaulted, etc.
Because women subconsciously know that we live in a believe-all women society.
The man is guilty until proven otherwise.
And many men are not going to have the evidence to prove themselves as not guilty because intimate moments like this are often not recorded, as you guys can see from this video.
So now that you guys understand that women are in this vulnerable state post-sex, you guys have to move accordingly.
Do not make a woman feel like a whore or a slut or useless after you hook up with her.
Do not do that.
Number one, you got to have a little bit of decency and respect.
But number two, it can come back and blow up in your face later.
Because, like I've been telling you guys since 2020, women don't do well when they take L's, especially at the hands of a man.
You don't believe me?
You guys remember the fucking documentary, The Tinder Swindler?
Guys, remember that?
For those that don't know, I'll quickly run it down for you.
The Tinder Swindler was a viral documentary that came out a couple of years ago that documents an individual that lied about his wealth, lied about his success, lied about private jets having a certain lifestyle.
And what he basically did was he had multiple women that he met on Tinder and dating apps and swindled them out of tens of thousands of dollars each.
He was basically a charlatan scammer.
Now, let's be honest here.
We probably all know a woman that scammed a guy, got some free dates here, gotten some free dinners here, been able to get a bag here, been able to get a bag there, been able to scam guys out of all types of shit.
None of these women are the feature of a full-length documentary.
You want to know why?
Because it is common for women to use men, and it is common for men to accept being used.
We just take it as L, move on.
However, it is not common for women to be used.
If a woman is used by a man, Netflix's fucking number one show.
If a man uses a woman, everyday effect, who cares, bro?
Consenting Adult Laws00:09:40
I say all that to put things in perspective.
Women don't do well when they take L's at the hands of a man.
So, after you hook up with a girl, do not make her feel like a piece of shit after.
You must be intelligent, guys.
And let's get back to it.
I hope that helps somebody out there.
Quoting from the court transcript: Although the accuser originally told police that she was obviously fine with being asked to leave, her testimony at trial revealed otherwise.
In cross-examination, she admitted that the also, let me be explicitly clear about this.
Guys, I did not watch this video beforehand.
I did not watch this video beforehand.
I wanted to give you guys a raw reaction here, real time.
So she said she wasn't mad about it back then, but now look what we're finding out.
Did I not predict it, man?
I told you guys, I am literally hosted on this.
I know how women think, dude.
Dismissal did not feel good, and she agreed with trial counsel that she felt worthless because she was treated as a conquest or notch on Mr. Densmore's back.
Did I not call it?
Did I not call it?
Look, and this isn't me attacking Jack.
There's plenty of men that do this.
That smash a chick, all right, get out.
Plenty of guys do this.
All I'm saying is, is that if you do that, it could create headaches for you later.
This is what's called buyer's remorse.
Because honestly, no guy owes making you feel comfortable after sex.
They don't.
But some women feel that way.
And if they feel used, they're going to come after you.
Bad post.
So, in hindsight, I can absolutely see why this would make her feel bad.
She had traveled to see me.
She was texting her friends and family about me and our date ahead of time.
In particular, some high expectations.
Yeah, but that does not give her the right to make this accusation against you, as you guys are going to see here soon.
Expectations for me.
Kicking her out was rude and dismissive.
I didn't think that way at the time, but I regret how I handled that.
And if I could go back, I would do things differently.
It's crazy that he even has to apologize for kicking a chick out of his house, a consenting adult, by the way, after sex.
Let that sink in, chat.
Let that sink in.
Let that sink in.
A consenting adult had sex with him.
He told the consenting adult to leave.
And then they felt some type of way and then retroactively withdrew the consent.
This is why.
And what I'm going to say isn't a reflection of Jack Denmo.
I'm going to give you, this is my opinion and my opinion only.
But when I tell you guys that we need to make women second-class citizens again and they need to be fucking subordinate to men, this is exactly what the fuck I'm talking about.
There is a real reason.
There is a reason that every major religion put constraints on female sexuality and made sure that women were subordinate to some type of man, whether it was their brother, their father, or their husband.
This is why.
This is why.
When they have power, when they're treated like adults, they reserve the right to infantilize and make themselves a victim at any fucking point.
Okay?
So, in other words, you are always looked at as an adult with adult responsibility.
She can pick and choose when she's treated like an adult.
She could be a whore today and then end up being treated like a fucking child later on as a victim if she doesn't like how the deal ended up.
And then people get mad at me when I say they shouldn't have the right to vote.
They should be treated as second-class citizens.
Men need to be the leaders in everything because they do stupid shit like this.
A woman's feelings are coming into play to destroy an innocent man's fucking life.
With that being said, all of the sexual activity that we did was consensual.
And when I say consensual, I don't mean ambiguous or neutral.
I mean it was enthusiastic, encouraging, and ongoing.
And I testified to that under oath.
To put it simply, the whole thing was a typical one.
Yeah, um, when a girl's saying, bang me daddy and all this other stuff spanking or whatever.
Yeah, that's definitely enthusiastic consent.
But normies don't understand that.
One night stand.
Just to be clear, my charge had nothing to do with filming a consent video.
It was entirely based on an allegation that I non-consensually assaulted this person.
And you know what's crazy?
If he made the video, that would have exonerated him.
You guys hear that?
The video that he wanted to record would have more than likely saved him in this situation and she didn't want it recorded.
And interestingly enough, it's illegal in a lot of places for you to record yourself having sex with someone without their consent.
But that person could come back and withdraw said consent later on and fuck your life up.
Incredible.
He respected her wishes and didn't record, and then she used that against him and used the advantageous gynocentric social order that we have to mount a ridiculous accusation against him because she knows that women are going to win in the court of appeals of public appeals.
This was shocking to me.
It absolutely destroyed my mental health.
And for months, I was so confused.
What the f am I being charged with?
We do know what the reasons were now, and we'll get into those later.
