Vungle CEO Arrested For Child Rape and Attempted Murder (axios.com)

Freshly Exhumed writes: Axios is working to get details about a revelation on a government website that Vungle CEO Zain Jaffer is facing charges at the Maple Street Correctional Center in Redwood City, California of attempted murder, a lewd act on a child, oral copulation of a person under 14, child abuse, assault with a deadly weapon and battery upon an officer and emergency personnel. Vungle is self-described on its website as "the leading in-app video advertising platform for performance marketers," and was founded by Jaffer in 2011. Vungle has since issued a statement: "While we do not have any information that is not in the public record at this point, these are extremely serious allegations, and we are shocked beyond words. While these are only preliminary charges, they are obviously so serious that it led to the immediate removal of Mr. Jaffer from any operational responsibility at the company. The company stressed that this matter has nothing to do with Mr. Jaffer's former role at the company." Axios notes that "the San Francisco-based company has raised over $25 million in VC funding from firms like Google Ventures, Thomvest Ventures, Crosslink Capital, SoftTech VC and 500 Startups."

Comments

Verbing Vungle

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, he really Vungled that kid!!

Re:Verbing Vungle

[Applehu Akbar]

Oooh, just wait until this gets worked into the plot of a Silicon Valley episode.

Re:Verbing Vungle

[Anonymous Coward]

It's hilarious how many angry, fire-breathing, conservative, anti LGBT, anti-progress assholes turn out to be closet adulterers, homosexuals, or cads who've pressured mistresses into getting abortions, etc. etc.

Oh wait, maybe there are just assholes on each side and most people aren't in that category.

Re: Verbing Vungle

[Anonymous Coward]

Really? You sure? Because all the pedos and rapists so far this have been Hillary supporting, lgbqt supporting democrats. Same goes for both mass murderer shootings.

You are so bitter and twisted you canâ(TM)t spot reality when it actually does rape you. You just say thank you mommy, please do it again. People like you are why people like this get away with this scum for so long.

Re:Verbing Vungle

[Anonymous Coward]

Adultery and homosexuality are not nearly the same thing as sexual harassment, sexual assault, gun running, etc.

Nice try though.

Re: Verbing Vungle

[Anonymous Coward]

What a compelling and grammatically correct argument you present.

Re:Verbing Vungle

[AutodidactLabrat]

What Honest People?
Not Teagaggers, nor Trumpian criminal assaulters, nor Nazis like your Richard Spencer crowd,
Nor Steve Bannon, nor any of you is innocent

Re: Verbing Vungle

[Anonymous Coward]

Trump literally bragged about sexually assaulting women on tape. His ex wife filed rape charges against him and only dropped them for an undisclosed amount of money. Dozens of women have accused him of sexual assault and related misconduct.

Are you suggesting that Trump is a " Hillary supporting, lgbqt supporting democrat."

Re:Verbing Vungle

[Anonymous Coward]

Getting a bit defensive there, snowflake. What kind of disgusting behaviour are you trying to project?

Re:Verbing Vungle

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, Bill O'Reilly and Roger Ailes were a couple of lefty snowflakes.

Re:Verbing Vungle

[KingBenny]

technically allegations arent proof ... but its the easiest way to bring someone down, however since he's into marketing im willing to believe it lol so a 14 yo sucked his dick for money OMG thats a first i bet ... no comment

Re: Verbing Vungle

[Contract Gypsy]

You are off topic again, as usual.

Re: Verbing Vungle

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's drop the partisanship.

It turns out judgemental assholes across the political spectrum were hiding something.

Re:Verbing Vungle

[Anonymous Coward]

Didn't say anything about "lefties", but thanks for erecting the strawman.

Re:Verbing Vungle

[AutodidactLabrat]

Just Catching Republican'ts with their lying pants down chimp.

Re:Verbing Vungle

[Anonymous Coward]

Cool? What do Republicans have to do with me or anything I've said? You seem to be under the naive assumption that everyone must belong to a political gang.

This is almost as bad

[Anonymous Coward]

as video ads.

Re:This is almost as bad

[Anonymous Coward]

Check out the Google reviews for Vungle lol

the worst

[lucm]

The list of felony charges includes assault with a deadly weapon, child abuse, lewd act upon a child and oral copulation of a person under 10.

This gonna look good on his linkedin

Re:the worst

[mmdurrant]

Out of curiosity, what are you quoting in your comment? This text didn't appear in TFA or the summary.

