Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
AN UNNAMED ACTRESS has sued Harvey Weinstein alleging he committed sexual battery against her in Beverly Hills hotel rooms in 2015 and 2016 after she agreed to meet the producer to discuss a television role.
The actress is identified only as Jane Doe in the sexual battery lawsuit filed yesterday in Los Angeles Superior Court. It alleges that Weinstein held the woman against her will while Weinstein engaged in sexual situations.
The suit says the woman first met Weinstein in 2011 at a party and he offered to assist her with her acting career. For several years, Weinstein invited the woman to awards show parties.
Weinstein met her at the Montage Hotel in Beverly Hills in late 2015 to discuss a part in the television series Marco Polo, which Weinstein and his company were producing. The producer asked her if he could masturbate in front of her, and when she refused, he held her by the wrist and forced her to watch him, the lawsuit said.
The next incident happened several months later at the same hotel, according to the lawsuit. The woman agreed to meet Weinstein to discuss the Marco Polo role again, and this time alleges Weinstein threw her on a bed, started performing oral sex on her and raped her, the lawsuit states.
The woman was able to break free and flee the room, the suit said.
“Any allegations of non-consensual sex are unequivocally denied by Mr Weinstein,” the producer’s representative Holly Baird wrote in a statement.
Mr Weinstein obviously can’t speak to anonymous allegations, but with respect to any women who have made allegations on the record, Mr Weinstein believes that all of these relationships were consensual.
The lawsuit seeks unspecified damages. It also names The Weinstein Co., which fired its co-founder after decades of allegations of sexual harassment were detailed in an expose by The New York Times last month.
The Weinstein Co. did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment.
The lawsuit alleges the company knew of Weinstein’s sexual harassment and abuse behaviour, and showed “deliberate indifference” to prevent his actions.
The lawsuit was filed by Gloria Allred, who did not immediately return a message seeking additional details about the case.
Beverly Hills police have said they are investigating allegations against Weinstein, but have released few details. Authorities in Los Angeles, New York and London are also investigating Weinstein for possible criminal prosecution.
The harassment and abuse allegations against Weinstein have led to numerous women coming forward with allegations of harassment and abuse against powerful men, including actor Kevin Spacey, numerous entertainment industry executives and politicians in the US and abroad.
The scandal in Hollywood has prompted Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey to establish a task force to handle any forthcoming criminal complaints. The advocacy group Women in Film also plans to make a help line and panel of pro-bono legal experts available beginning next month to provide counseling, referrals and legal advice to harassment victims.
Yesterday, the independent theatre Cinefamily in Los Angeles announced it was shutting down due to crippling debt after conducting a review of sexual harassment allegations against two of its leaders. The theatre had numerous celebrity fans and supporters, was rocked by sexual harassment allegations against its executive director and a board member in August.
The board suspended the theatre’s activities and hired an independent firm to investigate the allegations.
The board says that no victims corroborated rape claims, but the investigation did uncover serious concerns and breaches of acceptable behaviour.
Cinefamily had many celebrity supporters and fans including Steven Spielberg, Jeffrey Katzenberg, David Geffen, Brie Larson, Jon Favreau, Sting and James L Brooks.
NBC News announced yesterday that it fired Matt Zimmerman, its top talent booker, for “inappropriate conduct” with more than one woman at the network.
Zimmerman used to be in charge of arranging guests for the Today show but in 2014 was promoted to vice president and led the behind-the-scenes unit responsible for such bookings at all NBC News programmes.
The network didn’t give any details about Zimmerman’s behaviour, only that he violated company policy. The network acted in response to internal complaints.
Messages sent to Zimmerman were not returned yesterday.
NBC recently fired political contributor Mark Halperin, who had been accused of sexual harassment by several women dating to when he worked at ABC News more than a decade ago.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
FFS, she needs to take some responsibility. Why did she go back a second time? Why did she not report it to the police? Why is she now looking for money rather than justice?
@Nick Allen:
Probably because a civil suit has a far lower burden of proof than a criminal court.
@Nick Allen: she is not responsible, he obviously is a creep. But why go back the second time?
@White Rabbit:
Why is she not responsible??