But I was charged in February 2021, and these charges were then made public in October 2022 after the accuser contacted my city's local newspaper to run a story about these allegations before that year's McMaster Hoko was to take place.
During this time, I felt absolute agony.
I stopped making comedy and prank videos because I just, to put it simply, lost my sense of humor.
And it's embarrassing to admit, but I felt helpless.
Now I want to give you an overview on these things in society.
Through legal counsel and many other stories that have been shared with me, I've learned that my case is not unique.
False accusations are common and absolutely devastating to the victims.
For those that don't know, in Canada, there is no actual...
And that's why I'm doing this video, chat.
That's why I'm doing this video because most people are not going to cover this topic because this is a topic that no one talks about, nobody cares about.
And this is probably one of the most important topics that I need all of you motherfuckers to pay attention to and understand and be completely aware of.
Anybody can get hit with these bullshit accusations, man.
Anybody.
Nobody's safe.
Evidence required to charge and convict somebody.
In most assault cases, there isn't actually any concrete evidence.
It ends up just being one person's word versus another.
He said, she said situation.
So as an accused person, the only strategy you have is to find lies, discrepancies, contradictions in the accuser's story.
So imagine you or your loved one is being accused despite there being zero evidence.
If you or your loved one's defense lawyer cannot question the credibility of the person making these accusations, it will most likely lead to a conviction and there's nothing you can do about it.
As much as this system and laws were put into place with good intentions to help real victims and real survivors, an unfortunate side effect is that they are highly abusable and exploitable.
They often take years of time, hundreds of thousands of dollars, and the accused person loses their job, loses their reputation, and is publicly shamed and potentially even ends up in jail for something they didn't do.
But aside from that, from the defendant's standpoint, there are also laws that have been put into place to make it even more difficult to defend yourself.
Like rape shield laws in America.
Normal trial, you can get access to information such as records, messages, emails, etc.
However, in assault cases, the police and prosecutors can, and in my case, they did, actively redact any and all information or evidence to prevent you from using it in your defense.
So in America, I'm assuming it's probably like a functional equivalent of like rape shield laws in Canada, but very similar, more than likely, since Canada is like a Commonwealth state like us.
In my case, it was brought to our attention that there were a common law state like us, excuse me.
Common law country like us.
For thousands of communication records that had been redacted by the police.
We later found out that the police not only redacted all of this data, but they actually emailed the accuser and said, is there anything specifically that you would like us to redact?
And then she replied saying, yes, I would like you to redact all of the emails with my therapist and all of the communications with her alleged boyfriend.
Pay attention to this therapist one.
Particular specific emails that were very, very telling.
Egyptian Mendes Counsel00:02:48
And I will get into them later on.
But anyways, back to the evidence.
At one point, I remember they gave us about 90 different pages and around 80 of them were completely blacked out.
I'm not a lawyer.
I'm actually kind of an idiot.
But from what I've been explained by legal counsel, this makes it incredibly hard to defend yourself at trial.
If there is evidence.
Yeah, you're not getting the full discovery.
So you don't even know what the police are fully using against you.
So you're basically fighting with one eye open for your freedom.
Mr. Osidian, good evening, Myron.
Thanks for your fitness and advice to all of us.
I have just one question for you tonight.
What are your thoughts on the conspiracy theory of rumors of human meat and beef in the fast food?
Never heard of it.
Didn't really pay attention to that.
Cha-cha says, love the show always shooting again.
Funny how you saw, funny saw you in Chipolio last week and I had a black hoodie on.
I want to say Apple wasn't trying to make a scene in the public place.
Okay.
Say hi, man.
It's no worries.
My name is Ray.
I keep all the evidence.
I have been ignoring the girl since New Year's.
91 calls, 14 voicemails and four emails.
Later, I decided to show the police now she's being charged with aggravated assaults and stalking and coercion.
Yeah, this is where we are.
Let me see here.
Let me read some of these chests so I don't catch up too much.
Joe says, yo, homie, hire Erner here.
I got a camera system for every room, but the bathroom up in my place.
I'd rather get time for recording legally than for grape.
Also, I put a little painting.
That's a disclaimer, too.
They still need to indict you.
Yeah, yeah.
I mean, keep it.
Try to keep it at least the common areas, man.
You don't want to break the law.
But keeping it in the common areas is a good start.
Crypto, these nuts.
What's up?
Says, what's up, bro?
Hope all is well for you.
This is for OneChest, brother.
Do you have a calisthenic workout plan?
Hit them up and get a coach from him.
Can you give us some examples of what three things you would do after sex make a feel, bro?
Just like comfort her.
Don't be like a scumbag.
Don't kick her out immediately.
Order some food.
Hang out.
Chat with her.
You know what I mean?
Shoot her like a human, dude.
That's all.
Presumably, you're not smashing girls that you hate.
I'm hoping.
Egyptian Mendes.
These girls are also awful with the stuff they ask for.
For someone who has never dealt with women, it sounds like a flat out abuse violence.
Yeah, that's what they do.
Cletus, Myron, how is it even legal for women to make the accusation on the basis of I changed my mind?
I retroactively no longer consent to sex.
It's literally impossible to know if it's consensual or not, and you can't read their personal minds.
Exactly, my friend.
That's the problem here.
Myron's a G, have you been watching Friends of it for years?
Only Money Mondays now, but MGX has been much valued.
I appreciate you.
Got you, Stephen Lee.
Steve only.
Egyptian Mendes.
This has scared me since I'm 21.
I hooked up with a bunch of girls where I would just say I need to head to bed.
I have work in a marriage.
I always delete numbers too.
Yeah, you got to be a little bit nicer about that.
What are two answers to overcome the opposifying of men in today's societal programming?
That's not the topic, bro.
Bro, it's fucking wild that once anything comes out trying to expose you in this region.
Yeah, that's what they do, bro.
But don't worry.