Re:the worst

[lucm]

Out of curiosity, what are you quoting in your comment? This text didn't appear in TFA or the summary.

Techcrunch
https://techcrunch.com/2017/10...

Re:the worst

[Anonymous Coward]

YES, YES AND YES.
Thank you Vungle, for not accepting my application, LOL.
The irony, to be happy because you were not selected.....

Re:the worst

[Anonymous Coward]

He was representing "the leading in-app video advertising platform for performance marketers" and clearly was a real performance marketer himself, so it's perfectly within the norm.

Re:the worst

[Anonymous Coward]

On the news last night, they said that the CEOs father met the police at the door in a distraught condition, he directed the police to the backyard, where the CEO was still in the process of assaulting the child.

They also commented that there was a suspicion that the CEO may have been on LSD at the time.

Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

So much for innocent until proven guilty.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Holi]

How so? Did he get convicted with no trial?

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

He has been substantially deprived of significant material value without ever having set foot in a court.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

It doesn't matter if he's exonerated. The bad PR is enough to ruin his career.

captcha: immune

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Ol Olsoc]

How so? Did he get convicted with no trial?

True, innocent until proven guilty and all that, but that doesn't mean we can't comment on it. Perhaps this would soothe your angst:

The alleged list of alleged felony charges includes alleged assault with a alleged deadly weapon, alleged child abuse, alleged lewd act upon a alleged child and alleged oral copulation of a alleged person under 10.

allegedly

howbow da?

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Darinbob]

How do you ensure that the general public treats him as a normal citizen, do you forbid the press from reporting on any crime? Also criminal law has a higher standard of proof than the general public will accept. If the person is found not guilty over a technicality, you can't expect the company keep him on as a CEO, or even a janitor. "Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal principle, it is not a law that can be enforced on the general public.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[rmdingler]

Is it just me, or does it seem like allegedly should have another d in it?

Clearly, if your offense is of the type inclusive of the term child abuse you will be judged more harshly.

Fair? Maybe not, but we have to believe in something.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[HiThere]

While your assertion is fair, it's worth noting that if he weren't a (presumably) wealthy executive it wouldn't be newsworthy, but would still be public.

Try to come up with a proposal for a better approach. Do you want to allow secret trials?

Part of what's going on is that everyone so hates his profession that they're immediately willing to believe the worst of him without seeing the evidence. My first thought of a comment was:
"So he decided to make his profession more directly physical."
and to deride the company claim that it had no relation to the acts he was accused of.

That said, I don't feel much obligation to suspend judgment in this case because my reactions won't have any effect on the result. And I'm not sympathetic to the damage to his career because I consider his career in itself immoral.

Re: Trampling Civil Rights

[Zero__Kelvin]

Rimdingler likes the d !

Re: Trampling Civil Rights

[rmdingler]

I like what you did there, but in all fairness, what are we without the D? oughnut, and ebian... what are we, Savages?

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[CaptainDork]

Companies have standards of employment that essentially say, "You fuck with our revenue stream, we're gonna shitcan you."

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Ol Olsoc]

Is it just me, or does it seem like allegedly should have another d in it?

Got me! With my talent of making spelling mistakes, I looked it up because I thought I might have had it wrong

Clearly, if your offense is of the type inclusive of the term child abuse you will be judged more harshly.

Fair? Maybe not, but we have to believe in something.

We'll see how it works out. I'm willing to say innocent until proven guilty, but the kid under 10 allegation does tend to naturally repulse me, as likely most people. Anyhow, this guy had other charges as well, although the attempted murder charge was dropped.

Re: Trampling Civil Rights

[Zero__Kelvin]

I on't know. Gla you took it in the spirit it was intene! Ood night.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

Thought experiment: what if there was never any public announcement of charges laid upon suspects? Answer: that would be like having a system of government in which it is forbidden to question the thoughts of four-star generals. Such a government is called a junta, and we do not want that.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

Hm. And were he White, the gallows would already be built. Funny all the hang-wringing that goes on with non-Whites brought up on charges.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Applehu Akbar]

And as we all know, alleged is the media term for 'guilty'.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[R3d M3rcury]

How do you ensure that the general public treats him as a normal citizen, do you forbid the press from reporting on any crime?

It is an interesting argument. Does the reporting of his crime in any way help the public?

