Harvey Weinstein scandal (Mod warning in op.)

optogirl

optogirl wrote: »

It doesn't really. If you were accused of stealing something in work last Thursday you wouldnt' say ' I have never stolen anything, particularly last Thursday'

It's semi-legalese. He's denying generally and denying a specific incident.

Outlaw Pete

Seems the LAPD has closed Sheen case already.

Sheen Not Under Investigation, Corey Feldman Claims Dismissed

The Los Angeles Police Department already closed their investigation into Corey Feldman’s claims of a Hollywood pedophile ring and the PIO exclusively told RadarOnline.com that Charlie Sheen is not under investigation after The National ENQUIRER’s report that he allegedly sexually assaulted a 13-year-old Corey Haim.

Feldman, 46, announced on Monday that he was meeting with the LAPD to share the names of the men he claimed were responsible for sexual assaults of young children, including his late friend Corey Haim, who died in 2010 at the age of 38.

“LAPD detectives are committed to protecting victims of sexual assault and will thoroughly investigate any reports of a sex related crime,” LAPD PIO Officer Sal Ramirez told Radar.

“In the case of Corey Feldman, unfortunately according to California law the alleged occurrence is out of statue and Robbery/Homicide detectives have no other avenues to pursue this case,” Ramirez said.

According to a report by The National ENQUIRER, Sheen, the 52-year-old disgraced HIV-positive actor, corrupted his much younger Lucas costar on set with drugs, then had anal sex with him. Sheen was 19 at the time, while Haim was barely a teenager.

“The LAPD is not currently investigating any claims against actor Charlie Sheen,” Ramirez told Radar.

“Haim told me he had sex with Sheen when they filmed Lucas,” Dominick Brascia, a former actor and a close friend of Haim, told The ENQUIRER. “He told me they smoked pot and had sex. He said they had anal sex. Haim said after it happened Sheen became very cold and rejected him. When Corey wanted to fool around again, Charlie was not interested.”

Feldman claimed that he tried to report allegations of sexual abuse of Haim and others in 1993 to Santa Barbara Police but they were only interested in discussing Michael Jackson, who was being investigated for sexually abusing under-aged boys.

“However, the LAPD applauds Mr. Feldman for coming forward as an out of statue assault report could potentially bolster any current and forthcoming case as it create a pattern of behavior,” Ramirez told Radar.

“The latest rash of sexual assault reports are particularly troubling, and the LAPD encourages and will gladly take a report from anyone who feels they may be a victim.”

neonsofa

optogirl wrote: »

It doesn't really. If you were accused of stealing something in work last Thursday you wouldnt' say ' I have never stolen anything, particularly last Thursday'

If someone in work accused me of general theft and made reference specifically to a theft on a thursday, I might say the above if i knew for a fact I wasnt even in work on thursdays,let alone stealing. Also,if he was in a relationship for a certain period and is being accused of an incident during this time,he may want to stress that nothing happened (sinister or otherwise) during that time. Bit clumsy but perhaps he wanted to stress for the benefit of others who may be have been involved with him during that period.

Penn

Deleted User wrote: »

It's semi-legalese. He's denying generally and denying a specific incident.

Agreed. I don't particularly see anything wrong with his statement.

Penn

Penn wrote: »

Agreed. I don't particularly see anything wrong with his statement.

Unless it's false of course. :pac:

J. Marston

RabbleRouser2k wrote: »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5063683/Former-Smallville-actress-second-command-sex-cult.html

So Allison Mack, aka Chloe from Smallville, is second in command of a Hollywood sex cult. What the hell is this?

The NY times did a story on this in October-it's seriously Scientology like, but on a smaller scale.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/17/nyregion/nxivm-women-branded-albany.html

That is so weird. Smallville is the only thing I remember her from and she was the most typical, girl-next-door character ever.

Next thing I hear about her, she's running a sex cult and branding women. The roles must have seriously dried up!

retro:electro

I kind of understand the statement- it would be like saying "I've never murdered anyone but I especially never murdered the person you're accusing me of murdering". He's just being more specific about it. I'm sure it made sense in his head! It doesn't really translate well but I get the sentiment.

Neyite

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Seems the LAPD has closed Sheen case already.

