one person at Cartoon Network having a problem with keeping his hands to himself is something that needs to be taken with massive grains of salt, whether it be one person accusing or ten people collaborating the claim
I wanted to respond to this post specifically because of the irony of you using that word (collaborating), since I'm assuming that was a typo and you meant to say "corroborating". "Collaborating" means quite the opposite of what you were meaning to say, I think. Which would be to say, that the people supporting her on Twitter are "collaborating" in a plot to get this guy fired. Let me be clear - that is NOT what I think is happening, at least I hope not. But it should be noted that these people are also not
corroborating anything with their Twitter posts. I probably haven't read every single one, since they've been going up so fast, so correct me if I'm wrong - but NONE of these people have claimed to actually have seen anything that allegedly happened. In fact, the only thing that they corroborate is the fact that this guy was obviously not popular with his co-workers. A devil's advocate would argue that that only makes the initial allegation even MORE suspect.
We've also heard about his so-called "history". What history? Patrick Harpin can't just come along and say he "has a history" and not provide us with any said history! When was he accused in the past? Did anything come of it? Were there any official investigations, and if so what were the results? Furthermore, I'd highly caution anyone against assuming that his firing from CN as confirmation of guilt. It's equally likely (and happens quite often in the entertainment world) that CN merely caved to public pressure which resulted from the, let's say "less-than-proper" way in which this story became public. This is made even more likely by the fact that they coincidentally fired him mere hours after the story exploded.
I hate being the voice of reason in a case like this, because the response is inevitably something like "you support a sexual predator!" or "she just wanted to keep others safe! that's the only priority here!". But in reality, even if that was the sole reason that her friends leaked the story on Twitter, it does NOT help to keep others safe. What would best keep other safe would be to allow a proper investigation (I mean by police, not by CN's HR department) to conclude and allow those authorities to decide if the suspect should be charged or not, at which point they would do the job of keeping others safe by either arresting him or making the charges publicly known. By circumventing this process, Ms. Partridge (or whomever initially made the accusation) may have inadvertently immunized Mr. Page from prosecution, which wouldn't keep anyone safe if he really is who they say. At least, legal prosecution. Hearsay is not admissible in a court of law for a very good reason, and unfortunately Twitter has given those who commit Hearsay a megaphone. Good luck finding an unbiased jury now.
As a society, we CANNOT allow the pretense of "keeping people safe" to overwhelm the concept of hearsay. This would give anyone who has a beef with someone else, and enough friends to back them up, free reign to point fingers at whomever they choose for any horrible crime they can think of, which only goes to further hurt credibility of future real victims. And in a case like this one, which is one person's word against another (and at this point it looks like there's no other witnesses), a victim's credibility is everything. There are multiple, far more effective avenues one could take if they believe a person to be an imminent threat, that don't involve a public forum that leads to hopeless finger-pointing.
I don't know what happened to Emily Partridge, none of us do. The only thing I know for sure right now is that Skyler Page is not well liked by many of his co-workers. And while I would never suggest that she "made it all up", or that her friends are "just out to get this guy", they cannot be surprised when that's the reaction they get from many people when they choose to take the matter into their own hands in the form of public character assassination, as opposed to allowing the proper authorities the chance to perform due process.