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Darinbob]

It could. Maybe it informs parents of the dangers of letting their children spend alone time with CEOs.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

How is reporting on public court documents "trampling civil rights"?

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

If you're making that argument then you better cancel every local news broadcast, twitter, and dead tree publications.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[I'm New Around Here]

CEOs are the worst.

Re: Trampling Civil Rights

[BronsCon]

I on't know. Gla you took it in the spirit it was intene! Goo night.

There, fixe that for you.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

If the person is found not guilty over a technicality, you can't expect the company keep him on as a CEO, or even a janitor

So it's best to shoot him now rather than let him slowly starve to death on the streets. After all, sometimes kids play in the streets...

Innocent until proven guilt is the law, it's not just a principle.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

By who?

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

Most people are deprived of significant material value without having set foot in court. Is this valley-bitch special ... entitled in some way perhaps because he had money before he raped the kid ? Twer my kid hurt ... I'd put a 357-cal slug-right-now in that manicured Silicon Valley head. Bitch has lived way too long.

Re: Trampling Civil Rights

[LynnwoodRooster]

Well, Systemd is improved if you lose the D...

Re: Trampling Civil Rights

[Zero__Kelvin]

Good call. I should have used se

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Calydor]

Would you do that BEFORE or AFTER a court of law has found out if he ACTUALLY did the crime?

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

How long have YOU been a registered sex offender?

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Opportunist]

He's an advertisers. He is guilty. At the very least of stealing people's time.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Megol]

Yes. ...
Wait, did you imply that would be a bad thing?

Re: Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

Depends at what stage you catch him

Re: Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello USA, that you? It's Europe here, wondering about why we are suddenly consisted a junta...

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

It would be nice if the media only reported on crimes where people knowing about it would be useful; when the police were appealing for information, or where someone was found guilty.

You think that's impossible, but it's the way it is in many countries. You hear of an incident happing and it's reported as "A man in his 50s was arrested after a car chase along the 323; two police officers were injured when he attempted to ram a blockade, with one in a serious but stable condition at Local Hospital.". Then months later after the case you get a report of the details.

If you are arrested of a crime, is it fair to you that your life is ruined even if it is immediately found that the accusation is baseless? Does it provide any benefit to society? What should you do; sue the government? Even if successful, that ends up with civil society paying for your losses which were incurred through the actions of journalists. And the journalist "just" reported the fact that you'd been arrested, so you can't go after them for your loss of reputation, earnings and emotional distress, because they did nothing illegal - they merely profited off the destruction of an innocent life.

I know a teacher whose career was almost ruined by a false allegation; the only reason she's still teaching is that the teenage kid swore that an incident had occurred in the summer vacation on a particular date, and she happened to be attending a conference in another country at the time. She had to prove her innocence against his entirely fabricated accusation, and if she hadn't had such cast-iron proof her career would have been ruined on the word of one vindictive little toe rag. If the media had got hold of the story before the school and cops had established the (lack of) truth, her career would have been toast regardless of the eventual outcome.

I'm all for naming and shaming people who actually commit serious crimes; a public register and automatic identification on social media would be fine with me. But trashing people's lives on unproven accusations has to stop.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[hai_Priesty]

It is an interesting argument. Does the reporting of his crime in any way help the public?

Are you willing to honestly vouch that if you have children, you will be impartial enough to say that you won't judge him "just because this person has been arrested and charged for sexual assault against minority and attempted murder" and allow your young children to be around this person alone? If this sexual predator with pedo tendencies is your neighbour do you WANT to know?

If yes, you may want to revalue your merit as a (potential) parent. If no, you have answered your own question.

My previous point may not sit well with you - but you may also consider that it is not the reporting that is in the wrong. I think people should have some right to know, and if you really think that they should not be judged, then it's the people the judge that is wrong, not the reporting. Although I acknowledge that it's a problem in the society that many people just OMG at news-of-the-day and never bother to verify after the fact that someone's charges has been dropped or found not guilty.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

> He has been substantially deprived of significant material value without ever having set foot in a court.

That's what venture capitalists *do*.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Antique Geekmeister]

> Try to come up with a proposal for a better approach. Do you want to allow secret trials?

