complaint

FKA twigs sues ex-boyfriend Shia LaBeouf over ‘unlawful’ NDA

Singer-songwriter FKA twigs is suing her ex-boyfriend, actor Shia LaBeouf, claiming that he is trying to “silence” her from speaking out against sexual abuse through the use of an “unlawful” nondisclosure agreement.

The complaint, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on Wednesday, seeks a court order to prohibit LeBeouf from enforcing sections of an NDA which Tahliah Barnett — the Grammy Award-winning singer’s legal name — says violates California law.

“Shia LaBeouf has tried to control Tahliah Barnett for the better part of a decade,” the filing states.

“This action was taken in response to Mr. LaBeouf’s attempt to bully and intimidate twigs through a frivolous and unlawful secret arbitration he filed against her in December in which he sought to extract money from her,” said the singer’s attorney Mathew Rosengart, national co-chair of media & entertainment litigation at Greenberg Traurig in Century City, in a statement.

Rosengart added that twigs “refuses to be bullied anymore. She is instead standing up for herself and other survivors of sexual abuse who have improperly been silenced. This is the unusual case that is not about money but about justice and upholding and enforcing California law and policy designed to protect survivors by nullifying illegal NDAs.”

LaBeouf’s attorney Shawn Holley of Kinsella Holley Iser Kump Steinsapir denied the claims.

“When Ms. Barnett and Mr. LaBeouf both decided to resolve their differences and move on with their lives, no one forced her or ‘bullied’ her to stay silent,” Holley said in a statement.
“As a woman with agency, she decided to settle the case and accepted money to dismiss her lawsuit.”

The suit arises out of litigation that Barnett brought against LaBeouf in 2020, when she accused the actor of “physical, sexual, and mental abuse” during their relationship,” as well as “knowingly infect[ing]” Barnett with a sexually transmitted disease.” That case was settled last year.

In a response to the suit, the actor told the New York Times that “many of these allegations are not true.”

But he added, “I am not in the position to defend any of my actions. I owe these women the opportunity to air their statements publicly and accept accountability for those things I have done.”

In the statement Thursday, Holley added that the claim of sexual battery “was disputed, as were the other claims made in Ms. Barnett’s lawsuit.”

Shia LaBeouf with a mustache wearing a tuxedo as he poses at the Cannes International Film Festival in 2025.

Shia LaBeouf poses for photographers upon arrival at the premiere of the film “The Phoenician Scheme” at the 78th annual Cannes Film Festival May 18, 2025.

(Lewis Joly / Invision / AP)

According to the new lawsuit, LaBeouf filed a secret arbitration complaint and “improperly sought exorbitant monies” from Barnett last December, claiming she had breached their agreement by violating its nondisclosure provisions after she gave an interview to the Hollywood Reporter in October.

In the interview, Barnett was asked if she felt safe and answered that as a woman of color in the entertainment industry, she “wouldn’t feel safe” and discussed her involvement with organizations that support survivors, saying, “I think it’s less about me at this point and more about looking forward. Just, you know, moving on with my life.”

The agreement Barnett reached with LaBeouf “contained a deficient and unlawful NDA that is unenforceable,” under California’s Stand Together Against Non-Disclosure Act, according to the complaint. The law forbids NDAs from being used to silence victims of sexual misconduct.

“As the California Legislature has made clear, survivors should have the right to tell their stories without fear or coercion, and California law does not and must not allow abusers and bullies to silence them through secret agreements containing unconscionable, unlawful gag orders,” the complaint states.

The lawsuit further alleges that while LaBeouf has sought to prohibit Barnett from talking about her abuse, he has “repeatedly brought up his relationship with Ms. Barnett—on his own and without being directly asked about her—materially breaching the very confidentiality provisions that he had just contended were fully enforceable against Ms. Barnett.”

While the actor agreed to drop the arbitration in February, he has “refused to acknowledge, however, that the NDA provisions are illegal and unenforceable,” the filing states.

