John Travolta sued for sexual battery

[believe09]

There is no case. He wasn't even there at the time they claimed the assault took place.

http://www.tmz.com/2012/05/10/john-travolta-masseur-lawsuit-plane-flight-new-york-city/

oops.

 

[believe09]

I wish I hadnt read from the bottom up...$2 million?

 

[tlcya]

Here's the thing. If you are assaulted, you call the police, you pursue criminal prosecution. What you don't do is file a civil suit under anonymous conditions (IMO).

 

[lillygator]

There is no case. He wasn't even there at the time they claimed the assault took place.

http://www.tmz.com/2012/05/10/john-travolta-masseur-lawsuit-plane-flight-new-york-city/

actually, I thought I read that receipts have come out that proved he was there.


there have been rumors for years about him, and his news stories usually get swept right under the rug for whatever reason.

 

[Woe.be.gone]

Assault is the operative word in this story; if there were proven assaults then they have a case.

Otherwise, I don't understand the obsession with who is putting what where. People's sexuality is their business.

It's more than that though because it's JT's reputation at stake. If he wanted to be out then he'd be out. If he's not gay then it's a bald faced lie and damages his reputation and hurts his family. If he's a closet gay, it still hurts his family. If that's the case, it will hurt his image with the people who have always wished him well. When people are famous, they betray their fans when they betray themselves. That's what Tiger Woods did imo.

It doesn't matter who they are if they're honest about it but if who they portray themselves to be and who they are is different then they fool us. I'm not sure who the people are who take it upon themselves to make sure the world knows the truth about someone but, if you're a fan who believes the facade image, then it's disappointing to find out otherwise.

Lisa Rinna was on TV today and I heard her ask, 'why wouldn't the masseurs just leave the room if they felt violated?' Same thing I asked yesterday. What was the nature of the 'assault'? And now they need to sue JT because they're so damaged that he allegedly made a pass at them?

 

[Woe.be.gone]

So if one is gay, they would do what he wanted??
That makes no sense..

Goz

After I read my post again, I realized that was a sloppy remark. No they should not do what anybody else wants simply because they are gay. I was hoping peeps would read my mind - ha! - and understand what I meant considering the scenario. Which is, at least one 'victim' says he was picked up in a car by JT himself that had condoms visable in the console.
This person is in the business of giving massages and gets picked up in cars by high rollers, apparently. Is this his first rodeo? Never been propositioned before and thought about a game plan if and when that should ever happen? Has he sued other clients or does he wait for the most famous one to come along before he takes action? If the masseur is gay, would it be THAT psychologically damaging for someone to suggest the route of a happy ending?

I'm trying to get the picture of what an 'assault' entails? To me an 'assault' is when you are forced, detained and/or put in a position of bodily harm or have been forced to perform a deed (like at gunpoint) that you didn't want to do. Would someone asking for something constitute claiming an assault? Even if he got a little handsy, would that be an assault? Say 'no' and walk out. Where is the 'assault' word coming from?

 

[believe09]

The receipts prove Travolta was eating in a resturant in NYC at the time of the assault IIRC. His plane was logged also flying from LA to NYC, and it stayed overnight, again during the time the masseuse says he was assaulted.

again, oops.

 

[Emma Peel]

oops.

ya, I'll say. LOL.

It's not like it's not been tried before.

**********

Methinks, Travolta must have a movie coming out soon.

*emma runs to google*

ah, yes. He does. Savages. due July.

[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Savages_%282012_film%29"]Savages (2012 film) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

Savages is an upcoming crime–thriller film directed by Oliver Stone. It is based on the novel of the same name by Don Winslow, who co-wrote the script with Stone and Shane Salerno. The film is set for release July 6, 2012, and stars Taylor Kitsch, Aaron Johnson, and Blake Lively.

oooo...NICE cast! Benicio, Salma, Travolta & Uma too.

********


I wouldn't put it past these "defendants" to time their blackmail scheme around a blockbuster release. You know, hoping someone would just pay them to go away and be quiet.

IMO, that's when you usually hear from the opportunists.

