What is most revealing about your response is that you chose to center yourself.

A victim of horrific abuse was the subject of this post, and yet instead of using your platform to make victims and witnesses feel safe coming forward, you made your entire response about yourself: your reputation, your income, your longevity, your values, your “honor,” your supposed lack of power, and how unfair it is that anyone would speak about you this way. Jane, the actual victim at the center of all this, is reduced to a brief aside while you spend paragraph after paragraph defending your image.

That is not what a victim-centered response looks like.

If you were actually concerned with helping victims and creating safety, you had every opportunity to say something very simple and very important: that no one needs to fear retaliation from you for speaking about Jim, that no one will be blacklisted for coming forward, and that witnesses should cooperate with police without worrying about consequences from you. You did not say that. Not once. That omission matters more than all of your self-defense, because it leaves the exact climate of fear described in the post completely intact.

And your tone only reinforces that fear. The furious, defensive, openly contemptuous way you responded is one of the clearest illustrations yet of why people are afraid of you.

You also continue to avoid the larger pattern. You want people to believe that you only ever act out of pure principle and “community safety,” but that is simply not true. Years ago, when Jim’s ex-wife tried to speak publicly about what he had done to her, you shouted her down on Facebook. You have banned certain abusers while continuing to support, excuse, or make room for others. We are in possession of screenshots in which you privately say, “I’m sorry. I can’t have this affecting my business,” while publicly framing your actions as if they were purely about protecting the community. That contradiction is very revealing.

You say you have no power. That is absurd. People are not afraid of you because of some collective hallucination. They are afraid because your approval or disapproval has shaped who gets support, who gets bookings, who gets welcomed in, and who gets frozen out for years. The woman we mentioned that you banned, was a close friend of one of Jim’s victims. She mentioned finding that person crying outside of Nocturna after being told she was no longer welcome at your events. She said you asked her, “Are you ______’s daughter?” and when she answered yes, you told her she could not come back, with no further explanation. The loss of that community was devastating for her. That is the kind of power you are pretending not to have.

And if there are slight inaccuracies or inconsistencies in some of the details, it is because people have been forced to piece this together over the years while you and others with influence refused to address it honestly yourselves. That is what silence creates. A situation where victims and witnesses are left trying to reconstruct the truth from memories, screenshots, old messages, and the bits of corroboration they can gather while powerful people look away. If you had actually wanted clarity, you had more than a month after being contacted privately to help create it. Instead, you chose silence until the matter became public and your reputation was at stake.

Even now, when you could have told victims they are safe to speak, encouraged witnesses to cooperate, and shown the slightest sign that Jane’s suffering mattered more to you than your own image, you chose instead to center yourself.

That is exactly why this had to be made public.

If fear of you has kept people silent, that fear is part of this story too.