Celeb News
Celebrities & the Law
Commentary without the usual nonsense. Jill is a founder of one of the nation’s most respected trial law firms, a law professor, and a former prosecutor.
It Looks Like the Scarlett Johansson and Romain Dauriac Divorce Will Be a Messy One
We are HUGE Scarlett Johansson fans here are PROOF so we are sad that is has been confirmed that her marriage is over. And sadder still that things look like they might get pretty messy.
Scarlett Johansson filed for divorce from her husband, Romain Dauriac, a French journalist- turned-popcorn seller (Just a few months ago he and Johansson opened Yummy Pop, a gourmet popcorn shop in Paris.) on March 7, 2017 after only two years of marriage. In January we had heard rumblings that the couple had broken up but all seemed quiet there for a while. Johansson, no dummy, thankfully did have a prenup with Dauriac so the majority of the financial issues are resolved. The biggest issue in the breakup is going to be over custody of their 2-year-old daughter, Rose Dorothy. Johansson has asked for primary physical custody. According to his lawyer, Dauriac is going to fight that.
Both Dauriac and Johansson are known to be private people. And, we remain impressed with ScarJo as one day after filing the divorce papers, she released a statement saying that in the future she will not be discussing her divorce. “As a devoted mother and private person and with complete awareness that my daughter will one day be old enough to read the news about herself, I would only like to say that I will never, ever be commenting on the dissolution of my marriage,” she stated. “Out of respect for my desires as a parent and out of respect for all working moms, it is with kindness that I ask other parties involved and the media to do the same. Thank you.” Scarlett, we hear you and we will respect your privacy and only report on facts as we know them and are substantiated.
But Johansson isn’t the only one releasing statements, Dauriac released one of his own that same day. He is not pleased that Scarlett filed papers with the court (FYI PROOF readers–a couple can’t get a divorce in the US without ultimately filing legal papers with the court. Yes, custody and other matters can be worked out without court involvement but only a court can issue a dissolution of marriage.) In fact, Dauriac asked Johansson to withdraw them in order to protect their daughter. The Frenchman said in his statement: “It is indeed unfortunate, especially for our daughter, that Scarlett filed in Court and made our personal differences so public. I would implore her to withdraw her action promptly and go back, as uncomfortable as it might be, to the negotiating table. We are the parents of a lovely daughter whom we will continue to co-parent for many years and share her joys and sorrows as only a parent can.”
What is particularly worrisome in this situation and has us thinking of poor Kelly Rutherford is that Dauriac’s lawyer has said that his client plans to petition the court to allow him and his daughter to move to France. Apparently, Johansson and Dauriac were in the middle of
private negotiations when she filed papers but it’s obvious that those discussions were not going quite how Johansson hoped and she wanted official court involvement. Depending on how broken those negotiations had become, we agree with this decision by Johansson and her team. Too much at stake here to play nice for too long.
We really hope that Johansson and Dauriac can come to an amicable solution regarding custody of Rose and that things don’t go the way of Kelly Rutherford, as we mentioned above. Most of us know how that hellish multi-year, international custody battle ended: Rutherford losing custody of her two children to her Monaco-based ex, Daniel Giersch as well as causing her to go bankrupt. If Johannson and Dauriac can keep the best interest of Rose in mind at all times as the case progresses, there is a lot to gain, as top divorce lawyer, Brandy Austin, makes clear: “Having represented numerous clients in divorce proceedings, I can attest to the emotional impact a custody dispute has on a child. Although there are multiple interests involved, the child’s best interest is of utmost importance. A parent who puts the child’s interest before their own can often avoid a contentious battle in court and win the favor of the judge or jury.”
We do appreciate this couple’s desire to keep things private, much like Brad and Angelina’s recent decision regarding their divorce (of course this was only after issues regarding custody and care of their children became VERY public) but we can’t say we think this is going to be an easy one. This custody matter seems primed to become an all out custody battle. Hopefully, the result will be the one that is in the best interest of young Rose Dorothy. We’re rooting for you little one.