We're going to cook them tomorrow.
They're pathetic, bro.
Witness Discrepancies Explained00:14:59
They're pathetic.
And I'm going to show you guys actually why.
I know why they did it.
Dustpan, shout out to you for subscribing.
It's for the year, bro.
My wife Christian Ass loves your shit and your bros.
Appreciate you, buzz.
Oh, you joined for the year.
Okay, perfect.
Thomas Rushmore.
I used to watch Jack all the time before he got taken down.
I know a girl got pranked by him a while back.
Crazy that girls ruined someone's life with no remorse.
Exactly.
Glita says, The world we live in now is really bad.
We have women destroying men's legacy sometimes, decades after the man is dead.
Yep.
Okay, let's get back to it.
That we're bringing that contradicts their version of events.
They can change their version of events before.
Bro, I'm a prosecutor in Canada.
I can tell you grape is the hardest for accused people.
Bring me up and I can tell you about it.
Interesting.
Prosecutor in Canada.
It's the hardest for accused people.
That's interesting.
Matt DeKing.
Holy shit, we got a Canadian prosecutor in the house even admitting that it's a fucking slippery slope and an uphill battle.
For trial.
So why is it like this now?
Well, first of all, obviously, it's intended to protect real survivors from privacy concerns as well as trials being delayed.
But what it really is, is they essentially wanted to get more convictions.
After the 2016 acquittal of John Gomeshi, which led okay, this is an ugly reality as well, guys.
Prosecutors' offices get rated on arrests and prosecutions that are successful.
Very ugly, but it's the truth.
They absolutely keep stats on successful prosecutions.
To significant changes to Canadian law, frequently referred to as the Gomezi rules.
This was implemented via Bill C-51 and subsequent legislation, which are designed to make it easier to secure convictions by altering how evidence regarding a complainant's credibility is handled.
These changes were meant to counteract how in the Gomeshi trial, the defense was able to use contradictory evidence like emails and photos to successfully challenge the credibility of witnesses and get an acquittal.
Because of Bill C-51 and the Gomeshi rules, if there is evidence that shows contradictions in the accuser's statement, it can be discarded.
And even if it's not discarded and it is allowed at trial, it has to be given to them and approved.
And that gives them the opportunity to prepare for it and potentially alter a story.
This is what has been put into effect to get more convictions.
The problem is, it is potentially at the cost of innocent people going to jail and having their life ruined.
Again, I want to preface, I'm not a lawyer, but that is my understanding of the law, which is similar to America.
And I'm open to being corrected.
Now, right off the bat, from the statements of the accuser alone, we had many examples of inaccuracies, contradictions, and story changes.
But once we found out that there was all of this actual evidence that had been intentionally redacted, we became very curious.
After several years and over $100,000 just in pre-trial application costs, we were able to get a significant portion of the redacted evidence, including emails, text messages, etc.
After reviewing them, it was quite clear that there were multiple strong motives to fabricate these allegations.
Now, if we go back to the encounter, remember that the accuser only actually had an issue with my attempt to film a consent video.
This is what was so confusing to me because I was there.
She initiated sex with me afterwards, and we continued having sex.
All of this material is available in the official trial transcripts, which you can go over in the description.
But even though I deleted whatever was recorded, she had a massive concern on whether or not this video still existed and was worried that it would be circulated.
Bro, I hope that he was able to get it back, bro.
I pray he was able to get it back.
Circulated online.
And we know this because it was mentioned multiple different times.
For example, from the April 18th transcript.
And what about if he actually took a video?
If he did and that got out, that could ruin my entire life.
Interesting.
Why would it ruin your entire life?
That is from the email she sent.
I think we know why.
Also, guys, I'm back on Instagram.
Got my account back.
As you guys can see, FedReacts, we're back up.
See how long we last this time.
Her therapist the night of our date from April 18th.
This is at 2:22 p.m. on August the 7th, two days after August the 5th.
Also, I'm going to the police, maybe not to press charges, but I want to tell them and report it and see if they could do anything about him possibly.
Also, guys, smash the like button because this is a very important video.
Let's get some more people in here.
I'm going to stay on YouTube a little bit longer because this is very important, this topic.
So, smash the like button for me, guys, on YouTube.
Let's get this thing into the algo a bit more, engage with the channel possibly taking a video or picture of me.
End quote.
You sent this, right?
She responds, yes.
My lawyer, the primary purpose for going to the police that you are sure you want them to do something about is to see if he took pictures or videos of you.
The accuser, yes.
Lawyer, and in your mind, you would agree that that would entail them having to at least go to his house, talk to him.
Accuser, yes.
And taking his phone, accuser, yes.
And then making sure that there wasn't anything there that you had in a compromised picture or video, right?
Accuser, yes.
If you want to double-check this, this is all in the testimony on April 18th.
So that's wild.
When she contacted the police, her concern was to know for sure that the video was truly deleted.
I wonder why.
However, the only way that the police can search a phone is by obtaining a warrant.
Yep.
And a warrant can only be obtained if there was a crime from the appeal.
Given the evidence reaching it meant that when the accuser left Mr. Densmore's home, she believed he possessed a compromising video of her on his phone, which increased the probative value of evidence supporting a potential motive to fabricate.
As Justice Krachenko concluded, the accuser's most significant concern was that Mr. Densmore had images or videos of her on his phone.
It was essential to consider whether the accuser made the sexual assault allegation partly or fully to prompt police to access his device, especially since the police apparently would not take action unless she made a formal complaint.
In regards to her email to the police, she said, I'm unsure if I want to press charges at this time, but I'm deeply concerned as to if he has any photos or videos of me.
Interesting.
Interesting.
So it seems to me that she's more concerned about the video than actually being a victim.
Following back and forth communication with the police, the accuser eventually went in and gave an official statement nearly two months later.
She then described a non-consensual encounter that, to be frank, did not happen.