Unfortunately they have to - it's outside of the statute of limitations, isn't it? So even if it was true and irrefutable proof was presented, they still would be unable to prosecute.

Penn

Neyite wrote: »

Unfortunately they have to - it's outside of the statute of limitations, isn't it? So even if it was true and irrefutable proof was presented, they still would be unable to prosecute.

I read last night however that in Denise Richards' divorce papers, she implied Sheen regularly looked at possible underage porn

https://twitter.com/TnBopinions/status/928305655668146176

Outlaw Pete

Neyite wrote: »

Unfortunately they have to - it's outside of the statute of limitations, isn't it? So even if it was true and irrefutable proof was presented, they still would be unable to prosecute.

Oh Corey has always been aware of that (see below for a Time article he retweeted last year) but seems he felt he had enough information to have Charlie investigated I believe. Outing him should be enough to ensure he never works again anyway. Can't see him being given an acting role anyway.


https://twitter.com/Corey_Feldman/status/736075883476176896

One thing I'm somewhat (pleasantly) surprised by is that there hasn't been anything thrown at Feldman yet.

Hammer89

Deleted User wrote: »

One thing I'm somewhat (pleasantly) surprised by is that there hasn't been anything thrown at Feldman yet.

You have to assume he's not stupid enough to beat this drum if he himself had the same skeletons in his closet.

Neyite

Outlaw Pete wrote: »

Oh Corey has always been aware of that (see below for a Time article he retweeted last year) but seems he felt he had enough information to have Charlie investigated I believe. Outing him should be enough to ensure he never works again anyway. Can't see him being given an acting role anyway.

https://twitter.com/Corey_Feldman/status/736075883476176896

I'd say you are spot on, current social climate where Spacey is getting removed post-production from completed works, nobody is going to hire Sheen.

His career was waning slightly since his Two-and-a-Half Men days I think. Anger Management was fairly short lived, some bits and pieces of guest appearances in 2015 by the looks of thing, he did nothing at all in 2016 (probably due to the HIV diagnosis being made public and the resultant fallout from recent sex partners to contend with) and has two projects this year.

What I'm not seeing is any outing of people at the top of their game in Hollywood yet.

The good thing about Charlie Sheen is that he's destroyed his career long before the Haim allegations. This will just add fuel to the fire.

retro:electro

Neyite wrote: »

Unfortunately they have to - it's outside of the statute of limitations, isn't it? So even if it was true and irrefutable proof was presented, they still would be unable to prosecute.

It's really sad, isn't it? They could do with taking a leaf from our book in that sense. We have no statute of limitations for victims child abuse.

Neyite

anna080 wrote: »

It's really sad, isn't it? They could do with taking a leaf from our book in that sense. We have no statute of limitations for victims child abuse.

It's a law that's very convenient for predators of children given that it often takes years of abuse, followed by years of substance abuse and erratic behaviour, then several more years of perhaps rehab and trauma counselling for those children to feel emotionally resilient enough to report and prosecute their attacker(s). They are too little/ fcuked up to realise the clock is ticking and when they finally do, time is up.

It's a law that's almost tailor made in favour of child predators.

Red_Wake

anna080 wrote: »

Neyite wrote: »

Unfortunately they have to - it's outside of the statute of limitations, isn't it? So even if it was true and irrefutable proof was presented, they still would be unable to prosecute.

It's really sad, isn't it? They could do with taking a leaf from our book in that sense. We have no statute of limitations for victims child abuse.

Tbf, we're soft on child molesters in other ways.

Shurimgreat

Looks like more accusers of Roman Polanski have come forward.

I know its been said before but surely this must end his career.

Also, while many actors and actresses in Hollywood have disgraced themselves through association with Polanski, you'd have to question the French and Swiss courts who refused to extradite him, even though he admitted himself he was guilty.

The Nal

Shurimgreat wrote: »

Looks like more accusers of Roman Polanski have come forward.

I know its been said before but surely this must end his career.

Also, while many actors and actresses in Hollywood have disgraced themselves through association with Polanski, you'd have to question the French and Swiss courts who refused to extradite him, even though he admitted himself he was guilty.