Discussing celebrity news is what we enjoy most at PROOF. Please visit the rest of our site for more of our one of a kind take on celebrity news.
Manis, Minis and Mistakes: What Celebs Need to Know About Courtroom Attire
Whether it’s a drunk driving charge, shoplifting, a custody battle, or something else, celebs are in court all the time. Some get the right advice (and actually follow it!) and show up to court as if he/she were an eager college grad going on his/her first job interview; others not so much. You probably know whom I am talking about. Lindsay Lohan and Britney Spears are the sure-fire “winners” here. Rather than face their legal troubles with grace and respect, these celebs have made some pretty poor choices and sadly made a bit of a mockery of our system.
To be fair, not all of Lindsay’s courtroom attire choices have been bad. She has actually looked pretty appropriate a few times. Let’s face it though, she has had more opportunities than most to do the right thing. And, the bulk of her choices? Not good. If were her lawyer, I would have stashed an LBD in my briefcase, dragged her into the ladies room and made her change each and every time she showed up looking like she was ready for a night of LA clubbing rather than a day in court. The following are the choices that bother me the most. First, without a doubt, that white, skin-hugging Kimberly Ovitz mini dress. Nothing says responsible law-abiding adult like a hot party dress, right? Next, would have to be that “colorful” manicure with the obscene message on her middle finger. Was the F*** U meant for the judge, the system as a whole, or for someone else? Either way, completely inappropriate. If she had just kept her hands below counsel table, she would have been fine, It’s not as if she has to recite the Pledge of Allegiance or anything! And those oh so close looks. The gray pants suit. Classy until Lindsay decided not to button her blouse. That nice beige blazer? Just fine but not when completed with short shorts and booties. Ugh. I’m getting annoyed just thinking about this because they are all such easy fixes and sometimes you just gotta follow the rules. You don’t have to like them, Lindsay, you just have to follow them, especially when there’s something in it for you.
Britney. Oh, Britney. Gosh, there was just so much going on for her personally during the time she was seemingly in and out of court that I can almost excuse some of her choices. But only just almost. That black backless dress for one hearing and lacy, white frock for another? No. I think Britney wants to do the right thing, show respect for the system, as evidenced by some of her better choices but she just doesn’t have the right people telling her what to do in ways that make her want to listen to them. Again, if her lawyers could have been one step ahead of her and brought her something respectable to wear, I am sure she would have worn it. Britney has really cleaned up her life up since those days of the shaved head and umbrella rage. She’s a good girl so I don’t think we’ll be seeing her in court too often anymore, but if we do, I bet she’ll look just fine. Stay classy, Brit.
Nick Cannon Sued for Stealing Unsuccessful App Idea
Nick Cannon may have just quit “America’s Got Talent” because he felt he was mistreated by the show (he said he felt silenced, controlled, and treated like a piece of property) – but he has even more drama ahead of him: he’s facing a lawsuit on an entirely unrelated matter.
Enrico Taylor is suing Cannon for allegedly stealing his idea for a talent discovery app. Taylor is seeking $1.75 million in damages.
In court documents, Taylor claims he met Nick in early 2015 and hoped to get Mariah Carey’s ex interested in his new app. The disgruntled app-maker says he told Cannon that he was working with rapper Birdman, who is the co-founder of Cash Money Records, to create a digital talent search app called “I Discover Stars.” Taylor claims that Cannon said he liked the idea but then Taylor never heard back from him about it. Five months later Cannon launched his own digital talent search app, N’credible.
Allegedly, Cannon’s app was intended to be an extension of his management and music company, N’credible Artists, and was for comedians, singers and rappers to audition for the former “America’s Got Talent Host” without him actually having to physically be at the audition. Sounds like a good idea, right? Apparently though wannabe superstars didn’t flock to it. Taylor is claiming that not only did Cannon steal his idea, but also says that because Cannon’s app was a total bust, Taylor can’t get his own app off the ground – and now he wants $1.75 million as a compensation. That is quite a circuitous legal argument and not sure how persuasive it is going to be in a court of law. Think about: Taylor is seeking big bucks for an unsuccessful idea?!
