Thursday, October 01, 2009

No Wonder Hollywood is defending someone like Polanski...

Why? Because that is what Hollywood is made of. Look at this case from 1996...Doe v. Capital Cities (1996) 50 Cal. App. 4th 1038. First time I read this doing legal research I was dumbfounded because of the arrogance of the people involved. If you have read the transcript of Polanski's victim...wait until you read the facts that happened to this poor guy in this case. The Hollywood people who did this to this guy...have gone on to much success and doing just fine...of course. I have cut the facts of the case below. I couldn't find a site with the whole case to link. Be prepared. FACTS An aspiring actor is first drugged and then gang-raped by a casting director and four other men one Sunday at the casting director's home. Can the actor successfully allege causes of action for sexual harassment and negligent hiring against the casting director's employers? Given the nature of these events, plaintiff has elected to sue as "John Doe." Plaintiff met Marshall at a movie screening at the Directors Guild in July 1993. Marshall told plaintiff he worked as a casting director at ABC and gave plaintiff his business card. Marshall told plaintiff that he " 'had a great look' " and that ABC was developing programs that could be suitable for plaintiff. Marshall invited plaintiff to an interview at his office. The next day, plaintiff went to Marshall's office at the ABC Entertainment Center in Century City and read for him. Marshall responded positively to plaintiff's audition and introduced plaintiff to Marshall's supervisor who was likewise impressed. In the following weeks, Marshall "spent several hours a day on most days . . . working with [plaintiff], [efforts] which . . . Marshall said[] would lead to an employment contract [***4] between . . . ABC and [plaintiff]." These efforts included auditions, a taping, meetings with other entertainment industry executives, and attempts to find an agent and a publicist for plaintiff. When instructing plaintiff to perform particular tasks, Marshall "REPEATEDLY TOLD [HIM]: 'I'm your Manager at ABC.' " On several occasions, Marshall told plaintiff that he would be introduced as a new ABC star at an annual event held at the Page Museum on September 18, 1993. Based on all of these circumstances, plaintiff "fully believed that . . . Marshall would hire him for an acting position in an ABC Entertainment production . . . ." On Saturday, August 14, 1993, plaintiff spent the day at Marshall's office preparing for his final auditions. When they finished working, Marshall told plaintiff that "they would be meeting ABC executives for dinner that evening." "After dinner on August 14, 1993, . . . Marshall advised [plaintiff] that he 'had a brunch to go to in the morning,' and to be at . . . Marshall's home at 8:00 a.m. [the next morning]." During the morning of Sunday, August 15, 1993, plaintiff went to Marshall's home. He did so "expecting to attend a meeting where he would meet entertainment industry executives representing ABC shows and/or for the purposes [of promoting his acting career]." Marshall gave plaintiff a glass of tea. Plaintiff drank the tea which, unknown to him, contained a drug. When plaintiff awoke, he was bound and tied. He was given multiple injections of an unknown drug and was beaten and gang-raped by Marshall and four named codefendants, 2 none of whom is alleged to have any connection with ABC. At one point when plaintiff was untied, he attempted to escape but Marshall and a codefendant forcibly took him back into the house and again injected him with a drug. Marshall ultimately drove plaintiff in plaintiff's car to Beverly Hills where he abandoned him. Plaintiff was subsequently discovered by the police. Those four individuals are Barry Parker, Michael Sullivan, Ken Dickson, and Fred Goss. Plaintiff names them as defendants in his common law intentional tort causes of action. Plaintiff also alleges Doe defendants participated in the attack. The ordeal caused plaintiff severe emotional distress as well as a temporary memory loss for several months. In late October 1993, Marshall and others grabbed plaintiff outside of his home and stabbed him. Plaintiff reported the stabbing to the police and to ABC. In the following six months, the "defendants" physically harassed plaintiff, threatened him by phone and by writing, and poisoned his dogs. In July 1994, plaintiff filed a complaint with the California Department of Fair Employment and Housing, alleging unlawful employment practices, including sexual harassment. (Plaintiff's brief asserts that Marshall and the other four assailants are being criminally prosecuted.)

1 comment:

Joe said...

So typical of Hollywood thinking. When Whoopie Goldgerg says Polanski didn't commit "rape-rape," she was personifying the kind of warpped reasoning liberals in general and Hollywood in particular use.