He attacked her in the same hotel at an earlier date. Why did she return to the hotel.
Would you put yourself in that position??
If she was looking for a part in Marco Polo and having already being duped into going to the hotel once then why do exactly the same thing again
@Duncan: Marco Polo, what a bag of shy-te that turned out to be.
@Duncan: So you imply that he had a right to rape her because she returned a second time.
@White Rabbit: No, he’s saying that she could have prevented it the second time by having a modicum of common sense. If I walk through a bad neighbourhood with 10,000 euro cash in my hand it doesn’t give them the right to rob me, but I have to take responsibility for being an idiot at the same time.
@White Rabbit:
Come on seriously!!
That’s outrageous and dangerous. At no point do I imply he has a right to do anything.
My point is simply this, he attacked her very seriously the first time she agreed to go to the hotel to meet with him. He didn’t simply make a pass at her he abused her and very badly. For this he should be jailed.
Now agreeing to return to the same hotel under the same arrangement to see the same man who abused her was very irresponsible.
That’s not saying it’s her own fault but she should not have gone there and certainly not on her own with a man who had viciously assaulted already.
@Nick Allen: that very fact of the second meeting will be well emphasised by the defence and seriously undermine her claim
@John Cronin: Acting is a very difficult profession with little security. I’m sure there are a lot of desperate actors willing to walk down ‘a dangerous street in Addis Ababa’ to get a good job, which Weinstein had a lot of power to offer. He has a lot of power over vulnerable actors, and he was abusing that power.
@Duncan: I agree Duncan. but the danger is if we put responsibility on the victim in this case. If the creep knows she is returning to the hotel after the 1st instance, he then feels he is free to do as he wishes, because it’s her fault because she knew what happened the first time.
@White Rabbit:
People must take responsibility
Having abused her originally and getting away with it was a disgrace but he must have thought all his christmases has come together when she agreed to go there again to meet him.
This guy is a creep and deserves jail for what he did. Responsibility lies with this woman for first off letting him away with it and secondly for putting herself in danger with this monster.
Comments are open because Weinstein has been expelled from the circle. Don’t expect to be able to discuss Pat Hickey though.
And the onslaught of victim blaming begins. The only one responsible for the vile acts of a sexual predator are the predator himself. Not his victims. Without his actions there would never be any problems at all. I hope all their victims get justice in whatever form they need it. Be it criminal or financial.
@Catherine Sims:
You are wrong. Although he is completely wrong and should be locked away she should not have gone back to the hotel a second time. She made the decision to do so and it was as the wrong decision. Your argument is like saying a person who knowingly cannot swim and jumps off a boat for a swim and drowns has no responsibility for their actions.
@Catherine Sims:
Let me ask you one question here. Would you have gone to the same hotel with the same creep a second time ?
‘Onslaught’ might be an exaggeration. Who is really defending these people? You’re perfectly right though, he’s the only one responsible.
@O Swetenham:
So do you think she could have made different decisions which would have ensured she avoided this happening? And the different decisions would have been based on her previous experience. This is called the learning process
@Duncan: Listen lads are ye as vocal about the male victims of Kevin Spacey ???? Nope is the answer. Second of all it’s a very sad fact that people still have to deal with predators . Predators are predators in the first place because they hold power. Or did you miss that in the rush to blame women ?? With power they are lonely sex pests who live in bedsits and end up on a register. You are in essence saying that’s it’s perfectly ok for a predator to ruin the career of hundreds if not thousands of people because they don’t comply and that he should get off Scot free. Because what you boys are describing is a no win situation for all of their victims. They either get the blame or have their careers ruined. Either way the predator gets off Scot free or gets what he wants. So no I’m not wrong I’m right on this and that is why things need to change. So yeah go victim blame somewhere else today.
@O Swetenham: It will just be the same few who do it but they comment a lot trying to make the same points over and over so it can seem like an onslaught I’m afraid.
@Catherine Sims:
You need to come up for air !!
No one is justifying this creep or saying anything positive about Kevin Spacey. So before you whitewash all me with feminist aggression take a deep breath.
The point being made is not a justification for the predators but simply saying that in this particular case she new what could happen and should not have gone to the hotel.
