horsechoker
The Caf's Ezza.
DisgustingWhat's up with all these weirdo TV chefs at the moment? Thinking about it reminded me of this from a few years ago:
![]()
So glad indoor smoking is banned
DisgustingWhat's up with all these weirdo TV chefs at the moment? Thinking about it reminded me of this from a few years ago:
![]()
Maybe this is just a long running punishment.Impractical Joker Joe Gatto hit with second allegation of inappropriate behavior by former employee
https://www.themirror.com/entertain...tto-inappropriate-behavior-allegation-1047413
Did think it was weird when he quit. Makes sense now with all these allegations.Impractical Joker Joe Gatto hit with second allegation of inappropriate behavior by former employee
https://www.themirror.com/entertain...tto-inappropriate-behavior-allegation-1047413
Just seen that. Feck sake.Not just Joe. Murr has been allegedly texting underage girls too.
Legendary filmmaker Paul Schrader, the screenwriter behind Taxi Driver, American Gigolo, and Raging Bull, sexually assaulted and harassed his personal assistant over the course of years, the 26-year-old woman claims in civil court documents obtained by The Independent.
The bombshell allegations emerged after Schrader allegedly reneged on a confidential settlement he agreed to in February, according to an affidavit filed by “Jane Doe,” as the former assistant is identified in a motion filed late Thursday night in New York State Supreme Court.
Attorney Menaka Fernando, one of the members of Doe’s legal team, told The Independent, “As stated in our motion, Ms. Doe is simply seeking to enforce the settlement agreement between the parties resolving her sexual harassment and sexual assault claims. We have no further comment at this time and ask that the media respect Ms. Doe’s privacy.”
In a phone call on Friday morning, Schrader’s attorney, Philip Kessler, told The Independentthat he had just received the filing and was still going through it.
“But, I can tell you that this looks to me to be a desperate, frivolous, and opportunistic claim,” Kessler said. “The underlying intentions of the plaintiff here contain many very material inaccuracies, and are obviously designed to paint Mr. Schrader in a very false light, in an effort to intimidate and coerce him into settling. And just to be very clear, Mr. Schrader never had sex in any form with the plaintiff, nor did he ever attempt such a thing. We will vigorously defend this.”
Schrader, 78, “used his position of power over Ms. Doe to sexually assault her, by luring her into a hotel room and forcibly grabbing her and kissing her, despite her verbal protests,” says the motion. “Three days later, he forced Ms. Doe into his hotel room, under the guise of packing his bags for him, and he exposed his penis to her.”
During Doe’s tenure, which lasted from May 2021 through her termination in September 2024, Schrader “force[d] her to work in a sexually hostile, intimidating, and humiliating environment on a daily, if not hourly, basis,” the motion states. It lists, in addition to sexual assault, a “barrage” of harassment by Schrader, including, among other things, “forced exposure of his genitals, unwanted sexual advances, repeatedly professing his love and desire to touch Ms. Doe (both verbally and via numerous emails), and near-constant inappropriate sexual questions and lewd and misogynistic commentary.”
In May 2024, while premiering his latest movie, Oh, Canada, at the Cannes Film Festival, Schrader allegedly “demanded Ms. Doe go to his hotel room, trapped her inside, grabbed her arms, and thrust his face into hers to kiss her against her will, and then further restrained her in an effort to keep her in the room before she managed to free herself and flee the hotel room.”
“Three days later, Ms. Doe returned to Defendant Schrader’s hotel room after receiving numerous calls and angry text messages, in which Defendant Schrader claimed that he was ‘dying’ and could not pack his own bags,” Doe’s motion contends. “Afraid, Ms. Doe reluctantly acquiesced. Upon arriving, however, Defendant Schrader opened the door to his hotel room wearing nothing but an open bathrobe with his penis fully exposed. As Ms. Doe attempted to pack Mr. Schrader’s bags in terrified silence, he repeatedly commented, ‘I am so sweaty. I sweated through the bedsheets. Feel how wet they are.’ Ms. Doe packed his bags as quickly as she could, and left.”
Schrader knew his behavior was “unwelcome and offensive,” as evidenced by numerous emails he sent to Doe, according to the motion.
“I sense you recoil every time I have the impulse to touch you,” he allegedly wrote to her last year.
Schrader fired Doe after she refused to succumb to his sexual advances, the motion states.
“[O]n September 23, 2024, he retaliated against her and terminated her employment,” it says. “Two days later, in full acknowledgment of his unlawful and predatory behavior, he wrote in an email to her, ‘So I f**ked up. Big time... If I have become a Harvey Weinstein in your mind then of course you have no choice but to put me in the rear view mirror.’”
About 10 days later, Schrader posted a help wanted ad on Facebook for a new assistant, calling the position a “s**t and ice cream job.”
“There will be days when you would be willing to pay me,” the posting read. “Then there will be menial tasks. I hope to be in pre-production in December, shooting late January–at that point work would be on set and on demand 24/7. The job would commence on acceptance. It may involve travel. Applicant should have college education and knowledge of film history. Applicant should live in greater NYC area. Computer skills essential. If you can lug film cans (remember those?) you’re strong enough.”
In 2017, Schrader was criticized for saying he was more offended by Weinstein’s reputation for recutting films than for the raft of sexual assault and rape allegations against the Miramax honcho, who is now in prison, later insisting his remarks had been misinterpreted.
Since Schrader’s “brutal attack” on Doe, his “exposure of his genitals to her, and his countless other acts of sexual harassment,” she has experienced nightmares, extreme anxiety, and trauma, and “has withdrawn almost completely from her former life,” the motion states.
