Do we like Danny Masterson?
Our score: 0 out of 10. A court convicted him of raping two women, he is serving 30 years to life, and no verified good work turned up to set against that.
Danny Masterson is best known as an actor on That '70s Show. These days he's known for something else: a Los Angeles jury found him guilty in 2023 of forcibly raping two women at his Hollywood Hills home in 2003. That's the story that matters here, and there's no way to spin it.
The case was messy and took two trials. The first ended in a mistrial in November 2022. In the retrial, prosecutors argued the women were left 'absolutely wrecked' after drinking only a small amount, and that the reasonable explanation was that they had been drugged. His defence argued the women may have tweaked their accounts and might be motivated by hatred, revenge or money. Masterson has said all the encounters were consensual. The jury deliberated for six days, convicted on two counts and deadlocked on a third, which was later dropped.
At sentencing in September 2023, Judge Charlaine Olmedo gave him the maximum: 30 years to life, eligible for parole after about 25 and a half years. She told him he might feel the justice system had failed him, but said: “But Mr. Masterson, you are not the victim here.” He declined to address the court.
On the harm check, the finding that matters is the conviction itself, a crime of violence against two women. My searches didn't turn up other public statements from him on LGBTQ+ people or the planet, so the verdict rests on the court record. His former co-stars Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis wrote character letters to the judge, then apologised for the pain they caused after the two accusers criticised them publicly. Kutcher said they never meant to undermine the victims' testimony.
The latest chapter came on 27 October 2026, when a three-judge California appeals panel rejected every argument in an 89-page ruling. That included the claim of judicial bias, a statute-of-limitations challenge and a habeas petition claiming his trial lawyer was ineffective. His lawyers had filed that petition in November 2025, saying the jury heard only half the story. They've since criticised the court, so a further appeal is possible.
As for the good stuff, there's honestly nothing verified. One character letter and a charity-directory listing turned up in my searches, but nothing from a reliable news source. Whatever he did before 2023, a jury and now an appeals panel have said what he did to two women. We wouldn't support him.