X-Men Director Accused of Sexual Abuse

X-Men Director Accused of Sexual Abuse

bryansinger

Lawsuit alleges sexual assault of teenaged boy in 1999

Bryan Singer, director of the upcoming Fox superhero blocbkuster X-Men: Days of Future Past and two earlier films in the X-Men series, has been accused of sexual assault in a lawsuit filed in federal court in Hawaii on Wednesday, April 17th. The suit (which includes graphic accounts of the alleged crimes) claims that the assaults took place beginning in 1999 when the plaintiff was a 17 year-old aspiring actor and model.

The plaintiff is represented by Attorney Jeff Herman, who has stated that related suits involving other alleged abusers and victims are to come. Herman previously represented plaintiffs who brought similar accusations against "Elmo" puppeteer Kevin Clash in 2012. Singer's attorney, Marty Singer, has called the accusations "Completely without merit," and stated that ""We are very confident that Bryan will be vindicated in this absurd and defamatory lawsuit."

Sources: The Hollywood Reporter, The Wrap

Permalink

You mean the Elmo guy whose lawsuits were TOSSED OUT.

I'm not saying Jeff Heyman is an 'ambulance chaser'.
But if the shoe fits....

Amazing how FAST the story WASN'T covered my the media, as soon as he was pretty much CLEARED of charges.

Just saying.

Wait, so is Bryan being represented by his cousin or something? Or did he deliberately choose someone who had the last name as him for the lulz?

I do admit, I always find 'accused off' articles to be quite disrespectful to the person in question.

Accusations belong in a court of law, not in the media. Once it gets to a conviction you can write an article about it.

I somehow doubt this will have the same sting that it did for the poor guy that voiced Elmo. in his line of work, just the accusation was enough to force him to retreat from public life. Not so much for Singer, whose work generally doesn't involve being around children all day, every day. Yet another case of people trying to leech money out of a celebrity in the most heinous way possible.

Hagi:
I do admit, I always find 'accused off' articles to be quite disrespectful to the person in question.

Accusations belong in a court of law, not in the media. Once it gets to a conviction you can write an article about it.

I guess it is terrible for the individual.

There are ups and downs though, because it can encourage people with further detail to come forward, if they hear that proceedings are being taken out against this person.

It happened in the UK a lot where there were a lot of successive cases appearing of child abuse dating back decades - and through publication of these allegations in the media - people came forward to tell of their abuse, which they'd maybe hidden for years. So it created a feeling of security to come forward, when obviously they'd not felt they could come forward about it before.

I guess all we can hope is that when allegations are made, they are genuine - because the smear it puts on the accused can be hard to remove and having this kind of headline in the paper can make people assume it was true or at least have doubts of that person forever, even if it had no basis in reality.

"Accusations" are a dime a dozen. Innocent until proven guilty, right? The media has a HORRIBLE habit of proclaiming guilt before knowing the full story and they haven't learned their lesson yet. From Michael Jackson to the Duke Lacrosse Team to the Elmo puppeteer, reputations and lives have been utterly tarnished by jumping to unfair conclusions. Even a close friend of mine had similar accusations thrown his way by a spiteful associate.

Maybe he's guilty, maybe he's not; it's not our business and can't make any reasonable judgments until the court hears it and makes a decision...

Honestly I read this headline and thought it meant the actual director of the X-Men, that being Charles Xavier, and was intrigued by the notion. The reality of the situation is significantly less interesting - accusations fifteen years after the fact are already worthy of a healthy dose of skepticism, and the track record of this prosecutor brings an even larger amount of it.

Tanis:
You mean the Elmo guy whose lawsuits were TOSSED OUT.

I'm not saying Jeff Heyman is an 'ambulance chaser'.
But if the shoe fits....

Amazing how FAST the story WASN'T covered my the media, as soon as he was pretty much CLEARED of charges.

Just saying.

Didn't stop it from messing up his life though.