I'm going to try and say this as politely as possible.
There are multiple points in the accuser's testimony which contradict her police statements and her testimony at trial.
I want to share a few major discrepancies and then you can decide for yourself.
Now, as a warning, some of the information I'm about to share is graphic and potentially triggering, but I must go into these details so that you can see just a couple of the major discrepancies in this person's testimony.
Her version of events compared to her other versions of events and her own testimony.
Let's proceed.
All right.
Now you guys are going to see.
See, and this is the crazy part too, because in court, right, or in trials, the witness's credibility makes or breaks the case.
The accuser testified that I aggressively removed her shirt and pulled down her dress.
He started by removing my shirt and pulling down my dress so that my breasts were exposed.
Then, in cross-examination, she further insisted, no, he didn't ask me to take it off.
He just started to take it off.
My lawyer asked again, you're sure about that?
To which the accuser confirmed, yes.
She made this allegation in testimony and then doubled down on this in cross-examination with my lawyer.
However, these new allegations she made in her testimony are totally different from her actual statement to police.
To police, she said.
So we went to his room and we were like just sitting on his bed and he put on a show on Netflix and then he put his arm around me and then after a few minutes kissed me, which I was okay with.
And then he told me like, take off my shirt, which I was comfortable with because I was like wearing a dress underneath it.
So in her original story, she claims that I paused.
Ha!
Wow.
Politely requested her to take her shirt off and she did it herself voluntarily and comfortably.
However, at trial, she said he started by removing my shirt and pulling down my to take her shirt off and she did it herself voluntarily and comfortably.
However, at trial, she made in her testimony are totally different from her actual statement to police.
Boom.
Now, let me explain this to you guys.
When you're first, in like a case like this, you're obviously going to talk to detectives, right?
As the victim, the victim, right?
If you give the police a story and then you later testify to something else, that's a big fucking problem.
And obviously, this is an extremely pertinent detail.
The fact that what she told the cops when which led to the probable cause, which was then used to arrest him, the fact that she told the cops a different story to what she testified to is a big fucking issue.
Big issue.
Which one is it?
You either lied to the police or you lied on the stand.
Which one is it?
Because we have two different fucking stories here.
And this is obviously an incredibly important detail.
To police, she said.
So we went to his room and we were like just sitting on his bed and he put on a show.
This was used to establish the probable cause that was used to arrest him.
I don't know what the standard is again, but I'm assuming something equivalent.
On Netflix, and then he put his arm around me and then after a few minutes, kissed me, which I was okay with.
And then he told me like, take off my shirt, which I was comfortable with because I was like wearing a dress underneath it.
So in her original story, she claims that I politely requested her to take her shirt off and she did it herself voluntarily and comfortably.
However, at trial, she said he started by removing my shirt and pulling down my dress so that my breasts were exposed.
Then in cross-examination.
Completely different story.
Also, I think it's important that you guys understand something.
As someone that actually used to investigate crime and actually, you know, put witnesses on the stand, et cetera, the prosecutor prepares their witnesses before trial.
Now, I don't know what the fuck happened in this preparation, but the fact that her story is changing on the stand like this is a big fucking problem for the prosecutor.
Big fucking problem.
Your statement needs to match all the way through.
But yes, prosecutors prepare their witnesses.
Because a lot of the times these cases take years to go to trial.
Obviously, your memory fogs, you lose certain details, whatever.
So they'll read the police reports, prepare the witness for testimony.
So this is crazy that she's giving a different story on the stand than what she gave police.
And you would presume that the prosecutor would properly prepare her to make things match.
But she's changing her story now.
She further insisted, again, as part of this aggressive encounter she's trying to paint.
No, he didn't ask me to take it off.
He just started to take it off.
My lawyer confirmed, are you sure?
She confirmed, yes, that is how it happened.
Okay, I already know what's about to happen here.
For all the people here that might not be legally inclined, his lawyer is asking her questions on what's called cross-examination.
So, on direct examination, the state, because they're the ones bringing the case, the burden of proof is on them.
The state is questioning their witness.
This is called direct examination.
The prosecutor asks the victim questions, right, to paint a story.
Then, on cross, his defense attorney goes and challenges the victim and asks them questions, okay?
So, the lawyer is doing an interest.
I already know what's about to happen here.
I didn't watch the video, but I already know what's about to happen.
He asked her, Hey, did you tell the police that you removed your thing off consensually, right?
Or he's gonna, he's gonna catch her in a lie, basically, what's gonna happen.
So, let's go through, I'll let it just play.
I'll have it mixed up, but like, you guys get the point here.
They're gonna, he's gonna try to catch her on a lie.
So, let's just get right back to it.
However, my lawyer confirmed, Are you sure?
She confirmed, he just started to take it off.
My counsel, she's trying to paint.
No, he didn't.
So, she tells the cops that she took it off.
Then, on the stand, she says she took it off, or he took it off.
On the stand, he took it off to the police.
She took it off.
He didn't ask me to take it off, he just started to take it off.
My lawyer confirmed, Are you sure?
She confirmed, yes, that is how it happened.
However, my lawyer then confronted her with her own original statement to police.
Let's go.
Let's see what she says now.
And he reminded her that this is what she said.
And then he asked her.
And you're under oath.
Catch it, bitch.
And you're under oath, bitch.
Catch it, bitch.
Again, what actually happened?
She then confirmed her original story, which is that I asked her to take her shirt off and she did so voluntarily.
My lawyer further confirmed, asking, because you're the one that took your shirt off with his request.
And that was your way of showing interest or consenting, right?
To which she responded, yes.
Are you serious?
Are you fucking serious?
He just caught her in a lie on the stand.
This is a clear example of willingness to intentionally remove and omit participation and change details to suit the false narrative of an aggressive, non-consensual encounter, which to put it simply just never happened.
Moving on, there were factors.
Brad's done right there.
Her credibility is already cooked.