This already exists for children: proceedings are sealed from the press, and after they become adults many records are supposed to be expunged. There are many cases where plaintiffs, defendants, and prosecutors are forbidden to publish anything about it. Jurors are also normally forbidden from speaking to the press. There is also the entire Guantanamo Bay legal fiasco, where secret prisoners are kept without habeas corpus, without trial, tortured, and in some cases beaten to death.

Re: Trampling Civil Rights

[BronsCon]

There's a joke in there somewhere about your username and freezing your d off... but this is politically-correct-dot so I won't make it.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Antique Geekmeister]

> It is an interesting argument. Does the reporting of his crime in any way help the public?

Yes. It informs potential investors, or clients, that this CEO is going to be distracted by criminal proceedings and is going to have large personal expenses.

Re: Trampling Civil Rights

[Zero__Kelvin]

In 2017 Slashdot *is* the joke.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[HiThere]

That only works because very few people with power have any animus against children. Even so, you can't show that it's always better.

And the Guantanamo Bay example is an example of what happens when the open trial is denied. It's clearly unconstitutional abuse of power, and it was engaged in by both the Repubs and the Dems. The weasel-worded justification of "but it's not happening in the US" ignores that it's being done by the US govt. on territory controlled by the US.

Re: Trampling Civil Rights

[BronsCon]

Isn't that what I just said ;)

Re: Trampling Civil Rights

[BronsCon]

There's an entire movement based on the idea of improving the world by removing the D

Re: Trampling Civil Rights

[Zero__Kelvin]

Yes. It was more of a confirmation than an elaboration.

Re: Trampling Civil Rights

[BronsCon]

Confirmation of an elaborate scheme to dumb down the population, starting with Slashdot, by making everything politically correct and claiming that anyone with a D is evil?

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

"Innocent until proven guilt is the law, it's not just a principle."

Actually, you're wrong. There is no Federal Law that states this explicitly, and it isn't mentioned in the Constitution. The closest that such a Law has come into practice was the result of Coffin vs. United States, 1895, where the Appeals Court Judge gave a closing opinion on the matter that such a Presumption Of Innocence is part of Common Law, not Statute Law. However that is just a Legal Opinion, not Law. It can be cited at Trial, but it is not binding.
Note that the Canadian Charter Of Rights and Freedoms, the Canadian equivalent of the US Bill Of Rights, does explicitly assume Presumption Of Innocence, in Section 11(d).
Short of Congress passing a Law on Presumption Of Innocence, and it passes Supreme Court muster, the presumption of guilt or innocence is left to the Lower Courts to determine as they see fit. Such a Law is unlikely to ever even being debated; a Presumption Of Innocence would have implications that would destroy much of the current Legal Institutions that involve such things as Pre-Trail Jailing of Suspects and the posting of Bonds.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

"Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal principle

Quite the opposite. It is a lawful principle. As in common law. As in american common law (derived from english common law). As in due process. As in common law due process.

"bill of rights" "inalienable rights" "a man's home is his castle (the king is not above the law)" are common law maxims. see "maxim" www.dict.org, bouviers, for example "common law of the land"

"legal" stuff is all roman civil law. pope/vatican and "star chamber" type stuff.

"innocent until proven guilty" is a thing there, but it is more "the supreme pontiff of rome will not be questioned" -- and "the government" is innocent until proven guilty.

the fact things are "legal" now instead of "lawful" should tell you there are little to know actual courts left nowadays. see for example www.annavonreitz.com

"roman civil law" is whatever they say it is. "legal" is whatever they say it is. codes and statutes written up from scratch.

common law is many things: local, tradition, custom, even "religion" (in the sense of local custom) ... but it needs precedent always. one must prove someone actually did things that way, and that you belong to this group of people or are in such an area with such a tradition. common law always looks backwards for precedent. if there is no fit for the case/people/place at hand, then one can diverge, but should still e.g. merge portions of prior principles that fit, e.g. "an automobile is a new kind of horse carriage" would mean there are similarities that one does not have to start from scratch, can possibly update old laws to include the new "automobile" contraption.

civil law and "legal" things just make it up as they go. they shape the future. "the law is X because we say so". they tend to look forwards, society must adjust to the law (the government is god, the government is innocent, society must be remolded to conform to "The law")

so, even civil law "innnocent until proven guilty" is a thing -- it just applies to "the government" and not to people.

common law, the people are assumed innocent, and it is up to "the government" to prove they are complying with age-old maxims and traditions. the "legislature" can write "new" laws, but they have to comply to the "bill of rights" and other maxims, and not infringe on people's inalienable rights.

see cover page of bouviers law dictionary too -- "civil law" is all foreign.