Still, age of consent in Hawaii is 16. I wonder what the statute of limitations on the alleged charges are; maybe it's 15 years (2014-1999=15)? That shoe's startin' to look like a good fit.

Uh... isn't 17 technically legal in that state? "Rape" is one thing, but normal sexual contact should be okay by law, as far as I understand it in the state of Hawaii.

And it's a hard case to prove that it was "rape" as opposed to normal sexual contact... or, indeed, no sexual contact at all, given that there's no physical evidence still around. Just seems like a conveniently timed smear campaign. If it's legit and the victim is only coming forward with it now, that "convenient" timing will only work to hurt his case. Kind of a messy situation - but tossing around rape accusations is some very serious shit. If they aren't true, some harsh punishment is deserved, both for the plaintiff and the hackjob lawyer who probably pushed him into doing this.

Tanis:
You mean the Elmo guy whose lawsuits were TOSSED OUT.

Iwasgonnasay...

But yeah, between the connection to the Elmo Puppeteer idiotsuit, the length of time after the alleged crime, the proximity to the upcoming Singer film and his lawyer's brash and indignant full denial, this is starting to look like a court troll smear campaign.

I'm not placing my bets on the accuser.

15 years is a long time to wait to make accusations, particularly when the victim was almost an adult when the alleged crimes took place. It does seem like this Jeff Herman is looking to become the guy people go to if they have allegations they were taken advantage of someone in the media and want to go public with it.

The suit demands an unspecified amount and asserts claims for intentional infliction of emotional distress, battery, assault and invasion of privacy by unreasonable intrusion. The suit also notes that a "Certificate of Merit" is being filed under seal and cites a section of Hawaai statutes that appears to require suits alleging sexual abuse of a minor to be filed at latest by the time the minor reaches age 26. However, the Herman firm's media director said there is "a 2-year 'window' legislation in Hawaii right now that lifts the statute of limitations without regard to age."

He's even having to take advantage of a special "2-year window" just to get this lawsuit filed. If he's not simply hoping for a quick settlement to put this story to bed I can't see how he thinks he has a hope in hell of winning anything here.

"Hollywood has a problem with the sexual exploitation of children," said Egan's attorney, Jeff Herman, who handles sexual abuse cases across the country. "This is the first of many cases I will be filing to give these victims a voice and to expose the issue."

According to the suit, the Los Angeles parties were held at a mansion in Encino referred to as the M & C Estate, whose residents were Marc Collins-Rector and Chad Shackley, whose younger brother Scott Shackley was in Egan's high school class. Collins-Rector and Chad Shackley were principals of Digital Entertainment Network, an early online streaming video company. The complaint asserts that Collins-Rector sexually abused Egan and threatened him with a gun, but does not name him as a defendant.

Right... so, this is nothing to do with the fact that allegations against Bryan Singer are newsworthy [and thus get more attention for the lawyer] then?

lacktheknack:

Tanis:
You mean the Elmo guy whose lawsuits were TOSSED OUT.

Iwasgonnasay...

But yeah, between the connection to the Elmo Puppeteer idiotsuit, the length of time after the alleged crime, the proximity to the upcoming Singer film and his lawyer's brash and indignant full denial, this is starting to look like a court troll smear campaign.

I'm not placing my bets on the accuser.

Yeah because never in the history of hollywood has the casting couch been used by directors and producers to procure sex. I'm not saying that case has any validity or not but bear in mind it wouldn't be the first time high powered individuals in hollywood have used their position for less than benign purposes. I suspect that case will get messy and rest on issues of consent.

Hagi:
I do admit, I always find 'accused off' articles to be quite disrespectful to the person in question.

Accusations belong in a court of law, not in the media. Once it gets to a conviction you can write an article about it.

If it's bullshit they probably don't even wan't this to get to the courtroom. It's basically blackmail. First they probably ask for a settlement and say "IF YOU DON'T GIVE US MONEY WERE GOING TO GO PUBLIC WITH THIS." If they don't get the money, they go public with it like this, put the pressure on them, then probably come back to them asking for money again. Going to court for them is pretty much taking a shot in the dark and seeing if they can walk out with anything.

