X-Men director Brian Singer accused of under age sex w/ 17 yr old boy

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by MattyC

Well can we agree that there is a difference between a 16-17 year old consensually sleeping with a early 30's teacher/boss/etc.. and someone forcibly raping a child? As someone not far removed from the late-teen age range, I can say that there are for sure some teachers I had in highschool that I definitely would have and, had I somehow ended up hooking up with one, I would have received a gauntlet of high-fives and a statue in my honor. And I know that there were male teachers that would have elicited the same response from the girls. Obviously this is not true with all and probably most cases like this, but it is a reality.

Obviously we don't know anything about this situation and I don't make up my mind about anything until I hear the whole story. But my initial reaction upon reading it is that a young person hooked up with an older person of power in their chosen profession to try and get ahead. Didn't end up getting ahead and now the aftermath. If they're above the age of consent and they did indeed consent, the only issue I see is providing booze/drugs to a minor as a few have mentioned. But again, I will wait until more information comes out before solidifying an opinion either way.

The allegation is :

According to the lawsuit filed in federal court in Hawaii, plaintiff Michael Egan, who was named in a press release by his lawyers, was 17 when he was forcibly sodomized by Singer, among other accusations.

[rubecube]

Obviously, innocent until proven guilty and whatnot, but if you intentionally ply someone with drugs and alcohol in an effort to coerce them into having sex with you, it's rape. There's not really a grey area here.

[Coach]

You bolded 17 because? Was it not established earlier that 16 is the age of consent in Hawaii?

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by MattyC

You bolded 17 because? Was it not established earlier that 16 is the age of consent in Hawaii?

Because much like a teacher, this director is in a power position in his dealings with this 17 yr old.


Also, they rest of your post is garbage. The 30 something teacher and the 17 yr old are not on the same plane "power" wise.

In fact, I am going from memory, but isn't there something in the law that speaks to this type of power inequality in relationships of this type. I seem to recall there is, but my memory is hazy.

[Teh_Bandwagoner]

I think people find it generally suspicious because Hollywood is involved. You're never too sure if it's legitimate or if the accused is being exploited. The most recent ones that come to my mind that were either proven false or "mysteriously" went away are Alec Baldwin's Montreal stalker, and John Travolta and that male masseur.

[GreenLantern]

Ok if age of consent is 16 in Hawaii, what is it in California? Because the mansion where a lot of this supposedly went down is located in Encino, California. Pretty sure it is 18... thus the use of the term 'under age'.


I am not taking this for gospel, but it is definitely something worth noting. On the fence about whether I want to support this movie or not until this comes into the light a bit more. Hopefully none of it is true.

[Russic]

Elmo has taught me to count, share, and to withhold judgement on a rape accusation until the process is sent through a court of law.

Edit: The reason that case was thrown out was different than what I thought. Carry on.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

Because much like a teacher, this director is in a power position in his dealings with this 17 yr old.


Also, they rest of your post is garbage. The 30 something teacher and the 17 yr old are not on the same plane "power" wise.

I don't disagree with the power plane differences. And of course it can have an affect on what ends up happening between the two people. My original point was that there is a difference between consensual relations in matters of authority and outright raping a defenseless child. Maybe some see it more black and white but I don't. It's definitely possible that any age-of-consent teen involved in something like this solicited the older person first, as they can have an attraction to that position as well. And for me, until more information comes out, it's just as likely that this person approached Singer with "offers of services" in return for movie parts as the other way around. And then When the movie parts didn't happen, he goes for the sue route. No different that a secretary boning her boss and then sueing him for sexual harrassment when it doesn't go her way.

Again, I'm not saying I think this is what's happening here, but it does happen. I just think it's important to keep an open mind about this stuff and the alternative possibilities until more facts come out. And I think some people forget what they were like at 17 years old. If I was a 17 year old wanting to be an actor and (picking a name from nowhere) Liz Hurely (who would have been 42 when I was 17) told me to go down on her and I would have a part in her new movie, I wouldn't hesitate.

[Rathji]

Originally Posted by nik-

He's not the age of majority, but consent age is 16 in Hawaii so is "underage" even applicable here?

Not appropriate still, but not illegal and definitely not in the realm of the usual cases when underage is used.

I don't know American law in this area, but in Canada even if you are over the age of consent, if there is any authority relationship between the people, then then charged can still be laid.

For example, a teacher and a student who is over the age of consent.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by rubecube

You mean like when Fleury waited nearly two decades to release details about Graham James? That's a really ####ty argument.

No it isnt. Neither is the fact that this is a civil suit. At least when Fleury released details about James he did it to the Police.

You dont think the timing of this is fishy? He shut up for 15 years, he was promised a role in a movie that comes out in a month which he coincidentally isnt in. Broken promise equals broken silence?

It doesnt make it okay if Singer did it.

