A couple shows ago, the fans were chanting ‘we want Enzo’ to Cass, and Wai and John were shocked, saying something to the effect of, they must not have known what Enzo did to chant something so horrible.
At the time I thought I must not have been fully up to date, but today it appears Enzo’s lawyer came out and confirmed what I had thought to be true for the last few months, which is that the accuser had recanted everything, saying she had made it up. Am I missing something else? Is Enzo guilty of anything besides being an absolute horrible wrestler, and the reason we no longer get to watch Neville weekly?
I don’t think the fans really wanted Enzo, they just wanted to taunt Cass.
I concur, I don’t think anyone wanted to rewind back to that 205 time frame, or gasp even before when he was a heavyweight?
This was more just about the reaction @wai0937 and @johnpollock had, which led me to believe there was more to the story than I had heard.
Yeah, that’s about right. Unfortunately for Enzo, this happened during the height of the #metoo fad where in the court of SJW Injustice, anyone with a vagina is automatically telling the truth and anyone with a penis was suspect.
I’m sure an apology by the WWE and John and Wai will be coming shortly…
I think when it came to Enzo and the WWE, the crime was not involving them from the first moment. As with most of his issues in the back from what I’ve read, it was a case of him having no idea what the standard procedure was, and intrinsically making the wrong decision.
I really thought the chanting by the audience was tone deaf given the significance of the charges - of a case that had not been closed at the time of that show. The charges alleged were horrifying - and while a case like that is pending, to chant in favor of the accused was stunning to me that night.
Second, the charges are not being pursued because of a lack of evidence - I have spoken to the police and they have not stated anything regarding the allegations being recanted. The police told me that if new evidence surfaces, the case could be re-opened.
Thanks so much for replying John. I was under the impression that the lady had recanted a week or so after the events had transpired, but that was all internet reporting, nothing I would consider substantial, which is why I originally hadn’t asked. I think you don’t have to look much past Rich Swann to see how dropping charges due to insufficient evidence rather than a presumption of innocence can unfold.
Definitely appreciate clearing it up.
This does not to prove his innocence in the matter
Innocent or guilty he didn’t help himself by not informing the company of the allegations, and that probably went some way to him being released rather than being suspended.
He doesn’t need to prove his innocence. The prosecution needs to prove he did it. That is how the US legal system works. If it’s the opposite where you live, I feel sorry for you.
You’re comment was talking in absolutes as if he didn’t actual perform any act of sexual assault. I was merely highlight that the prosecutors & officers not having enough evidence to bring the case to make and arrest and bring to trial does not prove his innocence in the matter.
Exactly, where’s the proof? He’s guilty because she said so? Couldn’t possibly be that she hooked up with him, realized he’s a k-list celebrity after the fact and tried to shake him down. When that didn’t work, maybe she played the rape card to ruin him. Most rape victims go on TMZ to not only reveal their identity, but to talk about their case in public.
That goes a lot further to “prove his innocence” than it does his guilt. Usually when a crime has been committed, there’s evidence. Unlike OJ, I doubt Enzo discarded the weapon.
Why are you so hot for him to be guilty of this? What do you get out of it?
I think it was less tone deaf and more ignorant. I just assume that the majority of the WWE audience doesn’t know what happened to Enzo, and that they were just taunting Cass. As much as I am saddened by the direction humanity is taking in so many ways, I have to believe that those actions would not be condoned by the majority of the general public.
Haven’t Jerry Lawler and Vince McMahon both been accused of sexual assault as well? For Vince, I’m referencing the incident he had in the mid-2000’s at a tanning salon, not the Nailz sexual assault claim.
It’s interesting how Enzo has basically been barred from wrestling yet two powerful figureheads in wrestling seem to have made it out OK.
Wrestling has always had different standards for upper and lower card talent. Vince was just talking about how in his XFL he wasn’t going to employ anyone with a drinking and driving charge, and yet how many of his stars get those and don’t have it affect their pushes or tv time at all.
Actually, she hasn’t come out and said she made everything up. She’s still standing by her story. The authorities are just saying there’s not enough evidence to proceed
Sorry, just saw John already said this in the comments. I apologize
it’s because people liked them.
Nobody liked Enzo.
Which is pretty much exactly what I said in this post would happen. I don’t mean to sound pessimistic but I saw this coming a mile away.
I think Enzo just wasn’t the right hill for his defenders to die on, innocent or not.
He had put himself at risk for bad press with the rumblings of his ego and his alleged attitude, that it was hard to say he’s worth a second chance even if this story absolves him of legal consequence.
I know there’s a sentiment that behavioral clauses are bullshit, and that how a person chooses to spend their free time is their own business, but when you’re a public figure, you have a mediocum of responsibility to at least minimize your exposure to these sorts of allegations.
If it’d been a Randy Orton or John Cena accused, sure, there’d be a double-standard, but that doesn’t mean the company was entirely wrong to have cut ties with Enzo given the information they’d had at the time. I compare it to the Rich Swann case, where there was a complaint that was later dropped, but that doesn’t entirely absolve his role in how the situation had developed, especially when his standing in the company (rightly or wrongly) didn’t give the company any reason to stand by him, given the facts presented.