Again I ask you would you have gone there if you thought there was a risk and s high risk of being raped ?
@Nick Allen: Look Nick, this disgusting Weinstein f*ck made the leap from wanking in front of her to all out horrific rape in two visits. Now, the first thing is bad and scary and all that but maybe she thought it was an aberration, people do strange things in the movie business. Everyone has heard stories. Maybe he was on drugs, maybe he had too much to drink, there’s a lot of that kind of thing in the movie business also. Maybe he was under a lot of pressure. So, she goes back, this is her profession after all, this job could be a serious career boost, and this awful thing happens to her. And you come on here and f*cking blame her. What is wrong with you?
@Catherine Sims:
A change of approach by you Catherine. So now to avoid the fact that she must take responsibility for putting herself in the position a second time you are arguing that it was a choice she had to make as HW held the power over her career. In life People often have to make difficult and unjust decisions. Maybe if the woman had gone to the police the first time things would have worked out better for her. Either way, the world is a tough place and not always a fair place and people need to take responsibility for their own actions. There will always be bad people out there and unfortunately we have to learn how to deal with these types of situations
@Bloodysam:
You are having a laugh. He made the leap from masturbating in front of her to raping her and this caught her by surprise. Are you seriously trying to suggested that him masturbating should not have set off a red flag and warned her to avoid the guy.
@Nick Allen: I think the most rational reason that woman could think of for going back wouldn’t be good enough for you.
@Nick Allen: how did you extrapolate that from my comment above?
@Bloodysam:
I️ am all for hearing a rational reason but I️ haven’t seen any posted. The guy asked her to watch him masturbate and she said no, he then forced her to watch him doing so by holding her wrist and using his physical strength and you are arguing that this shouldn’t have raised a red flag. Are you that completely out of touch with society and what behaviours are deemed acceptable or not
@Catherine Sims: You can understand if it happened once in 2015 but she went back again in 2016. Please explain, if you are willing & able, how that exonerates her of all blame.
@Bloodysam: sure people masterbat all the time on first dates as long as it’s not the 2nd date, that’s all I got from that.
@O Swetenham:
Simple really, you said ‘he’s the only one responsible.’ If she did not got to the hotel then she would not have been raped. Although it may be harsh on the victim there is absolutely no denying that if she had chosen a different course of actions then it would have worked out differently. Yes the industry is wrong to cover up this behaviour and it is also very unfair on someone trying to get an acting role but those circumstances do not change the facts
@Jonathan Byrne:
Not only did he masturbate but he asked her to watch, she refused and he proceeded to use his physical strength to force her to watch.
@Nick Allen: If she doesn’t go back then Weinstein is not a rapist? Right?
No, you’re jumping to conclusions(and making a complete bags of it). You badly paraphrased my comment and then went on a tirade. I did not intimate anything of the sort.
@Bloodysam:
No, please show me where I suggested that. HW does appear to be a rapist, hopefully that will be proven on the courts and hopefully he will receive a custodial term. The point is that if she doesn’t go back then she doesn’t put herself in the situation where he rapes her. How is this so difficult for you to understand. No matter how bad a man HW is, the bottom line is that she was aware of a significantly heightened risk of forced sexual abuse (she was previously physically forced to watch him masturbate) and with this knowledge she allowed herself to be in a vulnerable situation with him again. Yes there are lots of reasons why she did so and yes she may have felt she needed to take the risk but it still doesn’t change the fact that she elected to go back.
@O Swetenham:
I didn’t paraphrase, paraphrasing is when one changes the wording. I used copy and paste and used your exact words. Try reading my quote and your comment. They are identical!
@Nick Allen: 100% with you Nick. Not only was there loads rumours going around anyway about his behaviour but she also witnessed it first hand and still made the decision to meet him. Yes hes a creep, he’s the one in the wrong and will hopefully do time but her decision making has to be questioned also.
@Nick Allen: he’s the only guy I know who can multitask while masturbating
@Nick Allen: give up Nick you are swimming against the tide with this gang and will never see your point.