We at PROOF are looking forward to seeing the evidence that comes out in this matter but if we were advising Cannon (which we are not–and here comes the PROOF legal disclaimer: nothing on PROOF should be construed as giving legal advice or the creation of an attorney client relationship) we would not recommend settling at this point.
Discussing celebrity news is what we enjoy most at PROOF. Please visit the rest of our site for more of our one of a kind take on celebrity news.
Tekashi69: Call me by Name and Other Legal News About the Rapper
Who is Tekashi69?
Tekashi69, also known as 6ix9ine (which is pronounced “six nine.” Yup, we know it’s confusing but there’s a certain creativity to it, no?) is a rapper known for just a few songs (only having risen to “fame” in 2017). Mostly he’s known for his face tattoos and being involved in a lot of controversial situations, especially as of late.
July 2018 Arrest at JFK
The rapper was picked up on a warrant stemming from a January 2018 assault in Houston. NYPD extradited him to Texas. NYC has a great interest in the comings and goings of the young rapper as he is on three years of probation resulting from a plea deal in a sexual abuse case. More on that below.
January 2018 Houston Mall Assault
On January 6th, 2018, Tekashi69, whose real name is David Hernandez, allegedly choked a 16-year-old teenager at a Houston mall. According to the teen, he was filming Hernandez, who is 22 years old, when the rapper turned around and yelled at him to erase the video from his phone. This is when Hernandez allegedly grabbed the teen by the neck while his bodyguards surrounded him. The teen told the body guards that he deleted the video because he was afraid of being hurt. In 2018 that assertion certainly doesn’t mean the footage of what went down isn’t available. In fact, someone else captured the altercation and, naturally, the video quickly made it to social media. It’s also likely that mall security cameras captured the incident (we feel as if Tekashi should have known that and at least should have tried to control his temper given the fact that he’s on probation). And, also a bummer for Tekashi is that it isn’t unfathomable that the scared teen would never have reported the incident. So, if the mall didn’t have video or didn’t take action and the onlooker didn’t memorialize it on his phone then Tekashi would not have been arrested that day at JFK.
Call me by Name
What’s very interesting to us is that Carl Moore, the rapper’s attorney in the Houston matter has asked the court to refer to his client either by his real name or “the accused” or “defendant” but NOT as Tekashi69. “We want the jurors to look at him as a citizen and not some larger-than-life celebrity,” Moore said about the request. Hmmm. We’re not so sure that’s the main reason behind the request. First, Tekashi is not a well known celebrity. Second, more likely the request was made because the rapper’s stage name is not only hard to pronounce and hard to spell but also doesn’t conjure up the most positive, innocent images. And, last, though we agree that the move was a smart one by counsel because it does, at some small level, make the rapper seem more “every day” the real issue is going to be the rapper’s appearance, all the face tattoos, is so extreme that the benefit of calling him Mr. Hernandez will likely be very slight.
What the heck does Tekashi69 or 6ix9ine even mean?
Well, no need to wonder or assume the rapper’s name relates to something sexual because the rapper himself recently explained it in an Instagram post. Here’s what he said:
“I never lost sense of where I came from. That’s what makes me 69. The true meaning of 69 is just because you’re right doesn’t mean I’m wrong YOU JUST HAVENT SEEN LIFE FROM MY PERSPECTIVE. Turn the 6 upside down it’s 9 but remains the same in a different perspective. Open your mind and heart ❤️.”
Past Legal Troubles: Using a Child in a Sexual Performance
As noted above, this isn’t the 22-year-old rapper’s first run-in with the law. Not in the least. Back in 2015, startling allegations were brought against Hernandez, who pled guilty to one felony count of use of a child in a sexual performance after he was charged with three counts of the offense stemming from an incident in February 2015. The incident in question involved the rapper having sexual contact with a 13-year-old girl. He was 18 at the time. He also distributed videos of the incident online. Descriptions of the video are graphic and disturbing so we will not go into detail here, but Hernandez claimed that he had “no sexual contact” with the girl and insisted that he did not know she was a minor. He also claimed that he was 17 at the time of the incident–though court documents have him listed as 18.