(paraphrase) if we ever allow cities to spring up here like in europe, we will become as corrupt as europe. thomas jefferson

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

re: "innocent uintil proven guilty" not being "a law" that is because it is part of "due process"

which is common law due process. american common law, deirved from english common law.

see my comment here:

https://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=11256611&
cid=55410723

it is much more than a mere "law". it is the foundation of a republic. see blacks law dictionary definition: ALL power is delegated from "The people".

it is an essential part of consent of the governed as well.

that such a Presumption Of Innocence is part of Common Law, not Statute Law.

exactly. see www.dict.org bouviers law dictionary, titel page, also "maxim"

common law is the law of the land. the fact the british bar attorneys and pope (yes, really, they do "Roman civil law") have tried to push foreign types of "law" on americans does not nullify the fact americna common law is the law of the land.

common law of the land. ashes to ashes, dust to dust.

the fact some "judges" run phony courts does not change these facts.

actual justices do follow the common law. real people, real money.

see for example www.annavonreitz.com

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[GrumpySteen]

The police were called to the house by Jaffer's father, Wagstaffe said. When officers arrived at the house, they found Jaffer engaged in the illegal contact with the minors

Dude's father turned his ass in and the police walked in and saw him molesting his kids. This is an incredibly bad choice of examples to use in arguing for presumption of innocence.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[GrumpySteen]

Most people would think people arrested and taken away with no public explanation or accountability is a bad thing.

Or maybe you're suggesting that freedom of the press and the first amendment are a mistake? In which case, which government agency do you want to review news stories and ensure that they're "helping the public" in the government's opinion?

The reporting of crimes is may not thrill you, but it's a part of the other freedoms we enjoy. Eliminate them and you're well on your way to a totalitarian state.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

I present the above as a superb example of paranoid, delusional, blithely illiterate, Right Wing Gibberish.
The "Anna von Reitz" cited above is a self-proclaimed "Common Law" judge, as in no Law Degree, no appointment to a Bench, no Election to Office. She just claims to be a Judge. Oh, and a Divinely inspired one to boot, who has a thing about Popes.

The United States is a Constitutionally established Republic. Within the Constitution, Criminal Law is codified by Statutes. (Also Regulations and other legally defined terms.) The case of Coffin vs. United States, 1895, is particularly pertinent here, because it spanned the concepts of the antiquated Common Laws and evolved Statute Laws. Common Law was opinion based, and is thus cited in legal arguments, but it has no Legal Authority of its own in US Criminal Courts, especially in Courts Of Appeals, where the actual applicable Law is analyzed. (If new evidence comes to light for example, generally the Appeals Courts sends the cases back to be re-tried.)
As Statutes get codified, the Common Law upon which they may be based is put aside. This is the whole bloody point behind Statute Law, you Loon. See United States vs. Hudson.
Common Law is still "common" in Civil Litigation, such as a certain Jurisdiction in East Texas. And we have seen what a mess that turned out to be. Opinion-based Law naturally leads to Judge Shopping.

The point of this discussion is Criminal Law, and the Presumption Of Innocence. In the US, Common Law has long been abandoned in these cases. This is a Nation of Written Codified Laws. I happen to think that not Codifying a Presumption Of Innocence was a Bad Thing. This is Codified explicitly in more civilized Countries. I also happen to think that this was not an oversight. The Constitution and the Legal framework that it established was never perfect, and thus subject to Amendment, so this is not a terminal condition.

For a really good and deep discussion of the US Constitution, and the evolution of American Jurisprudence, I recommend Akhil Amar's books and lectures on the subject, especially "America's Constitution: A Biography".

And now back to the regularly scheduled parade of Slashdot Crackpots.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

--""Innocent until proven guilty" is a legal principle"
"Quite the opposite. It is a lawful principle. As in common law. As in american common law (derived from english common law). As in due process. As in common law due process."

Oh what utter rubbish. The phrase "Innocent until proven guilty" dates back only to 1791, and was coined by Garrow, for his advocacy of Adversarial Judicial Proceedings. In English and later American Common Law, there was no right to Legal Counsel for defence, and Judges had absolute power in determining Guilt or Innocence, with no right of Appeal, except one. The King could Pardon, after Guilt was admitted. Twitler really screwed the pooch on this one. When Arpaio accepted Trump's Pardon, he was admitting Guilt. Civil Cases against him and his Department are now inevitable and I hope ruinous.

