Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Crime Technology

Vungle CEO Arrested For Child Rape and Attempted Murder (axios.com) 129

Posted by BeauHD from the disgusting-behavior dept.
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."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Vungle CEO Arrested For Child Rape and Attempted Murder More

Vungle CEO Arrested For Child Rape and Attempted Murder

Comments Filter:

  • This is almost as bad (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    as video ads.

  • the worst (Score:4, Funny)

    by lucm ( 889690 ) on Friday October 20, 2017 @07:27PM (#55407097)

    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

  • Trampling Civil Rights (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    So much for innocent until proven guilty.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Holi ( 250190 )
      How so? Did he get convicted with no trial?

      • Re: (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward

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

        • Re:Trampling Civil Rights (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Darinbob ( 1142669 ) on Friday October 20, 2017 @08:09PM (#55407299)

          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.

          • 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?

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

            • 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 poin

              • 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...

                • 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

            • > 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.

            • 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

              • 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.

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

          • Re: (Score:1)

            by 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.

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

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

        • 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 suppos

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

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

        captcha: immune

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

      • 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: (Score:3)

      by HiThere ( 15173 )

      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 th

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by 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.

      • > 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

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by HiThere ( 15173 )

          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: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

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

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

    • 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 [forbes.com]

      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.

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

  • Details TFS left out (Score:4, Informative)

    by DeplorableCodeMonkey ( 4828467 ) on Friday October 20, 2017 @08:08PM (#55407291)

    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 [forbes.com].

  • 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: (Score:2)

      by TWX ( 665546 )

      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.

  • 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 st

Slashdot Top Deals

Some people manage by the book, even though they don't know who wrote the book or even what book.

Close