Anthony Rapp: Kevin Spacey Made A Sexual Advance Toward Me When I Was 14- Page 10

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 11/6/17 at 3:15am

SmoothLover said: "I do wonder what the deciding moment was for Rapp when he decided to come out publically with the information after 30 years. It must have been a very difficult decision to make. To be a fly on the wall......"

In the original article, it is clear that the journalist is a friend of Rapp's and he had told her (IIRC it was a female writer) about the incident a couple of weeks earlier.

I am speculating, but I think the journalist/friend may have helped Rapp find the courage. Rapp himself also says, IIRC, that the Weinstein fuss helped him feel safe enough to think he might be believed over a powerful man.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 11/6/17 at 3:24am

TheSassySam said: "In response to libel/slander suits, they rarely go anywhere. Though, my favorite was when Liberace won a libel suit because somebody claimed he was gay. lol

The elements of libel include:

1. Someone made a statement;
2. that statement was published (spoken if slander, slander must includesomebody else besides the direct party listening to said statement);
3. the statement caused you, a person (not a company)injury;
4. the statement was false; and
5. the statement did not fall into a privileged category.

However, by the time these suits make their way through court, these matters are dealt with out-of-court. I could go more into it, if you all would like that, but it's quite boring (though, my nerdy self, LOVES IT!)"

Are you a lawyer? Or British? I ask because in cases such as Westmoreland v. CBS it was explained at length that the defendant has to "have known or reasonably should have known" that the statement was false. That doesn't strike me as a protected category such as "satire".

I'm not a lawyer, but bottom line: your #4 should include the fact that, in the U.S., the plaintiff must prove the defendant KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN the statement was false. More than anything, as I understand it from reading, this is the stumbling block that stops slander/libel suits at the Motion for Summary Judgment phase.

Updated On: 11/6/17 at 03:24 AM

[Kad]

Posted: 11/6/17 at 11:04am

GavestonPS said: "SmoothLover said: "I do wonder what the deciding moment was for Rapp when he decided to come out publically with the information after 30 years. It must have been a very difficult decision to make. To be a fly on the wall......"

In the original article, it is clear that the journalist is a friend of Rapp's and he had told her (IIRC it was a female writer) about the incident a couple of weeks earlier.

I am speculating, but I think the journalist/friend may have helped Rapp find the courage. Rapp himself also says, IIRC, that the Weinstein fuss helped him feel safe enough to think he might be believed over a powerful man."

 

In a link I posted earlier in this thread, it is shown that Rapp actually spoke of this incident with Spacey as early as 2001 in an interview with the Advocate- which redacted any information that would clearly identify Spacey (specifically, his name and movie credits).  

Imagine being a victim and speaking out- only to see the publication then redact the information.

 

[Fosse76]

Posted: 11/6/17 at 5:18pm

GavestonPS said: "Are you a lawyer? Or British? I ask because in cases such as Westmoreland v. CBS it was explained at length that the defendant has to "have known or reasonably should have known" that the statement was false. That doesn't strike me as a protected category such as 'satire'."

I'm not a lawyer, but bottom line: your #4 should include the fact that, in the U.S., the plaintiff must prove the defendant KNEW OR SHOULD HAVE KNOWN the statement was false.

Well, that depends on what you mean with your assertion. The plaintiff only has to prove the defendant was at the very least negligent in "publishing" the statement.  "Should have known" actually means the plaintiff need only prove that the defendant didn't bother to "fact check" the statement. 

But what's being slightly ignored with this discussion is that all the elements must be met for there to a finding in favor of the plaintiff in a defamation suit. If just one of those elements isn't proven, then there can be no finding in favor of the plaintiff. Most of the time it's the "injury" that's the hang-up (very similar to copyright infringement cases).

[CPB2]

Posted: 11/6/17 at 6:34pm

If the person alleging they were defamed or libeled is a public figure or official, the standard is even higher. They must prove not just that there is a published falsehood and an injury, but there was "actual malice" involved- which is a very difficult standard to meet.

[CPB2]

Posted: 11/6/17 at 6:40pm

https://www.buzzfeed.com/kateaurthur/kevin-spacey-house-of-cards-set

Crossing Spacey could make things complicated. According to a fourth person who worked on House of Cards for only a few days during its run, but had knowledge of what went on there through the IATSE union, which represents crew members, a production assistant was fired during Season 2 after refusing Spacey's advances. This man was "repeatedly harassed," the source told BuzzFeed News, to go on Spacey's boat, and after the PA refused he suddenly no longer worked on the show. When reached on Wednesday to discuss his departure, the former PA wrote over text: "My lawyers told me to wait to hear from them before I talk to anyone. I apologize. Maybe tomorrow."