Note that there is Legal Philosophy dating back to the Romans that advocated certain "Inalienable Rights"; a little Document dating around 1776 makes mention of them, but that did not carry literally the Force of Law. It was just an opinion. Actually a pretty good one.

English and American Common Law was the Law of Men, capricious and corruptible. It was Adams who sought to establish "...a government of laws and not of men.", in 1780. This was a time when a new concept in Law was developing. Common Law was based on Consensus, Precedence, and appeals to Authority. It rose from Morality, of which three types were judged- Moral, Immoral, and Amoral.
This new concept was developed out of Ethics, of which there were only two types- Ethical and Unethical. The structure was Logical; Laws were made by Legislation, and the Laws themselves were Judged as needed. One of the very first things that Washington did, even though it may have seemed trivial at the time, was put into place Courts Of Appeals, and a Supreme Court. Washington was not a Lawyer, but he understood in what bad shape American Common Law was. US Law was henceforth to be based on Principles laid out in the Constitution.
English and American Common Law for instance, had no problems with Slavery. Hey, there were Slaves in the Bible, and rules for their treatment, so it must have been OK. It was Moral.
It was specific Acts Of Parliament, Statute Laws based on Enlightenment thinking, that got rid of the English Slave Trade. It took a while for the same to happen in the US. Those areas of the US, primarily in the South, that still preferred Common Law, objected.

Oh, before asserting "bouviers law dictionary"(sic), you might actually read it some time. Bouvier was arguing against Common Law; and his Dictionary reflected this new emerging kind of American Legal System, including the Constitution and resulting Statutes that you so despise, you ignorant Cracker.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Pseudonym]

I haven't read your fine constitution in a while, but I'm pretty sure there is no guaranteed right to good public relations.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Pseudonym]

Are you willing to honestly vouch that if you have children, you will be impartial enough to say that you won't judge him "just because this person has been arrested and charged for sexual assault against minority and attempted murder" and allow your young children to be around this person alone?

I do have children, and I would answer that question honestly if it came up during jury selection. That is what you meant, right?

If he is not convicted, and perhaps even if he is, he may well still do all right in his career. See also: Woody Allen, Roman Polanski, Chris Brown, Charlie Sheen, Chuck Berry, Sean Penn, Donald Trump...

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Pseudonym]

See also: Woody Allen, Roman Polanski, Chris Brown, Charlie Sheen, Chuck Berry, Sean Penn, Donald Trump...

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Pseudonym]

It's pretty well known that if you're a guy and accused of any sexual harassment claim of any kind, your life is likely to be over.

See also: Woody Allen, Roman Polanski, Chris Brown, Charlie Sheen, Chuck Berry, Sean Penn, Donald Trump...

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[hai_Priesty]

I do have children, and I would answer that question honestly if it came up during jury selection.

Good for you on the fair jury part, my intention of previous post to GP (maybe I didn't state it very clearly) was the right for people to know if through the news - there are lots of people that reasonably want to take precautions when it comes to their children, and wait till AFTER his acquittal to let the person be alone with his kid.

By extension (to GP and GGPs), if we were to literally interpret "Presumed innocence until proven guilty" to the fullest extent, unqualified, and to protect them against every single potential of undesirable salutation................ I don't think society currently accepts that someone on trial for multiple sexual assaults and kidnapping of children, and attempted murder be able to continue his/her daily work of a kindergarten teacher till the minute he/she was found guilty.

You can't fault parents for this very basic precaution while he is still on trial (you MAY fault them if they still judge him after acquittal).

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[Contract Gypsy]

So much for innocent until proven guilty.

Since when did the media give a crap about the law they ARE the law. They destroy people for better ratings/higher advertising income!

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[tehcyder]

He has been substantially deprived of significant material value without ever having set foot in a court.

It's one of the side effects of the US's near complete freedom of speech/press. Most countries have limitations on what you can report about people who have merely been arrested but not yet charged, in the US there appears to be no such control, and you get law enforcement publishing mugshots of arrestees even if they're later released without charge.

Personally, I don't see why you should be able to report even on a trial until it is over and the person found either guilty or not guilty, but then I suppose I'm just an apologist for the Lizard NWO Illluminati Government conspiracy.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[tehcyder]

The reporting of crimes is may not thrill you, but it's a part of the other freedoms we enjoy. Eliminate them and you're well on your way to a totalitarian state.