Her credibility's already cooked.
Here, I'm going to replay that part because this is extremely important.
One more time, no interruptions.
However, my lawyer, he started.
I was okay with Netflix.
He said, so we went to his room and we were like just sitting on his bed and he put on a show on Netflix and then he put his arm around me and then after a few minutes, kissed me, which I was okay with.
Testimony Contradictions Revealed00:03:04
And then he told me like, 10, your shirt shirt and pulled down her dress.
I'm about to share is graphic and potentially triggering, but I must go into these details so that you can see just a couple of the major discrepancies in this person's testimony.
Her version of events compared to her other versions of events and her own testimony.
Let's proceed.
The accuser testified that I aggressively removed her shirt and pulled down her dress.
He started by removing my shirt and pulling down my dress so that my breasts were exposed.
Then in cross-examination, she further insisted, no, he didn't ask me to take it off.
He just started to take it off.
My lawyer asked again, you're sure about that?
To which the accuser confirmed yes.
She made this allegation in testimony and then doubled down on this in cross-examination with my lawyer.
However, these new allegations she made in her testimony are totally different from her actual statement to police.
To police, she said.
So we went to his room and we were like just sitting on his bed and he put on a show on Netflix and then he put his arm around me and then after a few minutes, kissed me, which I was okay with.
And then he told me like, take off my shirt, which I was comfortable with because I was like wearing a dress underneath it.
So in her original story, she claims that I politely requested her to take her shirt off and she did it herself voluntarily and comfortably.
However, at trial, she said, he started by removing my shirt and pulling down my dress so that my breasts were exposed.
Then in cross-examination, she further insisted, again, as part of this aggressive encounter she's trying to paint, no, he didn't ask me to take it off.
He just started to take it off.
My lawyer confirmed, are you sure?
She confirmed, yes, that is how it happened.
However, my lawyer then confronted her with her own original statement to police and he reminded her that this is what she said.
And then he asked her again what actually happened.
She then confirmed her original story, which is that I asked her to take her shirt off and she did so voluntarily.
My lawyer further confirmed asking, because you're the one that took your shirt off with his request and that was your way of showing interest or consenting, right?
To which she responded, yes.
This is a clear dude, right then and there.
This is done.
This is done.
Don, get the fuck out of here.
Take her off the stand.
Get this guy out of there.
Case closed.
This shit's done.
Credibility gone.
She clearly lied.
Like, what the fuck are we doing here?
What the fuck are we doing here, bro?
Are you serious?
She just got caught in a lie on the fucking stand.
And holy shit, talk about a poor job from the prosecution.
They didn't even prep her properly.
Like, the number one rule as a prosecutor is to prep your witness properly so the police reports match the testimony.
Fabricated Bruises Caught00:04:14
They couldn't even do that.
Are you serious?
So the prosecutor's a retard.
She's a fucking retard.
Good job from his defense attorney to catch this incredibly important discrepancy between what she said on the stand versus what she told police that don't match up.
This is crazy.
And apparently there's more of this.
So we'll keep going.
Example of willingness to intentionally remove and omit participation and change details to suit the false narrative of an aggressive, non-consensual encounter, which to put it simply just never happened.
Moving on, there were fabricated bruises.
The accuser claimed that I aggressively bit her breasts, causing bruising, swelling, and red marks for days after.
On August 6th, less than one day after our date, the nurse examined her breasts and found zero bruising, zero swelling, and zero red marks.
This was totally fabricated.
From the appeal, in her examination in chief, the accuser described an aggressive sex assault.
It began when Mr. Densmore removed her shirt and pulled down her dress, exposing her breasts.
She testified that Mr. Densmore kissed and bit her breasts, which was quite painful, and that the biting left bruises and red marks that lingered for two to three days after their encounter.
He then pushed her onto her back, got on top of her, and penetrated her digitally.
Page 34.
Though the events described above qualify as a violent assault, Justice Krachenko flatly rejected the accuser's account, noting how it conflicted with evidence from the nurse who examined the accuser's breasts and found no bite marks or bruising.
He also noted a major inconsistency about digital penetration that was brought out in cross-examination.
This is another clear example of fabricating an aggressive, non-consensual encounter as the accusations of bruises, bite marks, and red swelling for days after were entirely fabricated and confirmed by the nurse, not days after, but the next day, August 6th.
Wow.
Wow, wow.
Having initiated a perception of what actually happened that evening in her mind and the struggle for the pursuit of criminal charges, the complaint also struggled with physical reality.
This is someone that came to court and gave sworn evidence that she suffered injuries to her breast, bruising, red marks, swelling for days after because Mr. Denmore was biting her breast.
She then gave evidence that the nurse, the sexual assault nurse, inspected her breast for bruises, but it's agreed, it's an agreed statement of fact that when the nurse looked at her breast the following night, there were no injuries and she wrote her report to reflect reality.
Wow.
Wow, wow, wow, bro.
Next, in her police statement, she said that I got on top of her aggressively.
And in her description to the crown, she shared detailed allegations about this without any mention of her participation.
In April 17th, cross-examination, however, she admitted that after a few minutes of kissing, she swung her legs over my body and straddled me before removing her shirt.
Straddling is in mounting me, so sitting on top of my genital area, and grinding her groin area directly on mine while sitting upright on top of me.
She also said now that she smiled and moaned and that I would remark, I liked it or moan.
Again, this shows that she was an active participant, contrary to all of her previous statements.
This is from April 17th, 2024.
Next, in a statement to police, she said that she didn't make a single noise or sound besides ow.
Then in cross-examination, she admitted to making noises, moaning and saying, I like it during various stages of sex activity.
Wow.
So if she says she likes it at that point, everything else is like, okay.
Platform Demonetization Rants00:08:15
What?
That just doesn't, it doesn't, it doesn't make sense from a sequence perspective at all.
To show her consent that she was an active participant from the appeal.