[nik-]

I don't think "director" and "aspiring actor" is what the position of authority clauses were meant to address.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by MattyC

I don't disagree with the power plane differences. And of course it can have an affect on what ends up happening between the two people. My original point was that there is a difference between consensual relations in matters of authority and outright raping a defenseless child. Maybe some see it more black and white but I don't. It's definitely possible that any age-of-consent teen involved in something like this solicited the older person first, as they can have an attraction to that position as well. And for me, until more information comes out, it's just as likely that this person approached Singer with "offers of services" in return for movie parts as the other way around. And then When the movie parts didn't happen, he goes for the sue route. No different that a secretary boning her boss and then sueing him for sexual harrassment when it doesn't go her way.

Again, I'm not saying I think this is what's happening here, but it does happen. I just think it's important to keep an open mind about this stuff and the alternative possibilities until more facts come out. And I think some people forget what they were like at 17 years old. If I was a 17 year old wanting to be an actor and (picking a name from nowhere) Liz Hurely (who would have been 42 when I was 17) told me to go down on her and I would have a part in her new movie, I wouldn't hesitate.

I am all for waiting for the facts to come out, that is why when I qouted the age of this individual, I said "allegations".

As we mentioned above many of these alleged activities happened in California, where the age of consent if 18 yrs old. This appears (if the allegations are true) to be a case where an individual in a position of power, has abused that position to get sex from a minor.

I will also say that 16/17/18/19, hell 20+ yr olds often make poor decisions. I know I made dumb decisions.

I am keeping an open mind about this, and agree that instances like the 17 yr old propositioning the individual could happen, but if it did, why the #### would they accept?

[Locke]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I am all for waiting for the facts to come out, that is why when I qouted the age of this individual, I said "allegations".

As we mentioned above many of these alleged activities happened in California, where the age of consent if 18 yrs old. This appears (if the allegations are true) to be a case where an individual in a position of power, has abused that position to get sex from a minor.

I will also say that 16/17/18/19, hell 20+ yr olds often make poor decisions. I know I made dumb decisions.

I am keeping an open mind about this, and agree that instances like the 17 yr old propositioning the individual could happen, but if it did, why the #### would they accept?

Theres a joke here. Something about inappropriate timing for tying shoes. I dont know, I'm going to let it go though.

[Coach]

Originally Posted by undercoverbrother

I am keeping an open mind about this, and agree that instances like the 17 yr old propositioning the individual could happen, but if it did, why the #### would they accept?

Because they're attracted to the person and thought they would get away with it? Yes 17-20 year olds make dumb mistakes, but so does everyone else.

[Galakanokis]

Oh the comments I would love to make but shan't since this is an ongoing case. Let's just say after working on the first two X-Men films and hearing a number of the stories during those times I am not surprised by the allegations.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Galakanokis

Oh the comments I would love to make but shan't since this is an ongoing case. Let's just say after working on the first two X-Men films and hearing a number of the stories during those times I am not surprised by the allegations.

I got lost in the forest they built on the upper kananaskis lake......no idea how perilous those 5 minutes were.

[CaramonLS]

Originally Posted by nik-

I don't think "director" and "aspiring actor" is what the position of authority clauses were meant to address.

Really? Boss / employee relationships are treated this way.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Locke

No it isnt. Neither is the fact that this is a civil suit. At least when Fleury released details about James he did it to the Police.

You dont think the timing of this is fishy? He shut up for 15 years, he was promised a role in a movie that comes out in a month which he coincidentally isnt in. Broken promise equals broken silence?

It doesnt make it okay if Singer did it.

Except this isn't atypical for a lot of sexual assault victims. It can be incredibly difficult to seek out law enforcement immediately after the incident occurred. Everyone deals with trauma differently.

The reason for a civil suit vs. criminal charges largely has to do with burden of proof. He may have gone to his lawyer and been advised there wasn't enough evidence to obtain a criminal conviction.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Galakanokis

Oh the comments I would love to make but shan't since this is an ongoing case. Let's just say after working on the first two X-Men films and hearing a number of the stories during those times I am not surprised by the allegations.

Wow. Just....wow. I dont get things like this. I dont get where it becomes fun to force people to do things they dont want to do.

Originally Posted by CaramonLS

Really? Boss / employee relationships are treated this way.

I think this is going to be a big gray-area. Hes not really an 'employee' until some sort of transaction takes place. Has he ever earned a dollar that directly came from Singer or one of their associates?

Promising some kid a role that he may or may not be qualified for and that you may or may not follow through on doesnt really make him your employee.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by rubecube

Except this isn't atypical for a lot of sexual assault victims. It can be incredibly difficult to seek out law enforcement immediately after the incident occurred. Everyone deals with trauma differently.

The reason for a civil suit vs. criminal charges largely has to do with burden of proof. He may have gone to his lawyer and been advised there wasn't enough evidence to obtain a criminal conviction.

See, I hate this. If he did it then a civil suit solves nothing. No justice is done.

At the same time, as is usually the case, the truth in situations such as these is often found somewhere in the middle.