Last month, an attorney for Schrader contacted Doe’s legal team and said his client had been ill, and that during that period, he had done some “soul searching.” As a result, he no longer wanted to pay Doe the amount agreed to under the settlement agreement, the motion goes on.
“According to Defense Counsel, Defendant Schrader also stated that he could not ‘live with himself’ if he performed his obligations under the Settlement Agreement,” the motion says.
Doe then filed Thursday night’s motion to compel Schrader to comply with his obligations, revealing the allegations publicly.
The amount of the settlement remains confidential, and details have been redacted in court filings.
Schrader response -I hate to make this all about myself but that is a real kick in the bollocks
.You may have read that my former assistant filed a lawsuit making some allegations about me. I am writing because you are important to me and I want you to hear from me directly about this subject.
Out of the blue, in the fall of last year, a lawyer I had never heard of, representing my former assistant, sent me a letter demanding that I pay my former assistant millions of dollars or she would go public with sensational, false and misleading accusations about our relationship and my conduct via a lawsuit. I understood that the mere assertion of such accusations would be damaging and hurtful. As a result, I nearly committed to settling the claims by paying a small fraction of the amount that had been initially demanded to avoid the hurt and harm that the publicity surrounding a lawsuit with these kinds of false and misleading accusations would cause, to say nothing of the cost of litigation. Upon reflection, I changed my mind, which I believe I was legally entitled to do, and declined to sign the written settlement agreement the lawyers had prepared. I refused to bow to the coercion created by what I regard as unwarranted and opportunistic claims and resolved to defend myself.
Plaintiff has now filed suit, apparently hoping against hope for a quick money grab. She hasn’t sued for sexual harassment; she has sued to enforce against me the settlement agreement I declined to sign—even though the agreement says clearly that it would not be effective unless both Plaintiff and I signed it.
Although her lawsuit is for breach of the settlement agreement draft, it gratuitously includes some of the sensational, false, and misleading accusations that were contained in her demand letter. I am not a mind reader, but I believe that the accusations were included as a tactic—to bully me into writing a check. If that is their plan, it will not succeed.
The lawsuit labors to create a false impression about my character and my interactions with her. It also rewrites history, in a desperate attempt to transform our relationship of more than three years, which consisted of Plaintiff’s diligent work and very willing non-sexual companionship, into something unwelcome, coercive and odious to her. Nothing could be further from the truth.
To be absolutely clear: I never had sex in any form with Plaintiff. Nor did I ever attempt such a thing—period. I never exposed myself to Plaintiff—at any time. Our most physically “intimate” experiences together consisted of two kisses on the lips, which occurred months apart. We also often kissed one another on the cheek in gestures of greeting and farewell.
The first kiss was in December 2023 in a New York bar after we had both been drinking. She continued working actively with me thereafter. She did not indicate to me that she had been troubled by the kiss, much less that she preferred to change or end our relationship. She even co-wrote a script with me after this kiss.
The second kiss took place in May 2024 at Cannes where she had accompanied me for the premiere of my most recent film. Once again, after we had been drinking together, I kissed her. This time she indicated displeasure. I never attempted to kiss her again and I also apologized. Even after Cannes, Plaintiff expressed emphatically her desire to continue to work, dine and travel with me. She also expressed her desire to work with me on my next film, which was scheduled for production last fall. Finally, she participated in an interview and voluntarily made personal social media posts in which she chose to praise me.
Plaintiff was my Production Assistant from June 2021 until September 2024. During our more than three years of work together, she eagerly accompanied me to numerous work and social events as my guest. These events included small, private dinners with prominent celebrities in the entertainment industry. We also dined together in restaurants, drank together in bars, visited museums, and attended concerts, plays and film festivals. She never expressed any reluctance to attend these events or to join me in these one-on-one activities. If she was unhappy to participate in these activities, she didn’t show or mention it. On the contrary, she repeatedly expressed to me enthusiasm about her participation. Her lawsuit tries to paint a very different picture—one that isn’t true.
It is more than a little revealing that, throughout her employment, Plaintiff chose on her own to make flattering social media remarks about me, emphasizing her belief in my talent and her delight in my mentorship. I think it is at least as revealing that a number of her social media posts have been deleted since she engaged counsel and asserted her claims. The deletions include her reference to me as “my man”.
In the summer of 2024, having completed my most recent film, I had no need for a full-time assistant. Plaintiff was living in Arizona then, caring for her ailing grandfather, who subsequently passed away. Rather than eliminating her position, I reduced her compensation by approximately 50% even though she was not doing much work for me. I hoped that she would return to full-time work in the not-too-distant future when my next contemplated film project would create a need for an assistant. I also emphasized to her that if she was ready to move on in her career, she should do so and would have my unqualified encouragement.
Within a few months of this reduction in pay, I heard for the first time about the grievances detailed in the demand letter, which have been partially published in the lawsuit papers.
I understand that in the current climate a defendant accused of sexual harassment is often presumed guilty in the court of public opinion without the fairness of due process– unless and until the defendant proves his or her innocence. But that presumption is not always true. It is not true in this case. I have nothing to hide about my conduct— and that includes my decision not to yield to the pressure of my former assistant’s threat to make her sensational allegations public, a threat that she and her lawyers have now executed. If this case ever makes it to trial, I will be honest with the judge and jury who I am confident will see the truth.
https://variety.com/2025/film/news/paul-schrader-responds-sexual-assault-open-letter-1236362502/
“I did nothing more than drunkenly kiss my employee. Twice. And at no time did she express displeasure, other than that time she expressed displeasure.”