:cow:

***************

And now this from the plaintiff John Doe:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...sues-bizarre-statement.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

'In consideration of that, I ask the public to not judge anyone, and allow all parties to work things out in a respectful and dignified manner, and if these matters do go to court than only that final decision past appeals, etc should be considered a definitive statement on 'guilt' or 'innocence'.'

Translation - Hey c'mon. Quit making a big deal out of this - I just wanted a little hush money and now it's not hush anymore. Darn! :moo:


Anyway, it's just a theory.

 

[jjw]

It's more than that though because it's JT's reputation at stake. If he wanted to be out then he'd be out. If he's not gay then it's a bald faced lie and damages his reputation and hurts his family.

If he's a closet gay, it still hurts his family. If that's the case, it will hurt his image with the people who have always wished him well. When people are famous, they betray their fans when they betray themselves.

That's what Tiger Woods did imo.


Maybe his wife knows and doesn't care. We don't know anything about their marriage. I don't know how it would hurt his image. The world is slowly becoming more tolerant toward the gay community. His career as a romantic lead are probably over anyway. If his fans would be upset that he was gay or bisexual, he would be better off without those fans.

It doesn't matter who they are if they're honest about it but if who they portray themselves to be and who they are is different then they fool us. I'm not sure who the people are who take it upon themselves to make sure the world knows the truth about someone but, if you're a fan who believes the facade image, then it's disappointing to find out otherwise.

I don't understand why famous people have to tell us who they sleep with. Again, if he's bisexual and Kelly Preston knows and loves him anyway, why should we care? One of my favorite actors, Sir Ian McKellan, is openly gay and it sure hasn't hurt his career. Most of Travolta's fans are adults and should be mature and intelligent enough to not believe in fantasies about their favorite stars. I'm old enough now to understand I'll never marry Leonardo DiCaprio. Not to say, I would turn him down either. lease:

 

[Danaya]

Oh, this is common knowledge in Hollywood. Yes he is gay and has visited bath houses since the 80s. Why won't he just be honest with his fans? I guess he believes they will reject him and many people don't know the truth and he likes to keep a facade escpecially since his religion doesn't believe in it.

Here's some good reads about John Travolta's preferences:
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...its-part-of-a-long-history-of-gay-rumors.html
http://gawker.com/5685811/

 

[Glow]

Oh, this is common knowledge in Hollywood. Yes he is gay and has visited bath houses since the 80s. Why won't he just be honest with his fans?

and your factual proof is?

 

[Gozgals]

After I read my post again, I realized that was a sloppy remark. No they should not do what anybody else wants simply because they are gay. I was hoping peeps would read my mind - ha! - and understand what I meant considering the scenario. Which is, at least one 'victim' says he was picked up in a car by JT himself that had condoms visable in the console.
This person is in the business of giving massages and gets picked up in cars by high rollers, apparently. Is this his first rodeo? Never been propositioned before and thought about a game plan if and when that should ever happen? Has he sued other clients or does he wait for the most famous one to come along before he takes action? If the masseur is gay, would it be THAT psychologically damaging for someone to suggest the route of a happy ending?

I'm trying to get the picture of what an 'assault' entails? To me an 'assault' is when you are forced, detained and/or put in a position of bodily harm or have been forced to perform a deed (like at gunpoint) that you didn't want to do. Would someone asking for something constitute claiming an assault? Even if he got a little handsy, would that be an assault? Say 'no' and walk out. Where is the 'assault' word coming from?

Lost me on the gay part still but i won't go on with it.

Also, I don't know what you might know of the entertaining business, but being hit on for jobs,or whatever does not constitute the big day to some. It does not mean the first time at rodeo. It may be disturbing. It may mean your job is at risk, it may mean you do not work that day if someone hits on you,and you do not handle it correctly. That is a power play and it can be used.
Having an actor who feels they can disrobe because they are higher up than you may not be an assault but it certainly is not a light situation. It is an awkward situation. It is not like joe, john or sue hitting on you.. It happens in the real world. It is not what I would call a "Walk in the park."


goz
Done

PS this happens in the biz world too.

 

[Blondie in Spokane]

John Doe No. 1 in John Travolta sex abuse lawsuit dropped by attorney, report says

John Travolta has one fewer men suing him for sexual assault, at least for now.