The latest round in LaBeouf’s legal battle with Barnett comes just weeks after a New Orleans judge ordered the actor to begin substance abuse treatment and undergo weekly drug testing after he was arrested on suspicion of assaulting two men in the city’s French Quarter. LaBeouf was also required to post $100,000 bond as part of the conditions of his release. He was charged with two counts of simple battery, the Associated Press reported.

Source link

ITV viewers issue same complaint minutes into new reality show Celebrity Sabotage

ITV viewers were left saying the same thing as a new reality show debuted on Saturday night.

ITV viewers were not impressed as new reality show, Celebrity Sabotage, premiered.

The new series sees Joel Dommett, Judi Love, Sam Thompson and GK Barry sabotage ordinary people who think they are taking part in various reality shows, with the aim of winning them money.

In each episode, a fresh set of unsuspecting contestants will arrive, believing they’re participating in a brand-new ITV show. But what they don’t know is that hidden away in their very own high-tech Mission HQ are celebrity saboteurs, who are secretly watching the contestants’ every move and are being set their own sabotage missions.

Hosting the fake shows are a string of stars, including Emma and Matt Willis, Sara Davies and Clare Balding, while celebrities will also join Joel, Judi, Sam and GK to help with the sabotaging.

The first episode aired on Saturday (March 21), with a group of business enthusiasts embarking on a set of challenges under the watchful eye of entrepreneur and Dragons’ Den star Sara Davies.

The celebrity saboteurs were joined by comedian Jo Brand as they set about disrupting wedding video filming, deleting the contestant’s filmed footage, and sabotaging a wellness away-day face mask activity by using lashings of green food colouring.

After watching the first episode, several ITV viewers shared their complaints about the show’s premise.

“#CelebritySabotage This is as much fun as having a toothache, @ITV churns out some rubbish & this one is right up there. It’s a waste of our time, it makes you look forward to seeing the adverts! I’m going to sit outside & watch the car electric battery top up, a lot more fun!” one person wrote on X (formerly Twitter).

Another added: “How do programmes like these ever get commissioned. Utter rubbish,” while a third said: “What a s*** show.”

A fourth fan echoed the sentiment, saying: “This is a kids TV show that got mixed up in the schedule surely. Utterly dreadful hate watch,” with another similarly sharing: “This is appallingly bad even for ITV. How long before it’s shunted to 4.30 Sunday afternoon?”

Meanwhile, other viewers enjoyed the silliness of the show, with one person writing: “Honestly I knew I was going to like #CelebritySabotage, it’s a great show with a great cast and I really like how the fake shows are rip offs of others. Definitely will be watching next week.”

Another added: “I know it’s all very childish but I absolutely love it. This is what Saturday night telly should be,” while a third said: “This is incredible. I could listen to @1Judilove laugh all day long, absolutely howling.”

Someone else commented: “Cackled with laughter for this whole show. What a vibe.”

After two days of sabotaging, the contestants eventually found out about the celebrities’ antics, before learning that they’d won a shared prize of £29,000.

Celebrity Sabotage is available to stream on ITVX

Source link

USC reaches settlement in Mike Bohn racial harassment lawsuit

USC has settled a lawsuit with a former high-ranking athletic department official who alleged the university allowed former athletic director Mike Bohn to racially harass and discriminate against her, then fired her when she voiced concerns about Bohn’s behavior.

Joyce Bell Limbrick was the highest-ranking Black and female official in USC’s athletic department when she was fired by the university in September 2023, four months after Bohn resigned amid an internal investigation into his conduct and the culture of the department. Bell Limbrick filed suit early last year, accusing USC of wrongful termination.

That dispute was settled out of court this week. Terms of the settlement were not disclosed.

When reached by The Times, Bell Limbrick declined to comment. Bohn has never publicly addressed the allegations.

While the lawsuit never made it to trial, it nonetheless offered the most detailed account yet of the conduct that led to Bohn’s resignation.