No, you're not.

Re:Trampling Civil Rights

[GrumpySteen]

Wow. What a thoroughly fact-supported response to a strawman argument you've made. I couldn't possibly refute it.

What is Vungle?

[Anonymous Coward]

It sounds like a vulgar bungle.

"The leading in-app video advertising platform"

[mapkinase]

I wish the whole company was put in jail for a long long time.

Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

OK Slashdot editors. When I genuinely type "Vungle wikipedia" into Google, and the first search result does NOT come up with Wikipedia - something is seriously wrong. Hell, I went TO wikipedia itself and I can't find any information on who this company is.

So a few more Google searches taught me this company has survived a bit longer than your average startup (founded in 2011), but is privately owned, and has limited track record in the market, and frankly has zero brand recognition in the consumer or business world compared to other unicorns/decacorns.

Why is this "news for nerds" or "stuff that matters"?

Re:Who?

[Khyber]

"When I genuinely type "Vungle wikipedia" into Google, and the first search result does NOT come up with Wikipedia"

Your fucking fault for relying upon both Google and Wikipedia to think for you instead of having some actual search chops, sonny boy.

Re: Who?

[Brockmire]

So you're complaining Google failed to show a link to a nonexistent Wikipedia page? That's some fucked expectations.

Re:Who?

[freeze128]

What's a Vungle? Alternatively, What's a Zain? When did the news become a bunch of made-up words?

Re:Who?

[DontBeAMoran]

When did the news become a bunch of made-up words?

I don't have the zlorbies'ed idea.

Re:Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't have shortcut to search with Wikipedia, and instead type "x wikipedia" into Google? Do you also type google into address bar?

Re: Who?

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you think that Flooz grows on trees?

Yep he's guilty

[Anonymous Coward]

I mean you read it here, and on that twitter thang. Shiite he's gotta be a perv.

If I'm wrong, tell me in 20 years. I swear I will read it.

Re:Yep he's guilty

[Anonymous Coward]

All his pro-Hillary tweets are gone .. they completely removed this guy from twitter.

Re:Yep he's guilty

[Anonymous Coward]

Being a perverted psychopath does not make him an idiot.

But if you want to see tweets from a perverted psychopath who is also an idiot, I have a recommendation!

Re: Yep he's guilty

[Anonymous Coward]

Pathetic

Re: Yep he's guilty

[Anonymous Coward]

If you would like more serious criticism of Mr. Trump, you might consult the entire rest of the globe. I gather that to what degree he has any personal faith, he is a disciple of that 'Power of Positive Thinking' minister. It's not that he doesn't think that words are meaningful, rather the opposite: he believes that speaking something makes it so. To a shocking degree, he's not wrong, but a few billion dollars in seed money go a fair ways there. The problem is that the line between "constructing a positive narrative out of your life events" and "being a pathological liar" is becoming increasingly strained for Mr. Trump and for the rest of America. Because at heart he is a moral abscess, and the day will yet come when he is forced to admit it. If there were such thing as divine providence the shock of realization would be lethal.

Re: Yep he's guilty

[Anonymous Coward]

Your not helping yourself, just demonstrating evidence of mental illness to everyone else

Re:Yep he's guilty

[Anonymous Coward]

so he's another Don Trump type when it comes to women? glad he's gone.

Re: Another ((pervert))

[Anonymous Coward]

What does this have to do with Jews?

This guy is a muslim, go deal with that.

In-app video advertising platform

[Anonymous Coward]

A prime multidisciplinary aficionado of non-consensual fucking.

Details TFS left out

[DeplorableCodeMonkey]

The CEO of a mobile ad startup has been arrested and charged with sexually abusing his three-year-old son and one-year-old daughter and three other felonies.

Source.

Re:Details TFS left out

[DontBeAMoran]

(insert joke about "won't somebody think of the children" here)

Re:Details TFS left out

[Anonymous Coward]

(insert joke about "won't somebody think of the children" here)

That is fucking sick, dude.

Re:Details TFS left out

[Opportunist]

The main problem is that he has been thinking of the children a bit too much.

Re:Details TFS left out

[Anonymous Coward]

The Vungle CEO is sick.

Opportunist got the joke.