 

Beau Willimon, the House of Cards creator and executive producer, who ran the show for several seasons, issued a statement on Monday after Rapp had leveled his allegation against Spacey in BuzzFeed News. It read: "Anthony Rapp’s story is deeply troubling. During the time I worked with Kevin Spacey on House of Cards, I neither witnessed nor was aware of any inappropriate behavior on set or off. That said, I take reports of such behavior seriously and this is no exception. I feel for Mr. Rapp and I support his courage."

All three sources who spoke to BuzzFeed News disputed Willimon's account. "Bull****. Utter bull****. 100%," said the higher-level source, who saw Willimon witness Spacey's behavior.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 11/7/17 at 3:01am

CPB2 said: "If the person alleging they were defamed or libeled is a public figure or official, the standard is even higher. They must prove not just that there is a published falsehood and an injury, but there was"actual malice" involved-which is a very difficult standard to meet."

Yes, but "malice" in this context doesn't mean what it means to a layperson. It's the "reasonably should have known" (i.e., neglected to perform due diligence that would have proved the statement false) part.

[GavestonPS]

Posted: 11/7/17 at 3:03am

Kad said: "GavestonPS said: "SmoothLover said: "I do wonder what the deciding moment was for Rapp when he decided to come out publically with the information after 30 years. It must have been a very difficult decision to make. To be a fly on the wall......"

In the original article, it is clear that the journalist is a friend of Rapp's and he had told her (IIRC it was a female writer) about the incident a couple of weeks earlier.

I am speculating, but I think the journalist/friend may have helped Rapp find the courage. Rapp himself also says, IIRC, that the Weinstein fuss helped him feel safe enough to think he might be believed over a powerful man."



In a link I posted earlier in this thread, it is shown that Rapp actually spoke of this incident with Spacey as early as 2001 in an interview with the Advocate- which redacted any information that would clearly identify Spacey (specifically, his name and movie credits).

Imagine being a victim and speaking out- only to seethe publication then redact the information.

"

I hadn't forgotten your post, Kad, and didn't mean to ignore it. Yes, I'm sure Rapp got the message from THE ADVOCATE redacting Spacey's name in 2001.

[AllThatJazz2]

Posted: 11/8/17 at 9:51pm

Kevin Spacey is being removed from the finished cut of All The Money in the World. His scenes are being reshot with Christopher Plummer in the role. Ridley Scott is looking to still get everything complete in time for the current December 22nd release date.

http://deadline.com/2017/11/kevin-spacey-dropped-all-in-the-money-in-the-world-christopher-plummer-ridley-scott-j-paul-getty-1202204437/

Updated On: 11/8/17 at 09:51 PM

[gypsy101]

Posted: 11/8/17 at 10:07pm

looks like his existence is being scrubbed from the face of the earth, i’m surprised by how quickly this all came crashing down for him after Rapp spoke out

[WithoutATrace]

Posted: 11/8/17 at 10:07pm

I just heard about this Christopher Plummer news. This is crazy! I certainly hope they can finish the scenes/editing in time for the December 22 release date...or maybe just push it back a couple weeks so it can still contend in the coming Oscar season.

More news to come I'm sure...wow

[gypsy101]

Posted: 11/8/17 at 10:10pm

wow it’s only been ten days since that happened and already he’s being removed from films and television appearances he already shot, a film he starred in will never see the light of day and he was removed from his own television series

[RndmAnswrs4RndmQstns]

Posted: 11/8/17 at 10:40pm

gypsy101 said: "wow it’s only been ten days since that happened and already he’s being removed from films and television appearances he already shot, a film he starred in will never see the light of day and he was removed from his own television series"

It’s kind of scary, really. The speed in which his career is spiraling downward is astounding.

Updated On: 11/9/17 at 10:40 PM

[SmoothLover]

Posted: 11/8/17 at 11:15pm

The Heather Unrah news conference today was just heartbreaking.

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 11/9/17 at 12:03am

I still can’t get over the fact that one of my favorite actors for half my lifetime has been revealed to be a predatory, manipulative POS. I had an American Beauty poster up in my room when I was in high school...probably too old for him at that age anyway.

[smidge]

Posted: 11/9/17 at 12:19am

I just hope that in a couple of years all is not forgiven. Mel Gibson is a POS too and this year received an Oscar nomination and is in a freaking Christmas movie. Same with Polanski. Still cannot believe people stood for his Oscar win, let alone allowing him to continue making films.

[GoblinKing2]

Posted: 11/9/17 at 7:59am

Hollywood's tolerance of deviant and criminal behavior seems even more inexplicable in the case of Spacey than Weinstein.  I live in the Midwest with no connections to the entertainment industry outside of an interest in pop culture, but had heard the Stacey rumors, as opposed to Weinstein, of which I knew nothing (although wasn't surprised).  With Weinstein, the conspiracy of silence, while not excusable, was almost understandable considering how much power the man wielded and the resources at his command to crush people.  Even Bill Cosby's capacity to hide his behavior makes a disturbing kind of sense considering that he was considered "America's Dad" for years.  Compared to these examples, I'm not sure how someone like Stacey continued to skate by.  Nothing tops the Polanski worship, however...  