Hernandez got off pretty easily given the circumstances. As part of his plea deal he was ordered to obtain his GED, refrain from posting sexually explicit and violent images of women or children (yes, that was a condition!), and not commit a crime for two years. If he followed those conditions, his sentence would be 3 years of probation and he would not have to register as a sex offender. Failure to abide by them means he could face up to three years in prison. If he isn’t stepped back to prison it wouldn’t be Hernandez’s first time behind bars. As a minor, he served time for assault and drug distribution (selling heroin).
Alas, in January of 2018, it was revealed that the rapper had not earned his GED. The formal hearing on the matter was rescheduled to April 2018. On that date, he was again unable to provide the court with a copy of his GED diploma and the hearing was once again postponed.
So now we have no GED and involvement with the criminal justice system–both occurrences that violate the conditions of probation. The Manhattan District Attorney’s office announced that the young rapper could face up to three years in prison and be required to register as a sex offender stemming from the 2015 plea deal. The next court date is October 2018.
Laying Low? Nah . . .
And Tekashi69 has not been laying low. He has been involved in beefs with other rappers, he was even investigated for the June 2018 shooting of Chief Keef in New York City (Chief Keef was not hurt) though, good for Tekashi, he was in Los Angeles at the time of the shooting. Then there was his July 22, 2018 robbery during which he was kidnapped, beaten, and robbed by three unknown assailants. The robbers allegedly took over $750,000 in custom jewelry and nearly $35,000 in cash. Tekashi escaped from the assailant’s vehicle and was able to call for help and reportedly taken by ambulance to a nearby hospital. Then, on August 17th, 2018, the rapper was on set with 50 Cent when production on their music video was shut down because of a shooting. Thankfully, no one was injured but, none of these incidents bode well for the young rapper. Is it a matter of where there’s smoke there’s fire? It’s in his best interest to stay as far away as possible from any trouble. Right now, the yanking of that plea deal is a very real consequence.
PROOF will be following this story and keeping you updated. Secretly, though, we do hope he gets that darn GED!!!
Ryan Phillippe in the Middle of a Domestic Violence Mess
Ryan Phillipe is one of those celebrities who normally flies under the radar. He has been on shows like Damages, Secrets and Lies, and most recently Shooter, but generally keeps a low profile. All that has changed recently as the 43-year-old is facing allegations of domestic abuse.
Elsie Hewitt, a 21-year-old Playboy model and Phillippe’s ex-girlfriend, filed a $1 million lawsuit against Phillippe on September 18th, 2017. Among her claims, she alleges that Phillippe physically abused her on July 4th, 2017 which resulted in her being treated at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and obtaining an emergency protective order against Phillippe. The TRO (temporary restraining order) expired on July 12th and was not made permanent. Nevertheless, Hewitt claims that on July 3rd, 2017, Phillippe left a party because he felt he had been “ignored” by her and that when she went to Phillippe’s house to retrieve her belongings, he became physical with her. Hewitt alleges Phillippe threw her down the stairs.
Following the news of the lawsuit, Phillippe released a very direct, clear statement via Twitter: “I am saddened and disgusted by the false allegations being circulated about me,” he wrote. “At the time these allegations were initially made, I fully cooperated with law enforcement and a thorough investigation was conducted.” Phillippe goes on to say “As a man, raised by a woman, in a household where women’s rights, feminism and advocacy were very much at the forefront, I am sickened that my name can be found in any article where domestic violence of any kind is being alleged.” Phillippe acknowledges that media attention has become a part of his life since stepping into the spotlight 25 years ago, and that usually he simply moves on from rumors, but “this time is different.”
“Domestic violence is a very real and tragic issue faced by many women the world over and should never be used to vengefully slander or as a ploy to monetary gain.” In case he wasn’t clear enough, Phillippe states: “This is wrong. This is not who I am. Every one of my accuser’s allegations are false.”