Bell Limbrick filed a Title IX complaint with the university against Bohn in October 2022, after an incident in which she says Bohn punched her on the arm at a USC volleyball match. That complaint ultimately compelled an investigation, during which, according to her complaint, Bell Limbrick told USC officials of “Bohn’s history and rumors of inappropriate and unwanted touching involving … other females at both Cincinnati and USC.”

The university hired an outside law firm that specializes in institutional responses to racial and sexual harassment and discrimination to investigate Bohn five months later. The Times learned of that investigation shortly thereafter, as well as a previous investigation into Bohn’s conduct at Cincinnati, and in May, asked both Bohn and USC about those concerns.

Bohn resigned a day later.

Soon after that, the university fired Bell Limbrick, citing “a pattern of poor performance.” She was the only member of an 11-member executive team to lose her job and, according to the complaint, had just been awarded a “merit increase” on account of her “overall job performance.”

Bell Limbrick worked at USC for nine years, initially as the director of athletic compliance, before Bohn was hired in 2019. Shortly after he became athletic director, Bohn promoted Bell Limbrick to senior woman administrator, one of the highest-ranking positions in the department. According to her complaint, she had been one of the few Black women to hold such a position at a major American university.

“Ms. Bell Limbrick had a thriving career at USC and she loved her work. Then, Mike Bohn arrived,” her attorney, J. Bernard Alexander, said in a statement in 2025.

”[Bohn’s] incessant, racially charged remarks made Joyce feel uncomfortable and undervalued, but more than that — he actively isolated her from the executive team and undermined her work. She already was vulnerable as the only Black woman on the team, and rather than support her, the university allowed Bohn to make her life hell.”

Her complaint detailed inappropriate comments made in front of USC donors and staff, as well as insensitive or discriminatory remarks made in her presence. At the time, The Times spoke with six people with knowledge of the department’s inner workings who largely corroborated her claims about Bohn’s conduct.

Bohn declined to respond to The Times’ questions about his conduct leading the athletic department, but he provided a statement to The Times on the day of his resignation in May 2023 stating he would “always be proud of leading the program out of the most tumultuous times in the history of the profession.”

“In moving on, it is important now that I focus on being present with my treasured family, addressing ongoing health challenges, and reflecting on how I can be impactful in the future,” Bohn said in the statement.

Source link

DTLA law firm co-founder faces California State Bar charges

The California State Bar has charged a founding partner of Downtown LA Law Group, a law firm at the center of a scandal that has embroiled Los Angeles County’s historic sex abuse settlement, with signing up dozens of clients in states where none of the firm’s lawyers were licensed to practice.

The bar charged Salar Hendizadeh, who left the firm this fall, on March 5 with helping one of Southern California’s largest personal injury law firms sign accident victims across the country, despite lacking attorneys who could litigate the cases in other states. Hendizadeh was charged with eleven counts, including deceptive advertising and charging illegal fees.

State Bar Chief Trial Counsel George Cardona said in a statement the allegations, if proved, “represent dishonest and illegal conduct.”

Hendizadeh and a spokesperson for Downtown LA Law Group did not provide a comment Monday.

The firm had roughly 40 clients in Texas, where it operated under the name “Lone Star Injury Law Firm” and branded itself “Texas’s #1 Injury Law Firm,” according to the complaint.

The firm had one L.A.-based attorney licensed to practice in Texas, Darren McBratney, but he left the firm in early 2022. The bar claims the firm refused to remove the attorney’s name from its website for years, ignoring a cease and desist letter from McBratney’s new employer.

Typically, attorneys can take cases in states where they’re not licensed, but they need to partner with local counsel or get permission from the court. In many cases, the bar alleged, DTLA made no effort to do so and left their out-of-state clients in the lurch.

The firm told a Maryland car crash victim her case was worth $1 million and encouraged her to see a California spinal surgeon who charged roughly $300,000 for surgery, according to the complaint. She fired the firm after she got a settlement offer of $160,000 — not enough, she believed, to cover her medical fees, the complaint said.