Another inconsistency was the accuser's avowal that the vast majority of the encounter took place in near silence.
In chief, she was a silent recipient of Mr. Densmore's advances.
She testified that other than providing her with specific directions, the only sound made by either party was Mr. Densmore calling her a slave.
Wow.
In closing submissions, trial counsel describes the accuser's initial depiction as an incomprehensible narrative of a silent movie.
It also seemed to be incomprehensible to the accuser, who admitted on cross-examination on multiple occasions that they were both moaning and that she was breathing heavy and that she uttered the words, I like that.
So which one is it?
Next, we're going to start talking about some of the therapist statements.
Okay, shit's about to get crazy right now, guys.
Do me a favor, smash the like button.
Obviously, this is an important video.
I'm staying up on JTUB a little bit longer for you guys.
I don't get fucking paid to be on YouTube, as you guys know.
But this video is kind of important.
So I'll take a little bit of a financial hit for you on Ninja.
So smash the fucking like button because I'm demonetized on YouTube.
I'm going to stay on here a little bit longer, maybe another 15 minutes or so.
Then we're going to move to kick.
But smash that like button.
And obviously, it's completely free to watch on kick with no ads, by the way.
But a lot of you guys don't want to get off this godforsaken, awful platform of YouTube.
So I understand that therapy is something that is very personal.
It's very private.
And a lot of people watching this might be in therapy.
So I'm not using this in any way to try to minimize therapy or discredit therapists in general.
Okay?
Just want to start by saying that.
There were many issues with the statements to the therapist, including inaccuracies given to the therapist by the okay.
Before we even get into the therapist, because a whole other thing, let me read these chats.
Can you join the police with the GED?
Depends on the department.
Elle says, love seeing your grandbrother.
You're changing lives every second.
I'm trying.
Sandman 90 says, why would they let her redact actual proof?
Is this how it works in the U.S.?
It works in pretty much U.S. Canada.
It's because sex rape shield laws, bro.
Rape shield laws basically make it where, as the defendant, you have a limited ability to protect yourself because you don't have full, unrestricted access to some of the discovery or certain pieces of evidence can't be brought in.
At this point, niggas might have to just pay for a box because what the fuck?
The Masters Whitmar, and you don't understand how bad as it can.
A few years ago, a feminist Supreme Court ruled if a man tampers with a woman's birth controller to get her pregnant, it is considered great because she didn't consent to the pregnancy.
That's crazy.
Off topic.
Sorry, man.
Any advice for future regarding the issues of my addiction yesterday was I'm seeing a sex therapist now.
I already told you yesterday, Broyo.
It's crazy how women are starting to withdraw consent because of how sexual encounters didn't go in a woman's favor.
I had false allegations against me in the past that still haunt me to this day.
YouTube niggas when Myrons cuts a kick in OSS only.
Yeah, that fucking meme is crazy.
Accuser, which led to the therapist giving very strong.
Also, the other reason, too, why it cut off YouTube, guys, is because I can't be as raw on YouTube.
I've actually had to like withhold, like kind of curb back some of my commentary because YouTube is so censorship friendly.
It's annoying as hell, dude.
This platform truly sucks.
The only good thing YouTube is good for, bro, is literally discovery.
Other than that, it's useless.
It's the worst fucking app ever.
It's to completely rely upon AI for moderation.
You can fucking get your channel nuked for anything.
You get your demonization nuke for anything.
And like there's very little recourse.
So it's like, it's the worst fucking platform ever.
Like, unless you're like a normie, like YouTube is actually trash.
But if you're like a political commentator, you talk about racy topics, you talk about controversial or divisive topics, like, bro, you're playing with fire being on YouTube.
You really are.
You know, the fact that some fucking weirdo in Silicon Valley can literally be like, oh, I don't like this content.
So let me just turn this person's monetization off or let me just nuke this person's channel because I don't like it myself personally is incredibly ridiculous.
Now, luckily, we've been able to find ways around.
Rumble, kick, OSS, et cetera, merch, book sales, whatever, right?
So I've been able to get around and deal with YouTube demonetization, but I really feel sorry for all the other YouTube creators.
They get demonetized or get their channel nuked out of fucking anywhere.
I can't tell you guys.
I'm on Twitter and I see so many people writing to Team YouTube.
Hey, my channel was randomly cut off.
Hey, I was randomly demonetized.
Hey, my channel randomly got a strike.
Hey, it was terminated with no excuse or no explanation.
And then they write into it and I can see the conversation on Twitter and they say, yeah, our decision stands.
What?
You guys are playing God with people's livelihoods.
You guys are literally playing God with people's livelihoods.
This is fucked up.
And I will always keep my boot on fucking YouTube's neck for fucking with people like that.
I'm good.
I've got around to demonization.
I figured it out.
I've been demonetized for damn near three years now at this point, right?
We adapt and we survive.
But for all the small creators out there, all the people out there that get fucking censored by YouTube and lose their livelihoods, I'm speaking up for them.
This is bullshit.
Honestly.
And losers like Neil Mahan and the entire trusted safety board at YouTube need to be held fucking accountable.
They absolutely need to be held accountable.
The fact that they can ruin someone's fucking life, right?
A small creator that might rely on that for some side income or is their primary income is fucking criminal.
It's fucking criminal.
And someone needs to expose it.
And to be honest with y'all, I might have to be the one.
I told y'all before: if we hit 10,000 active supporters, I might honestly take a fucking megaphone and go right to YouTube headquarters, set up a tent right there, set up a fucking table, and call these fucking idiots out.
Because the only thing that YouTube responds to is negative publicity and getting fucking called out for their bullshit.
And at this point, it's not even for me anymore.
It's really not even for me anymore.
I've adapted.
But the small creators that keep getting fucked over by this shitty ass fucking platform that's run by a bunch of retarded, left-leaning, colored hair, woke fucking morons that use their ideology to justify punitive fucking damage or punitive, make punitive decisions against people that don't hold the same political or ideological beliefs is fucking criminal.