Indeed, law enforcement officials confirmed that the case has been closed and Philippe would not be facing any criminal charges. A spokesperson for the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office made this clear in a statement: “The City Attorney’s Office has deferred this matter following an investigation by the LAPD. After a thorough review, the matter was set for a City Attorney office hearing, during which both parties were present, detailed the incident, were advised on the law and given guidance as to how to avoid similar incidents in the future. No further action has been scheduled following our office hearing.”
But domestic violence isn’t all that Hewitt is claiming. In court documents Hewitt says she saw Phillippe, “repeatedly abusing a panoply of legal and illegal drugs” and that he allegedly “increasingly combined these drugs with excessive alcohol consumption and often exhibited symptoms attendant of poly drug and alcohol abuse, including mood swings and bouts of anger.”
To no one’s surprise, Phillippe has hired a lawyer and in his “Look What You Made Me” moment has said he will not seek money damages against Hewitt for her malicious and defamatory claims. Prompted by Taylor Swift? Maybe. As you might recall, Taylor famously won her counterclaim suit against radio disc jockey David Mueller, suing only for a single dollar (read more about T Swift’s victory **make read more link to https://proofwithjillstanley.com/taylor-swift-groping-case-goes-to-trial/. ) But maybe it’s just because Hewitt doesn’t have much money so even if Phillipe got a judgment he wouldn’t be able to collect on it. Or maybe it is really that he just wants to make a point, to clear his name and is motivated solely by the desire to have Hewitt acknowledge that she has falsely accused him of physically abusing her. Not sure this is very likely but we do applaud Phillippe’s announcement that he will donate any money that he is awarded in the case to organizations that work to support victims of domestic violence.
What muddles this matter up even further is that some insiders have reported that it was Hewitt who attacked Phillippe, and that her injuries were a result of being removed from the premises and then falling and injuring herself. But then again, Hewitt reportedly has a witness, her friend who was with her at the time of the alleged altercation.
As with most domestic matters, it a tough to win game of he said/she said.
Hewitt’s lawyer, Keith Fink, is not playing any games here though. He, too has said of this case: “[Hewitt’s] not going to take a dime, I am not making a dime…”—the money will go to a domestic violence charity. Fink also gaffs at the suggestion that Hewitt is doing this for money and fame. He has said that his client is famous in her own right, while Phillippe was “just married to a famous person.” Ouch. But to be honest, did you immediately think of Reese the minute you first heard this story? We sure did.
Recall that Phillippe was married to mega star Reese Witherspoon back in the day. They separated in 2006 after seven years of marriage; their divorce was finalized in 2008. They have two children together, and seem to be doing a solid job of co-parenting Ava and Deacon. No doubt Reese has really blossomed post divorce with a string of great movies, tv shows and a super busy production company dedicated to providing quality roles to women in Hollywood. When this story broke, Reese was fresh off of Big Little Lies success which won huge at the Emmys this year. Also, Reese has been married since 2011 to Jim Toth. Phillippe has been in several relationships since his marriage to Reese ended. He dated Australian actress Abbie Cornish from 2007 to 2010, then model Alexis Knapp in the summer of 2010, with whom he shares a child with Knapp; 6-year-old Kailani. He dated law student Pauline Slagter starting in 2011. They were actually engaged, but eventually the couple broke it off in 2016.
As is life weren’t bad enough for Phillippe, in the midst of all of these allegations came another report stating that Slagter had gone to the Los Angeles Police Department back in March to file a harassment report. The exact complaint filed is an “Annoying or Harassing Electronics Communications Harassment Report.” According to Slagter, Phillippe was verbally abusive over text message after the pair had split up. Hearing allegations like this one is certainly trouble for Phillippe in this current claim. If more information or other ex-girlfriends start speaking up, a tweet condemning domestic violence is not going to be enough for Phillippe.