Attorneys signed up a Tennessee client who was injured at a Nashville rental car business, but the one-year statute of limitations ran out before they filed the case, the bar complaint said. The firm offered to pay for all of his medical bills and one year of physical therapy “as a form of restitution,” according to the complaint.

The charges come as DTLA faces another pending investigation from the State Bar in connection with thousands of sexual abuse lawsuits the firm filed against Los Angeles County, along with a probe from the district attorney’s office. Both have said they are looking into allegations surfaced by The Times last fall that DTLA paid clients to file claims, some of which were allegedly fabricated, that became part of a $4-billion settlement, the largest of its kind in U.S. history. The firm has repeatedly denied all wrongdoing.

The firm was founded by three longtime friends: Daniel Azizi and Farid Yaghoubtil, who are cousins, and Hendizadeh, a friend from elementary school. They began working together in August 2013, the month Hendizadeh got his California bar license, according to the complaint.

The bar complaint charges only Hendizadeh, though it also mentions Yaghoubtil, who shared the responsibility for marketing and client intake, according to the complaint.

The bar says Yaghoubtil repeatedly asked for a referral fee from a woman injured in a Michigan drugstore after she dropped the firm for allegedly taking too long to file her lawsuit. The client had to find her own attorney, the bar said, eliminating the need for a referral fee.

“Why would you tell the lawyers to not pay us a referral fee? That makes no sense.” Yaghoubtil texted the woman on Aug. 16, 2022. “But why not let us get the referral fee? Very sad. Have a nice night.”

Source link

Netflix flooded with same complaint as it drops Inside Season 3 trailer

The Sidemen’s reality series is returning to Netflix in a matter of days

A third season of The Sidemen’s hit reality show Inside is now just days away from release, with a first trailer arriving today (March 9).

The reality series established by the YouTube collective brings together 12 internet personalities who must compete in high-stakes challenges for an eye-watering sum of money. The group will all live under one roof over the course of a week as they compete for the prize pot stands at a whopping £1m.

The group must buy everything from basic necessities through to luxuries, all offered at an inflated price. However, in a brutal twist the cost of any of the goods are deducted straight from the prize pot. During one scene in the trailer, one of the cast is shown ordering “15 prosecco”, totalling £45,000.

Among the stars of the upcoming season are Geordie Shore star Chloe Ferry, lifestyle creator Saffron Barker, streamer Marlon Lundgren Garcia and even the former World’s Strongest Man, Eddie Hall. Rounding out the cast are Ben Azelart, Lydia Violet, Alhan Gençay, Chian Reynolds, Anna Malygon, Expressions Oozing and Alfie Buttle.

Netflix’s official synopsis for the show states: “One house. One million pounds. A whole lot of influencers. Content creators take on a series of jaw-dropping challenges for the potential to win a huge prize fund in this reality series from viral YouTubers, the Sidemen.”

While many fans are circling their diaries for the March 23 release date, the trailer was flooded by angry Netflix subscribers who all made the same demand: the release of the XO, Kitty Season 3 trailer. The streaming giant announced the romcom’s latest season trailer would be released today, but so far it hasn’t been made available.

“YOUU YOU CAN POST THIS BUT NOT XO KITTY???!!!” one fan fumed in the comments. “XO KITTY SEASON 3 WHERE IS IT?” penned a second.

“THEY’RE DROPPING EVERYTHING BESIDES THE XO KITTY SEASON 3 TRAILER” another remarked, accompanied by a crying emoji and a wilting rose. “WE ARE WAITING FOR XO KITTY COME ON,” demanded someone else. “I literally thought after seeing notification XO KITTY i was so excited,” said another fan.

Meanwhile genuine Inside fans expressed their excitement for what was to come. “Expressions doing this is going to be so hilarious,” one remarked. “It is going to be entertaining, ik that,” another added.

Season 3 of The Sidemen’s Inside reality series will land on Netflix on March 23. For the latest showbiz, TV, movie and streaming news, go to the new ** Everything Gossip ** website.