Oh, it's our platform, so we can do whatever we want.
Fuck y'all.
You guys are essentially a monopoly.
So no.
You guys are a monopoly in video sharing.
So you guys are going to be held to it.
You guys need to be held to a different fucking standard because they've come on and admitted that they bent the knee to the Biden administration with pushing pro-COVID vaccines.
They admitted that they pushed the push back and banned people for talking about the election being rigged, despite the fact that there's so much evidence out there that shows that there's some evidence there.
There's some smoke there with the 2020 election being rigged.
They used to ban people for that shit.
That's how Sneego got his channel back.
They banned it for shit that they don't enforce anymore.
Imagine losing your channel and your livelihood for shit that you were right about the whole time.
That's nuts.
So yeah, my grievances with YouTube at this point, it's more from a holistic perspective of how they do things and how they fuck.
I mean, Jack lost his channel.
The guy that we're talking, that we're discussing right now, lost his channel over some bullshit fucking accusations.
The guy we're literally covering now lost his channel over a false rape allegation, bruh.
So anyway, and I know some idiots are going to say, as their platform, they could do whatever they want.
Here's the problem: their platform doesn't even have real and consistent moderation.
Same exact problem with Twitch.
They rely way too much on AI.
Therapist Inaccurate Responses00:12:04
And when they do have human reviewers, human reviewers reserve the right to make decisions based on their own political ideology.
What one person might consider misogyny, another person might consider biological fact.
One of the reasons they told me that they're not going to remonetize me is because I said men are superior to women.
Like, what?
That's a biological fucking fact.
That's hate speech.
Fuck you guys, man.
Honestly.
So anyway, rants over with YouTube, but let's continue on.
But yeah, it's ridiculous because obviously it's kind of pertinent to the topic because this guy lost his channel as well for a false accusation that we're literally watching right now.
So now we're on the part of her visits to the therapist.
Excuse me.
Opinions and recommendations by the accuser with the statements to the therapist.
And this is awesome that he got her therapist records.
Including inaccuracies given to the therapist by the accuser, which led to the therapist giving very strong opinions and recommendations, which ended up leading to reshaping what actually happened in the mind of the accuser, in addition to collusion.
And if you don't know what collusion is, Google it because it's very bad.
The accuser was asked.
Basically, conspiracy and working together with some nefarious intentions.
About some of these statements throughout the trial in this particular one from April 18th.
My lawyer.
Okay, so you're not very truthful with your therapist, are you?
The accuser, no, I'm extremely truthful to her.
My lawyer, extremely truthful, right?
Accuser, yes.
My lawyer.
Mind you, this is after he caught her lying a bunch of times.
That's how you characterize what you're saying to her.
The accuser, yes.
Here in particular, she made a statement to her therapist where she inaccurately depicted our date and implied very dangerously that I tricked her into coming into my house.
Bro, what?
What?
Full-grown adult, by the way.
Full-grown adult, by the way.
He tricked her into going to his house?
All right, let's keep going.
I debated whether to send this or not because maybe I'm just being dramatic or stupid or overthinking or reading into something that didn't happen.
Or maybe it just brought this whole thing onto myself.
But I went on a date tonight.
We were supposed to go for a hike and then drinks.
But when I showed up to his house, he said it was too late to go for a walk.
So we started watching a movie.
My lawyer asked, Have I read that accurately?
The accuser confirms, yes.
My lawyer, and that's not what happened, is it?
Accuser, not all of the details.
No.
My lawyer, but that's what you told her happened, right?
Accuser, yes.
Pause.
Inaccuracies like that are super important because they have a severe impact on the therapist's perception of events.
Absolutely.
The therapist is going to dispense advice based on what they're fucking told.
If you lie to your therapist and say, hey, I only watch porn for one hour a day when you really watch it for 20 hours a day, That's going to heavily impact what your therapist tells you to remedy the problem.
Wow.
Which leads to responses from the therapist that, as a therapist's responses, would give massive influence over the accuser.
Yep.
But the therapist's advice is contingent and reliant upon the accuracy of the patient.
So if the patient lies, the therapist, by virtue of giving them the best advice based off of what they're told, is going to give shitty advice or a shitty diagnosis or a shitty prognosis, whatever the fuck you want to call it.
I call it retardnosis in this case because this bitch is retarded.
So the therapist receives this amongst other inaccurate statements continuing from April 18th.
So these are your records that she's made about sessions that she's had with you.
And the session date is Friday, August the 7th.
We spent the session going over her experience and looking at potential stuck points where she blamed herself.
In reviewing the evening, it is clear the accuser attempted to make good decisions and that he was clearly a predator, skilled in having her make small changes to their plans until she was in his apartment.
Have I read that correctly?
The accuser confirms.
Yes.
The accuser claims to be extremely truthful to her therapist, giving a completely completely inaccurate statement about the date to her therapist with a very misleading implication.
As a result, the therapist tells her with authority he was clearly a predator, skilled in having her make small changes to their plans until she was in his apartment.
She then takes these various responses she gets from her therapist and sends them to her.
And just so you guys know, therapy, psychology, psychiatry in general, that entire industry is run by women and feminists.
We already know what the issue is with that.
It's completely higher academia, psychology, and psychiatry.
These industries are completely fucking female run with purple-haired, feminist, loony-toon fucking idiots who immediately always victimize the female.
Also, keep in mind, not only do they victimize the female, that's their default setting.
She gave them a narrative that wasn't even true that puts her in a victim situation and removes accountability from her.
So going to a therapist is already fucking bad.
Then you lie to said therapist.
OK, and that therapist has a female first mindset from the beginning.
So you go to the therapist in the first place, which is female run.
The therapist already has a female first mindset.
Then you lie to said therapist.
Of course.
Of course.