John Doe No. 1, who filed suit on Monday with attorney Okorie Okorocha, has been dropped as a client by Okorocha, RadarOnline.com reports.

The move comes after the plaintiff said he got the date of the alleged assault wrong, this after Travolta's team produced evidence the actor was in New York on the day the accuser said he was attacked in Los Angeles.

"Okorocha did not feel he could represent John Doe #1 going forward anymore and recommend him finding another lawyer," a source told RadarOnline.com. "He is still representing John Doe #2 and other alleged victims who are possibly coming forward."


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...pped-by-lawyer/?intcmp=features#ixzz1uab9eWoU

 

[animlzrule]

IMO JT is gay. I believe that over the years there have just been too many rumors and allegations and smoke to not know that there is a fire. That said, it's nobody's business but he and his wife. And his true fan base shouldn't be disillusioned or upset by that. I can only imagine the excruciating choice it must be for someone to be open about their sexual orientation and after having lived the facade for so long now, he probably feels trapped. I think the real problem and hypocrisy lies with his choice of "religion". It does disgust me that he denied for years his son's obvious autism due to the fact that as per Scientology, autism doesn't exist. If you can make peace with living a lie or somehow find a family dynamic that works for you and all parties involved, so be it and everyone should be able to live their lives in whichever way fulfills their personal needs. However, when it comes to your children, a parent has to be their advocate and I can't imagine allowing a religion to dictate whether or not I take action to help my child live to their best potential and seek whatever help he or she might require to treat a illness/syndrome/disease etc....it's one thing to believe in aliens sprung forth from volcanoes or whatever "knowledge"the Scientology "clears" are privy to. It's another to be delusional and blind to what is right in front of your face because your religion commands it as in regards to physical and psychological health. I have no interest in watching someone be "outed". These people should slither away from whence they came. But if/when it comes to exposing Scientology for what it is, I'm all for it.

 

[4Jacy]

Who cares if JT is gay or not? And why should it be our concern? Do you enjoy his movies? Live and let live! Enough said.

 

[jjenny]

So the first accuser didn't even originally pick a date when Travolta could have possibly done it?
And when Travolta presented evidence he was elsewhere the accuser says he got a date wrong?
Why should I believe any of it, then?
Rich celebrity makes a good target.

 

[tlcya]

Yeah, John Doe #1 who started this whole kerfluffle turns out to have picked a day when there is mounds and mounds of evidence that his story was complete fabrication.

What I am waiting to see is what John Doe #2s story is. I find the whole thing very shady.

Personally I think it is all about timing. JT makes for a good target and his sexuality (long questioned by some) makes the perfect means of trying to extort, er I mean Settle out of court with) from a celebrity with a new movie coming out soon.

 

[Nova]

Are JT's accusers gay or straight? If they're gay, then why not do whatever he wanted? Come on - they're out for his money, probably because he didn't accept their offers. If they're straight, why would JT, if gay, expect anything from them? Not buying it....

(I am removing my response because you retracted your statement in a post above. Thank you.)

 

[Nova]

My theory on why so many famous people find themselves in situations like this:

Famous stars can have virtually anything they want, just by making a phone call, or nodding their head. Men, women, people, are constant throwing themselves at them, just for the chance to say they've been with them (certainly, things like this don't normally happen to the rest of us). Eventually, with so many different "opportunities" being offered to them, they grow bored with what has always satisfied them before, and need a new "thrill" to up the ante. This could take the form of sex, drugs, alcohol, etc.

There are some grounded famous people, but they seem to be the exception, rather than the norm.

I don't know about the ratio of norms to exceptions, but I think you have the right idea.

It's akin to the old saw: "Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

 

[Nova]

...Lisa Rinna was on TV today and I heard her ask, 'why wouldn't the masseurs just leave the room if they felt violated?' Same thing I asked yesterday. What was the nature of the 'assault'? And now they need to sue JT because they're so damaged that he allegedly made a pass at them?

BBM: Um, maybe because they needed to earn a living?

Again, I have no knowledge as to whether the charges against JT are true. But we don't require sexual harassment victims to quit their jobs rather than filing suit, and that's basically what this lawsuit is: a sexual harassment claim.