Celebs Fight Back Against Nude Photo Leaks. Yup, It’s Happening Again
In yet another hacking scandal, a new slew of nude celeb pics have been posted online, and the stars are already fighting back.
Nude photos of Tiger Woods, Lindsey Vonn, Miley Cyrus, Kristen Stewart, Katharine McPhee and Stella Maxwell recently turned up on the website Celebrity Jihad, and lawyers for Woods and McPhee have already fired off cease and desist letters to the site.
The nude Woods photos were reportedly stolen from Olympic skier Lindsey Vonn, who dated Woods from 2013 to 2015.
The whole episode is reminiscent of “The Fappening,” a 2014 incident in which nude pics of Jennifer Lawrence, Kate Upton, Amber Heard, Ariana Grande, Gabrielle Union, Kim Kardashian, Kirsten Dunst, Kaley Cuoco and many more celebs were posted on a site called 4chan.
That episode was not without consequences — two hackers (who apparently weren’t working together) were convicted and sentenced to prison time.
The first hacker, Ryan Collins, pled guilty to felony hacking and was sentenced to 18 months in federal prison in October of 2016. Collins accessed the photos by using phishing schemes to get passwords to 100+ Google and Apple accounts between 2012 and 2014. After he gained access to the accounts, he was able to download personal photos and video, including highly personal and private nude snaps. Collins also allegedly lured women into sending him nude photos by running a modeling scam.
US Attorney Eileen M. Decker made it clear the federal government isn’t going to go lightly on offenses like this. She said regarding the Fappening/Collins case, “Hackers violate federal law whenever they access private information stored online and in digital devices. Today people store important private information online and in their digital devices, which is why my office is deeply committed to holding hackers accountable, even when they do not sell or distribute the stolen data.”
The second hacker, Edward Majerczyk, was sentenced to 9 months in federal prison and ordered to pay $5,700 in restitution after allegeding hacking 300 Apple and Google accounts. Majerczyk apparently used similar methods to Collins to gain access to private celebrity photos and videos.
Majerczyk’s attorney attempted to explain his client’s behavior, arguing that he was “suffering from depression and looked to pornography websites and internet chat rooms in an attempt to fill some of the voids and disappointment he was feeling in his life.” We at PROOF have been practicing law a long time and have to say that is the first time we’ve heard that defense!
Judge Likely to Deny Richard Simmons’ Transgender Defamation Claim
A Los Angeles Superior Court judge has tentatively dismissed a lawsuit filed by Richard Simmons in May against American Media Inc., which publishes both The National Enquirer and Radar Online, in which the fitness icon contended the publications defamed him by reporting between June 2016 and March 2017 that he was transitioning from a man to a woman.
In a cover story that ran in The National Enquirer, the mag claimed that Simmons’ infamous disappearance from public view was due to being transgender. The publication called Simmons “the new Caitlyn Jenner,” claiming Simmons was “now a woman” and going by the name Fiona. They also reported a secret boob job and castration surgery.
Judge Gregory Keosian denied the claim for a very interesting reason — he basically said that being transgender isn’t perceived as being bad. He wrote that being labeled transgender doesn’t automatically subject a person to “hatred, contempt, ridicule or obloquy,” so therefore it’s not defamation.
He did acknowledge that not everyone embraces transgender people, writing, “While, as a practical matter, the characteristic may be held in contempt by a portion of the population, the court will not validate those prejudices by legally recognizing them.”
He pointed out that race is not subject to defamation, and speculated that being labeled transgender could be seen the same way.
An attorney for American Media, Kelli Sager, argued, “There is nothing inherently bad about being transgender” and therefore the defamation suit “isn’t actionable.”
Attorneys for Simmons vehemently disagree with Sager’s assertion. Rodney Smolla said, “There are giant segments of society in this country who endorse the kind of prejudice and hatred and shunning of transgender persons in a way that is dramatically different than the way we treat race in this country.”
A final ruling in the case will be issued shortly. But where has Simmons been? He has been in the news after having essentially disappeared from public view in 2014. Many have wondered why the fitness guru would shun the public after a long career of embracing publicity. Earlier this year, he was the subject of a podcast called “Missing Richard Simmons” in which a former student attempted to discover what he’d been up to since essentially going underground.