The answer that you're going to get from that fucking tainted source, a.k.a. therapist, is going to be you're the victim.
Her friends and family.
Also from April 18th.
Yeah.
Doctor therapist said that he seemed very calculated in the way he acted, like he had thought it out, and that I'm not the first.
So now she's giving false information to the therapist.
Therapist is responding, and then she's taking what the therapist is responding and sending it to her friends using the authority of the therapist.
This is one of the many messages that the accuser sent to her friends and family.
You can see more in the May 31st closing arguments.
Now, during testimony at trial, her statement changed.
April 12th, you've said the tour was approximately 15 minutes, nothing unusual.
What happens after that?
She answers.
Then he suggests that we go for a hike.
Oh, hmm.
And how did you then end up going for a hike?
What happens after that?
He suggested that we drive to a trail that was close by to his house.
So I agreed to that and we started driving there.
So the accuser admitted that actually I suggested we go for a hike, which was the original plan.
And then we left the house.
Okay, so you described driving towards the escarpment.
Accuser.
Do you eventually stop somewhere?
Accuser, no.
He says that it's busy and that we shouldn't bother going on a hike because it's getting dark out.
So then he suggests going back to his house.
Are you able to give us an estimate about how long you were trying to locate a hiking trail?
Accuser.
Not long, maybe 15, 20 minutes.
Did you agree with his suggestion to go back to his house?
Accuser, I did.
Huh?
We then returned to the house.
Remember how she said that he tricked her?
After she agreed to return and watch Netflix and chill.
But literally the same night as the date, she then goes and tells a very different and inaccurate version the same night.
So many implications, opinions, responses, and collusion and influences were made from these inaccurate statements.
And what's super concerning about all this?
And you know what's key, guys?
What did I tell you?
After you have sex with a girl is the most sensitive time.
What did she do?
All of these messages were right after he kicked her out the house.
So her friends and other people she messaged put the battery in her back to make her feel like a victim and a whore.
So she said, you know what?
I don't like this feeling.
I got to make him feel some of this.
I'm going to make a false accusation.
This is why I tell you guys, after you hook up with a girl, that is the most sensitive time.
Make her feel comfortable.
Don't make her feel like a fucking used up whore, whether she is or not.
Be personable, be polite, have some decency because women are ruled by their fucking emotions.
So since he kicked her out and she felt used, she talks to her friends.
They put the battery in her back that she's a victim like women always fucking do because women never take accountability and they just egg each other on with their own stupidity.
And next thing you know, the battery's in the back.
Now she's a victim.
Let me go ahead and take this all the way.
That's what happened here.
That's how the fuck this happened.
The crazy part is we're not even done here with some of the lies.
So we'll keep going.
Aside from that, she never corrected her therapist by saying, actually, he did suggest going for a hike.
And then we actually did leave the house.
Yeah, she told the therapist, guys, he tricked me into coming.
But when the lawyer asked her, she said, yeah, I chose to go.
And go to the hiking trail.
And we only returned after she agreed to, because it was getting dark.
Another thing she never acknowledged, the reason it was getting dark is why we came back was because she showed up over 30 minutes late to the date in the first place.
So instead of being honest about this or clarifying it or correcting it at all, she then took the therapist's responses amongst others and then sent them to her friends and family members.
Objectively speaking, this can be considered very problematic because she essentially gave an inaccurate statement to the therapist, which then elicits responses based on these false details.
And then instead of correcting them, she uses them as authoritative proof that something happened to her that didn't actually happen.
But all of this was.
So she lies to the therapist.
Therapist gives her advice.
She uses said advice to justify her stupid rationale, but and use that authority from the therapist.
But no one knows that she lied to the therapist in the first place.
Under false pretenses from false info information.
And this was not cleared up and corrected until nearly four years later at Wow Brial in 2024.
At that point, all these communications and the eventual false accusation had already happened.
The damage had already been done because amongst all of the other inaccurate statements made to the therapist, this completely colored the therapist's perception of what actually happened, leading to her convincing the accuser I was a skilled predator.
I've done this to multiple people, amongst other things, such as she's not the first, as somebody that's never met me and knows absolutely nothing about me, to intentionally put out false information to someone and then take what they said in response and use that as an authoritative source to influence friends and family.
Switching to Kick Stream00:02:14
And this is just a small taste.
I highly recommend you go through the April 18th testimony.
Everything's in there and it is shocking.
Okay, moving on.
Next, when giving her original statements to the police, she said that oral se lasted five to ten minutes.
Wait, so she gave him a BJ too?
Bro, are you fucking serious?
All right, bro.
We're going to go to kick, man.
Okay, I can't even fucking.
Yo, come on over to kick, guys.
Holy.
This is crazy.
All right, guys.
Come to fucking kick.
Come to kick.
We're about to cook, man.
I fucking can't say this shit on fucking YouTube, man.
You guys already know what the fuck we're going to go here.
She gave him a beat.
Bro, we're about to cook over there.
Come on over, guys.
We're switching over to kick now.
Kick.com slash Myron GainesX.
Come on, spam it in the chat.
We're going over to kick.
Let's go, guys.
Let's go.
We're switching over.
So I don't have to censor myself anymore.
I want to see all 2,000 of you guys come on over to fucking kick.
Let's go.
Let's cook.
We got 2,300 plus of you guys in here.
Come on over.
We're switching over.
We're getting the fuck off YouTube for obvious reasons.
I can't even fucking say what I want to say.
And now we're getting into this girl game of BJ.
We got to really get into this.
In fucking sane.
Let's go.
Come on, guys.
And then after, we're going to do some political analysis with my brother.
My brother's going to come on in a little bit, and we're going to do some political analysis with him.
So let's move the stream over to YouTube.
Sorry, over to kick.
Get the fuck off YouTube.
Let's go.
We're going to finish this thing up.
And then we're going to cover the conflicts of the Middle East.