I also hate it when people say he was guilty.
-
karenlynn1 — 19 years ago(January 24, 2007 08:28 PM)
FYI, CourtTV Crime library has the full
truthful
story about Arbuckle, and when he was proven innocent. It was interesting to read, and really paints a valid picture of those events.
Apparently, Virginia Rappe had a botched abortionor something like that.
anyhow, here's the link: http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/classics/fatty_arbuckle/1.html
One man's trash is another man's treasure. -
padawan1111 — 19 years ago(January 24, 2007 11:49 PM)
I saw a documentary about this case and it said Rappe had cronic bladder infections . Not a problem in this day and age, but back then their were no antibiotics, so a chronic infection could not be treated and could kill you. They think that contributed to her death. I think their was a famous tenis player in the 30's who died from an infection in his foot. Scary times for medical problems. Poor Arbucle had bad lawyers who decided not to give a closing argument at his trial. The media was really bad with the false headlines back then too.
-
bheck1 — 19 years ago(February 09, 2007 04:28 PM)
What gets me about Hearst's coverage of the trial was the exoneration of Rappe. Hearst portrayed her as some pure, virginal, saint-like, all american girl when in fact she had been a prostitute, had several abortions (the effects of which probably caused her death), and (according to Mack Sennett) had given half of his male staff clap. What did Pathe' Lehrman see in her enough for him to launch a press vendetta against Arbuckle. Lehrman might have gone after Virginia under the auspices of lust, but then you must consider the fact that Lehrman requested and was granted the right to be buried next to her upon his death. Maybe Lehrman was still in envy of Roscoe's talents?
-
ceebeegee — 17 years ago(May 21, 2008 12:08 AM)
Slandering a girl who died horribly doesn't make Arbuckle any more innocent. There's no "in fact," there's no proof whatsoever that she'd been a part-time prostituteno doubt spread by the same type who eagerly spread equally unfounded rumors about Elizabeth Short. Something about a young woman dying horribly brings out the vultures. Your basic point, that Hearst portrayed her as a saint in order to smear Arbuckle and sell more papers, is well-takendon't fall into the same trap.
-
MrBook_ — 13 years ago(May 06, 2012 08:20 AM)
Yeah the old "portray the rape victim as a slut" routine is the oldest trick in the book. (If she in fact wasn't a rape victim, that doesn't make it less reprehensible in this case.)
Pills are good! PILLS ARE GOOD! -
goldenpet — 11 years ago(April 20, 2014 04:22 AM)
I'm not making any accusations here, just posing some questions (Gross alert). I am wondering that if Ms. Rappe did have repeated abortions, which honestly, cannot be substantiated, that the instruments may not have been sterile, introducing pathogens into the urinal/reproductive tracts, and could have contributed to her chronic cystitis.
Also: The female urethra and the vaginal opening are in very close proximity to one another. An unskilled abortionist may have introduced an instrument into her bladder by mistake, thinking that they were accessing the contents of the uterus, and caused abrasions/injury to the interior bladder wall. I am not a medical professional, although I have had medical training in the course of caring for my mother. The circumstances of Ms. Rappe's preexisting chronic bladder condition and the later rupture, endured during a very painful several days for her before her demise, continue to puzzle me.
---------------
Wherever you go, there you are. -
ContinentalOp — 15 years ago(November 17, 2010 04:43 AM)
"Lehrman might have gone after Virginia under the auspices of lust, but then you must consider the fact that Lehrman requested and was granted the right to be buried next to her upon his death. Maybe Lehrman was still in envy of Roscoe's talents"
I think it is safe to say that Lehrman was deeply in love with Rappe, regardless of her faults.
"Namu-myoho-renge-kyo" -
Catdubh — 19 years ago(February 17, 2007 01:57 AM)
Fatty was INNOCENT! He was the victim of William R. He5b4arst's sick, twisted need for control of the press and, people in general!
See what a difficult situation you've created. Proud of yourself now are you? -
scotbpens — 16 years ago(June 25, 2009 09:40 PM)
Hearst may have had a personal grudge against the entire Hollywood film industry because he felt that Marion Davies, his mistress of many years, wasn't getting the roles she deserved that could make her a major star. So he vented his frustration by seeing to it that the papers under his control painted Virginia Rappe as the flower of innocent American womanhood, and Arbuckle as a sadistic, lecherous beast.
It was also a time when various religious and civic groups were railing against the "sin" and "filth" in motion pictures and clamoring for "decency" in Hollywood. (Sound familiar?) To appease the moral cusaders, Arbuckle may well have been made a scapegoat, a sacrificial 5b4lamb, when according to those who knew him, he was really a pussycat. (Excuse the multiple animal metaphors!)
All the universe . . . or nothingness. Which shall it be, Passworthy? Which shall it be?
