My Thoughts On: Free Kesha

 

If you aren't aware of the controversy surrounding popstar Kesha at the moment then the reason is because that she was denied a preliminary injunction that would prevent her from recording her upcoming six studio albums with a man named Dr. Luke, which is what her current contract states. Dr. Luke is alleged to have abused Kesha both physically and verbally throughout their working relationship, even at one stage causing her to enter rehab in 2014. Dr Luke is a pivotal figure in Kesha's life, and even discovered Kesha, owning the rights to record with her since 2005. Their current contract together has been renewed in 2008 and 2009, so it's not like she's being fraudulently exploited by Dr Luke and the music business. However along with the physical abuse Kesha is claiming that Dr Luke purposefully stalled her career, and prevented her from having any creative control over her music, which I find hard to believe considering how average she is as an artist. I also find this a strange accusation at the same time considering Kesha must have known how the pop world works before signing that deal back in 2005. If that's not the way things work in the mainstream music business then give me one example of a rookie in the pop genre who has creative freedom? From a neutral perspective this is a very serious and groundbreaking case in the music world, and if this is true then I'm glad Kesha has had the bravery to directly confront her alleged attacker in a court case despite her losing battle. The aftermath was one largely in favour of Kesha's side of the ordeal, going against the court ruling. But is there any reason for this biased outcry in the face of justice?

The simplest and most overwhelming point to make is that Kesha has zero evidence for this alleged rape. Her claims are tenuous at best, and aside from her own statement there is no physical reason for the court to believe this alleged rape ever happened. That's law 101, and an obstacle that this Twitter campaign has failed to address. What I also don't understand is that if a rape really did occur then why wouldn't Kesha be in court trying to get Dr. Luke criminally convicted? Instead the rape has taken a backseat to a civil case centred around Kesha being released from her contract, with only an accusation of rape being attached to this case as evidence. It's clear from this case that her primary goal is to remove herself from the contract, presumably giving her creative freedom that her current contract that was signed before she became famous restricts her from doing. The thing is that Dr. Luke himself has even claimed that Kesha is free to record music without him, so is this really about rape and not just a personal disdain to Kesha's restrictive contract? If the purpose of this court case is primarily based around Kesha's contract then you do have to side with the court and determine that these rape and sexual assault allegations seem to be a perfect storm in very tenuous events, especially when there's so little evidence involved in the claims.

As for the #FreeKesha part of this argument, well that's just another example of people jumping on the hate bandwagon when they themselves haven't even looked at both sides of the argument. This fad on social media gets worse when there are genuinely people making wild accusations aimed at Sony stating that as a company they support rape. Where the hell did you get that idea from? You've just read something totally unfounded on the Internet, with the only evidence based on an allegation. This social trend reaches its lowest point when you get people such as Lady Gaga, Taylor Swift and Ariana Grande, who are all outside of the court case, publicly pledging their support for Kesha when they have as much knowledge on the case as I do. Turns out the neutral party knows something the court doesn't, and as a result thinks it can then judge the accused before a verdict has even been given. Dr Luke is perfectly entitled to file a counterclaim for defamation if he believes the allegations aren't true, so quit branding him as the villain in this; it's his well renowned reputation at stake too. Kesha's supporters have so little evidence that they end up claiming that she's obviously innocent because she's crying in court. Maybe they should have presented that flawless evidence at Oscar Pistorious' trial when he was found guilty despite crying. Obviously he couldn't of murdered anyone because he cried during his hearing. But hey, feelings are more important than facts right?

The evidence for this case becomes increasingly against Kesha when you consider that a similar lawsuit has happened in the past. This was back in 2008 when Kesha VOLUNTARILY sided with Dr Luke, which if we're to believe Kesha is three years after the alleged abuse started. Kesha won that particular court case and consequently it was decided she could fire her managers whenever she chooses. Hell, another three years later another almost identical case came along where she even claimed under oath that no intimate relationships had happened between her and Dr Luke since they met. Kesha even sent Dr Luke a birthday card thanking him for making her dreams come true. When all the previous evidence is compiled it becomes apparent that in one case or another Kesha is a liar trying to extort the court system to further her own pursuits, yet this deplorable act is being supported, and even victimised by the public. Is it any surprise why the court was sceptical when so much of the evidence goes against Kesha's recent claims?

Why should Sony be forced to release Kesha from her contract when they themselves haven't been proven to have mistreated her? Dr Luke is only allegedly an abuser and so still innocent in a court of law, and Sony have never acted outside of their contractual obligations. It's a shame that Kesha has to cry 'rape' in order for this case to be taken seriously despite having no evidence for the case, so what choice do the court have? This is a standard contract for the music industry, so Kesha's claims are effectively just idle whinging without any clear cut evidence, which despite whatever the Internet might think is not enough to convict a man with a serious crime. Are some going to be unhappy that I'm apparently supporting this idea of a rape culture? Yes they are, but is this incident of an alleged abuser winning in court really going to discourage women from going to the law? I think it's imperative that a court of law look at both sides of the argument instead of siding with the victim, and If anything I hope this kind of action that appeases the accused is taken more frequently instead of the pathetic #freeKesha campaign. If a response such as a social media outcry is normal then this leads to a society were alleged victims can actively lie over such a deplorable matter, and in fact that has happened already at an alarming frequency.

I'm not here to make the defining verdict on this issue, as that would simply be ignorant considering I haven't read all of the evidence submitted the court. However what I am here to do is look at this trial from an objective point of view and analyse this story from both sides of the argument. Obviously I can't be totally objective, and in fact I would prefer the verdict that states Kesha can no longer make music to give my ears a rest. I wish other people would approach this issue in the same way, as this trial doesn't excuse the people on Twitter who are condemning a man based on allegations alone. The court of law should always work on an 'innocent until proven guilty' method. Why should one man's career suffer over false allegations? This was a case that made me question whose life really has been ruined.