Re:Details TFS left out

[Anonymous Coward]

Basically he's another Donald Trump? he'll get off (heh) with next to no prison time I am sure.

Re: Another ((pervert))

[Anonymous Coward]

So it's ok to give hormones to your son because he once thought a dress looked nice, but not ok to trim some skin that evolution hasn't gotten rid of quite yet.

That's nice

[Chris Mattern]

Axios notes that "the San Francisco-based company has raised over $25 million in VC funding from firms like Google Ventures, Thomvest Ventures, Crosslink Capital, SoftTech VC and 500 Startups."

So do they actually do anything, or have they just found that conning VC investors out of their money is a good living?

Re:That's nice

[TWX]

To the likes of the entities that funded them that $25,000,000 is chump-change. The roll-of-the-dice is worth it to them if the technology pans-out. I also expect that those companies that survived the dotcom bubble may themselves be slightly better at evaluating if a given startup has a better chance of actually providing a return, so they sponsor fewer losers relative to the winners.

Re:That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

Read the goddamned story! They have an app to diddle kids. Lazy ass....

Re:That's nice

[Anonymous Coward]

What technology is there to pan-out? An app?

Re: Another ((pervert))

[Anonymous Coward]

you are ignorant

Re: Another ((pervert))

[Anonymous Coward]

Both are wrong and ought be severely prohibited by the law and public opinion alike.

No such thing as bad publicity?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is the first I'd heard of Vungle. Seems like a real test to the "No bad publicity" idea.

Actually some country do that.

[Anonymous Coward]

In quite a few countries, you are not allowed to report onto somebody until they are either charged , or in some extreme cases judged. That avoid actually having people arrested or charged when it turns out later they are innocent , to be vilified in the public view, and that still does not impact a iota on freedom of press. And frankly good so : freedom of press is not infinite. And having the privacy and life of a person protected IMO trumps freedom of press, especially the fucking shitty boulevard press the news has become, e.g. sometimes CNN is no better in their screaming article than the daily fail.

The real danger of CEOs

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd worry mostly about my middle class children getting ideas about going to business school when they should be going to engineering school.

Re:The real danger of CEOs

[Anonymous Coward]

If they do, you have utterly failed as a parent.

Possibly a bad divorce and false allegations?

[Antique Geekmeister]

The articles from legitimate press are limited. I'm sad to say that I've personally seen a divorce case where a mother, badly counseled by her unqualified, untrained, and unlicensed therapist, accused the father of sexual abuse of their children. The mother was claiming that practices common around the world, such as casual nudity in the home, or bathing with infants, were sexual abuse in and of themselves. That took years of horrific court intervention and a change of therapist to help clear up, and it still ruined their family.

This does not mean that all such allegations, or even a high proportion of them, are false. It most _certainly_ does not mean this man is innocent. It does mean that some skepticism of criminal allegations is badly needed. It would be horrific if the accusations were ill-founded.

Re:Possibly a bad divorce and false allegations?

[Anonymous Coward]

The charges do not seem limited to just internal family struggles. Read through them again.

The kinda guy who could make Donald J. Trump blush

[Anonymous Coward]

Or Weinstein.

Lock him up and grab em by the anus!

Wonder why I block ads now? Don't... apk

[Anonymous Coward]

See subject & APK Hosts File Engine 9.0++ SR-7 32/64-bit https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&biw=&bih=&q=%22APK+Hosts+File+Engine%22+and+%22start64%22&btnG=Google+Search&gbv=1/

Ads/script/malware rob speed/security/privacy/bandwidth.

Hosts add speed (via hardcodes/adblocks), security (vs. bad sites/malware/poisoned dns), reliability (vs. dns down), & anonymity (vs. dns requestlogs/trackers).

Less power/cpu/ram + IO use vs. DNS/routers/addons/antivirus + less security bugs/complexity & faster vs. addons/routers/remote dns!

Avoids DNSChangers in routers/IP settings & dns redirect (99.999% of ISP DNS != patched vs. it) + DNS tracking & lighten DNS load & resolve faster from local RAM!

* Via what u NATIVELY have in a FASTER kernelmode IP stack!

APK

P.S. - Safe https://www.virustotal.com/en/file/e01211ca36aa02e923f20adee0a3c4f5d5187dc65bdf1c997b3da3c2b0745425/analysis/1433430542/ (self checking code vs. infection of program built-in it)