Not a Doc watcher, not a big fan, but the Internet's hard-on for taking claims at face value even without any actual evidence pisses me off. Public opinion doesn't require innocence until proven guilty, but it's a good idea. There have been enough situations of people lying about shit for some personal gain, especially lately.

I have only seen one situation that seems to match ALL of the claims from the hearsay on the Twitch side, because NONE of the people tweeting are first hand sources (they are repeating what they've heard from others), that matches Doc's comments about it, AND the fact that there were no criminal charges filed (these are public record). Because otherwise if it is true at face value, that means Twitch actively helped cover up the fact a streamer was messaging minors like that, AND paid the the contract price as if THEY violated the contract, which certainly has a morality clause in it that Doc would have clearly violated if that were true.

1. Doc was exchanging messages with a user via Twitch Whispers.
2. Twitch thought this user was a minor through internal information, like previous messages/chats, account info, etc. but not something another user would have access to.
3. The conversation itself did NOT include information about whether the user was a minor.
4. Doc would not have known that user was a minor, because it was not in the conversations.
5. Twitch acts on the information they have, cancelling the contract under something like a morality clause.
6. Doc would have no idea why he was suddenly permanently banned without any warning if they acted on this information without contacting him prior.
7. Through the litigation it is determined that either the user was in fact NOT a minor, or they WERE but Doc would not have a way to know that based on the messages alone.
8. That would mean Twitch, not Doc, had violated the contract by unilaterally cancelling it, and would need to pay it out, AND that there would be no criminal act to prosecute, hence no wrongdoing, even if he DID message a minor.
9. Depending on the wording of the NDA for that settlement, he almost surely cannot talk about specifics, hence the vague legalese responses, because that's the limit of what he's allowed to say without Twitch also agreeing to release more info. That settlement likely leaves Doc's ban in place in exchange for paying out the contract, Twitch not admitting anything, and Doc likely wouldn't want to continue working with them after a reaction and contractual cancellation of that magnitude without even an attempt at contact.

That would fit all of the "facts" as we have heard them from every party, without any criminal charges, with Doc getting paid, and Twitch officially silent. The largest red flag for the "he knew he was messaging a minor to meet up" is no prosecution at all, not even a paper arrest and charges later being dropped. There was never any public legal involvement, which indicates there was never an actual crime, which is what is being claimed.

Also, Cody tweeted multiple times advertising his band's show and stating if it sold out he'd talk more about it. So at that point, he basically loses all credibility as far as I'm concerned, not using it as marketing for his shows. Without hard evidence it not just looks like a way to try and boost his band's sales while he knows everyone will be talking about him and looking him up.
https://x.com/evoli/status/1679536544863113217
https://x.com/evoli/status/1730588093907161579