@Nick Allen: No it’s not a change of approach at all. This man was interviewing for a part in Marco Polo. At some point it would be reasonable to assume he would do his job. Especially in light of the fact she had seen him in group settings. If his behaviour was ok then it’s reasonable to assume that he could actually interview for the part without involving his genetalia. Or are you saying that it’s unreasonable for a woman to assume she won’t be sexually assulated ???? The point many of these women make is that they hadn’t heard the rumours. Many of them were boys locker room type talk. How was she to know he was a serial predator and worse?How was she to know he was just drunk or high first time around ? The truth is no one would have believed her. Look at what happened to Rose McGowan.
@Catherine Sims: And boys ??? If it hadn’t been her it would have the next poor girl. He was a serial predator. He was never going to be denied his victims because of the power he held. There is always the basis that everyone person has a right and expectation not to be raped in any situation. The responsibility lies with the person who rapes and assualts. They make the decision and they hold the responsibity. Saying a crime is the victims fault is fundamentally wrong. It always will be. We all have a right to not be assualted and to that that expectation as a normal part of life !!!
@Catherine Sims: Why would she meet him in his hotel room of all places if she just wanted to discuss the role? Why wouldn’t she meet him in a restaurant, cafe or bar?
Nobody is saying Weinstein’s actions are not deplorable. People are saying that the girl in question was stupid to meet him in the same hotel room. It’s not unreasonable for a woman to assume she won’t be sexually assaulted – but she was tempting fate by going back into the lions den again. So in this particular scenario, it was unreasonable for this woman to assume she wouldn’t be sexually assaulted.
She is partially responsible. If she didn’t go to the hotel room, it wouldn’t have happened. Therefore, her actions contributed to it happening. Therefore she’s partially responsible.
It doesn’t mean she bears as much responsibility as HW, but if she had any common sense she wouldn’t have met up with him at all. And if she wanted the role that badly, she would have met him in a public place.
@Catherine Sims:
She was the person he physically forced to watch him masturbate and you ask how was she to know. Do you not think that was enough evidence for her.
And please stop trying to change your approach. Yes HW is a bad person but that is not the debate and no women should not expect to be sexually abused. Again, not the debate. The debate is whether she has any responsibility for what happened and without question the answer is YES
Nice that the accuser has the protection of anonymity whilst the accused does not.
Is this the done thing these days? Sue somebody instead of pressing charges in a case like this? No wonder so many rapes go unreported.
@gary mullen: That’s not why rapes go unreported . You can in fact do both . You can press charges and sue . The reasons for choosing to sue alone could be that it’s easier to prove guilt in a civil case and it’s often easier to protect your identity in the US in a civil case. There are many reasons rapes go unreported but a civil law suit isn’t one of them.
So he attacked her in 2015 & she went back to see him again in 2016. Hmm.
@Cindy Crawford: perhaps she felt her inhibitions in her initial audition didn’t secure the role.
Did she get the role in Marco polo?
@martin buckley: Perhaps not, maybe that’s why she now has taken this rape case against him.
@martin buckley:
She is due to meet Weinstein in his hotel room for a third time tomorrow to find out
Disney owned Miramax and Miramax was Harvey Weinstein – the monster made flesh. Am beyond fed up with films with all men in them and one woman who keeps screwing up or being s…d. You can see why those story lines flourish with someone like HW calling the shots. Loved Wonder Woman this year – more of that please.
GO HARVEY GO! ……. to prison
So she sleeps with him on two separate occasions for acting roles, then when he is in the media spotlight she grabs an opportunity to sue but remains anonymous.
Does John Travolta seems to be slipping under the radar a bit?
I know for certain that all these accusations on Weinstein are false. He is a male feminist, who make films empowering women and is great friends with other male feminists such as Bill Clinton and Woody Allen. Surely a hollywood leftist who fights for social justice and progress wouldn’t turn out to be a sick deranged person?
@Nick Allen
Give over ! There is no one going to knowingly jump of a boat if they can’t swim unless it’s sinking .
at least all the money will go to womens refuge.
An absolute horrible creature and utter excuse of man. Of course the lady should not have gone back a second time but I don’t understand the need to point that out. Its like an I told you so.. It doesn’t help anyone. She probably shouldn’t have gone back. But why point that out? We all know it was a poor decision.
have your say