Well hes in his mid 80s so hes gotten away with it regardless. What always confused me was how many people were willing to work for a man who drugged and raped a child. Harrison Ford, Sigourney Weaver, Ben Kingsley, Johnny Depp, Adrian Brody, Kim Cattrall, Ewan McGregor, Pierce Brosnan, Jodie Foster, Kate Winslet etc.

Agent - "Here, fancy being in the new Polanski movie?"

"The child rapist?"

Agent - "Him yeah"

"Sure ok".

branie2

Woody Allen was accused, but nothing was proved, thankfully

valoren

Said it in passing at work yesterday to someone upon learning about Charlie Sheen.

"Did you hear the news about Charlie Sheen?"
"No, what?"
"Remember Corey Haim? Charlie had anal sex with him when he was 13 in the mid-80's"
"No, I don't believe that for a second"

:rolleyes:

retro:electro

Poor Corey Haim

branie2

Remember the thrills video about Corey Haim?

https://youtu.be/tzhZzIzJqek

mzungu

branie2 wrote: »

Remember the thrills video about Corey Haim?

https://youtu.be/tzhZzIzJqek

Trying really hard to forget about The Thrills tbh! :pac::pac:

Bambi985

Neyite wrote: »

It's a law that's very convenient for predators of children given that it often takes years of abuse, followed by years of substance abuse and erratic behaviour, then several more years of perhaps rehab and trauma counselling for those children to feel emotionally resilient enough to report and prosecute their attacker(s). They are too little/ fcuked up to realise the clock is ticking and when they finally do, time is up.

It's a law that's almost tailor made in favour of child predators.

True. Through all of this coverage I really am realising that being the victim of a sexual assault and/or rape must be the absolutely lowest place you can be, not just emotionally and from a trauma standpoint, but also in terms of how low you are in the pecking order from a societal and a legal perspective too.

The jump to disbelieve victims unless it's at a Bill Cosby/Jimmy Savile/Weinstein level and there's an international reputable media organisation leading the charge. The statute of limitations stateside that is completely tone-deaf to the nature of sexual abuse trauma and how it prevents victims from reporting their crimes in the immediate aftermath. The scrutiny of victims not just in society but in the courtroom too.

It feels like in all of this, the actual gravity of these crimes get lost. We stop thinking about the brutality and violation of sexual assault on victims, and how it's a life long battle to find any kind of peace or happiness or self-esteem as a result. Instead the jump is to focus on what they should and shouldn't have done. I read a quote about it recently - it's like if men were going around setting women on fire, and instead of going "WTF?? What kind of sick b@stard is this?" and instead started blaming women for going around being all flammable and stuff. It's bizarre.

I know at this stage we are all in full agreement about Weinstein, and Spacey (well most of us), as we were eventually with Savile and Cosby. But we didn't reach that point until decades of constant allegations being silenced or shouted down and dozens if not hundreds of victims raising their heads above the parapet.

pitifulgod

kunst nugget wrote: »

His hobby when he was younger was beating up minorities in racially motivated attacks and he nearly got prosecuted for attempted murder because of the severity of one of his attacks. But he's got a winning smile and a great Boston accent so no one brings up his scumbag past.

In fairness, he's been very open about that and went out of his way to apologise to the guy he attacked in recent years.

brooke 2

ceadaoin. wrote: »

Yes. In the documentary An Open Secret it seems that some of the victims go on to be recruiters themselves once they get too old to be as "valuable". They become part of the abuse ring and use the same tactics that were used on them to bring in new victims. making them a part of it also ensures that they will keep their silence. Possibly something similar with Sheen?

It was horrifying to see that some of the abusers who did actually go to jail for their crimes, were able to resume working in the film industry after their release from prison.

Hande hoche!

Seems like Louis CK is the next one. Remember some rumours a while back.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/09/arts/television/louis-ck-sexual-misconduct.html

SnakePlissken

Hamlet. wrote: »

You may need it since you cast little Marky Mark in the lead role.

That's Oscar nominated Marky Mark to you.

JP Liz V1

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Seems like Louis CK is the next one. Remember some rumours a while back.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/09/arts/television/louis-ck-sexual-misconduct.html

http://people.com/tv/louis-ck-accused-sexual-misconduct/

5 against him so far