[ArtMan]

Posted: 11/9/17 at 8:29am

My take on the "speed" of Spacey's career demise.  I believe the Hollywood Power Brokers always knew of Spacey's dirty secrets.  However, once his behavior was made public by Rapp's statements, the Hollywood bigwigs had no choice but to sever ties and do this quickly.  Unfortunately, many in our society live by the creed "it's not what you do, but what you get caught at".  In Spacey's case, "it's what you get accused of".

[Someone in a Tree2]

Posted: 11/9/17 at 4:25pm

Agreed that Kevin Spacey has done despicable things for many decades, and caused untold harm to many young men that they are still living with. But I'm genuinely curious why the pitchforks came out for him so immediately and with such forceful finality. His career is over. Any comeback for him is inconceivable now. Yet haven't there been countless powerful men who have exploited/ molested/ raped young women or men throughout the history of Hollywood, who have been treated with less swift and complete retribution by the world at large. (Bill Cosby and Donald Trump are just 2 that come immediately to mind.)

What sets Spacey apart, I wonder? I'm genuinely asking the question.

 

[Alex10]

Posted: 11/9/17 at 4:47pm

Someone in a Tree2 said: "Agreed that Kevin Spacey has done despicable things formany decades, and caused untold harm to many young men that they are still living with. But I'm genuinely curious why the pitchforks came out for him so immediately and with such forceful finality. His career is over. Any comeback for him is inconceivable now.Yet haven't there been countless powerful men who have exploited/ molested/ rapedyoung women or men throughout the history of Hollywood, who have been treated with less swift and complete retribution by the world at large. (Bill Cosby and Donald Trump are just 2 that come immediately to mind.)

What sets Spacey apart, I wonder? I'm genuinely asking the question.

"

I mean, if we're being honest, homophobia probably played at least something of a role. Even though obviously assault is assault regardless of the genders of the people involved, a lot of people still have a predisposition, conscious or otherwise, against the concept of the "gay predator" that makes them react on a quick and visceral level. Which is one of many reasons I'm so angry that he tried to deflect attention from it by coming out.

[Kad]

Posted: 11/9/17 at 5:27pm

Remember- despite all the heinous, racist, sexist, monstrous things Milo Yiannopolous said, it was his statements about pedophilia that ultimately caused his collapse. The idea of the predatory gay man is still very much alive.

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 11/9/17 at 7:22pm

I think had Spacey’s accusers been only the grown men who he has grabbed, he would have been able to survive this. Even the Anthony Rapp thing by itself would have eventually blown over to a degree, since no actual sex occurred. Even my own initial reaction was somewhat forgiving.

However the revelation that he had an actual sexual relationship with different 14 year old is what really did him in. That’s statutory rape that he committed multiple times. And the sordid details of that relationship are truly disturbing.

[adam.peterson44]

Posted: 11/9/17 at 7:28pm

It seems to me that the much greater response to Kevin Spacey compared to the minimal responses to Roman Polansky, Bill Cosby, Gian Ghomeshi (Toronto radio host), 45, and others stems from a very widespread misogyny that deems it "normal" for women or girls to be the targets of sexual predators but reacts with extreme indignance when the tables are turned and the predation is directed towards men or boys.  Obviously it would be much less common for women to be the targets if the world reacted as swiftly and angrily as they do when men are the targets. 

[The Distinctive Baritone]

Posted: 11/9/17 at 7:45pm

I feel that the difference between a guy screwing a 14 year old girl and a guy screwing a 14 year old boy is that although both are terrible, it is, I imagine, already hard enough to be a gay teenager and it’s taking advantage of someone who is especially vulnerable.

[sabrelady]

Posted: 11/9/17 at 10:35pm

Um- Gomeshi was fired by his employer(CBC)s when he showed them video of hsi actions. He was tried in the criminal court system. He was found not guilty, but hardly minimal reaction.

 

I think President Caligula did have a point ( relax, even a stopped clock is right 2x a day)  " When you are a star they let you do it. "Tho it's more that they can't stop you cos you have the power and the repercussions seem to be minimized for them as they are part of the club of power, money and success.

The golden rule holds- whoever has the gold makes the rules .  Well,l at least until it is demonstrated how egregiously the rules have been abused. Then sometimes a version of  "Azdak of Nuka " can occur and "there was almost justice"

 

I'm sure Spacey  Cosby et all can't believe that they would be held accountable for their actions ..