In either case, it does damage someone's reputation to be accused of something like this, even if it's blatantly false. Singer should walk out of this relatively ok. Maybe a few uneducated people in parent groups will read a headline like this, assume it means he was found guilty, and boycott the movie, but most people who read into this even remotely will see that it's much more likely that Bryan Singer is being targeted by an extortionist.

Unfortunately as a child entertainer Kevin Clash being accused of sexual abuse pretty much ruined his career. Even though the accusation was complete bullshit, planting the slightest bit of doubt in the heads of emotional, concerned mothers was all it took.

It's extremely fucking scummy.

EDIT:Sorry, Captcha said it didn't work and then posted twice.

I bet this is how it went.

Director guy: hey hot young wannabe moviestar chick, I'm a director guy, let me bang you and you will get a part in a movie
Her: sure thing
--later--
Director guy: I lied, trololololol
Her: I feel dumb. Hey heres this lawyer ad on tv....i gets revenge and monies

rembrandtqeinstein:
I bet this is how it went.

Director guy: hey hot young wannabe moviestar chick, I'm a director guy, let me bang you and you will get a part in a movie
Her: sure thing
--later--
Director guy: I lied, trololololol
Her: I feel dumb. Hey heres this lawyer ad on tv....i gets revenge and monies

The person he is accused of raping is male. Did you not even read the short Escapist 'article'?

MovieBob:
The plaintiff is represented by Attorney Jeff Herman, who has stated that related suits involving other alleged abusers and victims are to come. Herman previously represented plaintiffs who brought similar accusations against "Elmo" puppeteer Kevin Clash in 2012. Singer's attorney, Marty Singer, has called the accusations "Completely without merit," and stated that ""We are very confident that Bryan will be vindicated in this absurd and defamatory lawsuit."

Let me guess, the Attorney's other plaintiffs will be accusing Hugh Jackman, Patrick Stewart, and Ian McKellen. Oh, Winter Soldier's doing good, I suppose Chris Evans will be accused of something impossible to prove from 15 years ago too. *rolls eyes* This ambulance chaser should've been disbarred when he tried to tickle Elmo.

I had heard rumors of stuff like this had surrounded Brian Singer for years. As a fan of his films, I truly hope that the allegations are unfounded.

Tanis:
You mean the Elmo guy whose lawsuits were TOSSED OUT.

I'm not saying Jeff Heyman is an 'ambulance chaser'.
But if the shoe fits....

Amazing how FAST the story WASN'T covered my the media, as soon as he was pretty much CLEARED of charges.

Just saying.

I say this as someone who actually always looked up to Kevin Clash because of the charity work he has done but the lawsuits were thrown out due to the statute of limitations being up not because they were found to be without cause. I am not saying that Clash is guilty but it is also not a clear cut case that the charges were without merit.

Tanis:
You mean the Elmo guy whose lawsuits were TOSSED OUT.

Tossed out because they didn't meet the statute of limitations. Some states have no time limit for these kinds of things, and others do. It usually exists because evidence that may have proven someone innocent may have been lost due to time.

In my state Rape has no limit. However this case will most likely fall under Hawaii's limitations. It's ether

For a class A felony, within six years after commission of the offense

or

For any felony offense under 707, during any time when the victim is alive and under 18 years of age

I'm not a lawyer so I'm unsure which applies.

seems only fair since the x-men movies raped my childhood.

More has come out about this story which makes the headline clear. A man named Collins-Rector, who is on the sex offenders register, is alleged to abused plaintiff at age 15. Bryan Singer is alleged to have become involved when the plaintiff was aged 17.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/bryan-singer-xmen-director-denies-allegations-that-he-sexual-assaulted-a-young-actor-at-a-party-as-completely-without-merit-9266924.html

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here