But Simmons says there’s absolutely nothing for anyone to be concerned about. He and those close to him have made repeated statements that he’s just fine and merely wants to be left alone. His older brother, Lenny, echoed that on the podcast, “He’s doing what he wants to do, which is kick back and have a quiet life. … For some reason, he wants to be quiet, which is the complete opposite of how he normally is. I don’t understand it, but I have to respect it.”
Death on Deadpool Set Could Have Been Avoided?
Two nearly back-to-back deaths of Hollywood stunt performers on the Vancouver set of ‘Deadpool 2’ and the Georgia set of “The Walking Dead” have rattled Hollywood and caused some to wonder if they could have been avoided.
On August 15, 40-year-old motorcycle racer Joi “SJ” Harris died while performing a stunt for ‘Deadpool 2,’ her very first film as a stuntwoman. Witnesses said that while Harris, an African-American pioneer in her field, was riding, her motorcycle went airborne and hit a building.
Some have questioned whether Harris had the experience necessary to safely perform stunts for motion pictures. “She was a highly-qualified motorcyclist racer but not an experienced stunt person,” veteran stunt coordinator Conrad Palmisano told The Hollywood Reporter. He explained that stunt riding is very different from racing, and that she typically rode a smaller motorcycle than the one she was riding at the time of the accident.
Stuntman Steve Kelso told the Reporter, “I can’t tell you how much different it is doing stunts with motorcycles than just riding where the aim is to go really, really fast. I’m a professional race car driver, but it’s just day and night. There’s no comparison. The two don’t really mix. Being a professional motorcycle rider is only half the job, the other half is knowing all the parameters and the art of making movies.”
Kelso said that veteran stunt performers know when to safely bail on a stunt when it becomes dangerous. “She appears to have been a capable rider, but it just turned into a terrible, terrible accident,” he said.
Likewise, the July 12 death of stuntman John Bernecker on the set of “The Walking Dead” is being described as an accident. But in that case, the 33-year-old had almost ten years of experience and 90+ credits before the accident that caused his death.
Bernecker was supposed to perform a choreographed fall from a 25-foot balcony onto a layer of boxes with padding, but missed his target by inches. He reportedly tried to abort the jump by attempting to grab a railing, but failed. He was airlifted to a hospital but died of his injuries.
At the time of the accident, Bernecker was reportedly performing a scene with actor Austin Amelio, who plays Dwight on the series. Bernecker’s girlfriend, stuntwoman Jennifer Crocker, reportedly questioned why Bernecker was performing the stunt in the presence of Amelio, a non-stunt person.
In another high profile, but much less severe, stunt injury, Tom Cruise, who is known for performing his own stunts, broke his ankle on August 13 while filming a stunt for ‘Mission Impossible 6’ in London. In that case, the film’s director Christopher McQuarrie said that Cruise was always safe, but had performed the stunt at a slightly wrong angle, which resulted in the injured ankle.
Did these productions protect their performers properly? Did the performers follow safety procedures? Was the proper insurance in place in appropriate amounts? As is the case whenever an injury or death occurs on set, investigations are underway and liability will be determined. Because of all the parties involved in film and TV production, this is no easy task, and several parties may be ultimately to be at fault. Though shooting has continued on these projects, the investigative work must be done and a fault determination made as with any other workplace injury. In fact, as highly regarded NY workers’ compensation lawyer, Adam Rosen, points out, “serious injury at work is a real risk and can happen to anyone in any occupation. That is why it is imperative that all companies, including those involved in film production, carry workers’ compensation insurance. So that recovery can be sought from the proper party, once a claim is made for a workplace injury, the incident must be fully investigated and fault determined. This holds true whether the injury occurs on a movie set or a construction site.”
We at PROOF don’t think anything is likely to come of the Cruise incident but the other two? We are very interested in seeing what those investigations reveal–those deaths may just have been preventable.