Source link

Wisconsin man accused of setting fire to congressman’s office over TikTok ban gets 7 years in prison

A Wisconsin man who allegedly told police he tried to set fire to a Republican congressman’s office last year because he was angry that the lawmaker backed a bill requiring TikTok’s Chinese owner to sell off its U.S. operations was sentenced Thursday to seven years in prison.

In addition to the prison time, Fond du Lac County Circuit Judge Tricia Walker sentenced 20-year-old Caiden Stachowicz to seven years of extended supervision, court records show.

Stachowicz, of Menasha, pleaded no contest to an arson charge in November. Prosecutors dropped burglary and property damage counts in exchange for Stachowicz’s no contest plea, which isn’t an admission of guilt but is treated as such for the purposes of sentencing.

According to a criminal complaint, a police officer responded to a fire outside Republican U.S. Rep. Glenn Grothman’s office in Fond du Lac, about 55 miles northwest of Milwaukee, at around 1 a.m. on Jan. 19, 2025, and saw Stachowicz standing nearby.

He told the officer that he started the fire because he doesn’t like Grothman, according to the complaint. He initially planned to break into the office and start the fire inside. But he couldn’t break the window, so he poured gas on an electrical box behind the building and around the front of the building, lit a match and watched it burn, according to the complaint.

He said he wanted to burn down the office because the federal government was shutting down TikTok in violation of his constitutional rights and peace was no longer an option, the complaint states. He added that Grothman voted for the shutdown, but he didn’t want to hurt Grothman or anyone else.

Grothman voted for a bill in April 2024 that required TikTok’s China-based company, ByteDance, to sell its U.S. operation. The deadline was Jan. 19, 2025, but President Trump has issued multiple executive orders prolonging it. TikTok finalized a deal two months ago to create an American version of the social video platform. Trump praised the deal.

Danielle Gorsuch, one of Stachowicz’s attorneys, told the Associated Press after the sentencing that the incident was the culmination of a mental health crisis for her client and stressed that no one was hurt.

“Caden took every caution to make sure no one was present in the building at the time of the incident, as he only wanted to hurt himself,” Gorsuch said. “He took responsibility from night one.”

A spokesperson for Grothman’s congressional office didn’t immediately respond to a message seeking comment.

Richmond writes for the Associated Press.

Source link

What to know about the ongoing antitrust trial against Live Nation

After years of ticketing complaints and frustrations, the trial for the Department of Justice’s antitrust lawsuit against Live Nation is officially underway.

As part of its case, the DOJ has accused Live Nation of requiring artists to use its promotional services when they play a Live Nation-owned venue. Because so many venues are owned by the company, the government claims Live Nation’s alleged practices are anti-competitive.

Jury selection began Monday in a New York federal court and opening statements are expected Tuesday for the complaint first filed in 2024. Since then, the antitrust case against the Beverly Hills-based company has been streamlined — examining whether Live Nation uses illegal anti-competitive practices and whether the company and Ticketmaster should be broken up.

The legal proceeding is expected to last around a month, with Judge Arun Subramanian, who also presided over Sean Combs’ sentencing last year, at the helm.

Live Nation’s presidents Michael Rapino and Joe Berchtold, executives from competing companies like Anschutz Entertainment Group and Irving Azoff, the former Ticketmaster CEO, are expected to testify. Musicians like Ben Lovett of Mumford & Sons and entertainer Kid Rock could also take the stand.

Key claims in the lawsuit

The original lawsuit led by a cadre of interested parties including the federal government, 39 states and the District of Columbia alleged that Live Nation and its subsidiary Ticketmaster have monopolies in various aspects of the live music industry, such as concert promotion, venue operations, artist management and ticketing services.

The lawsuit states that Live Nation manages over 400 artists and controls more than 265 venues in North America. Ticketmaster simultaneously controls around 80% of the primary ticket marketplace and is also increasing its involvement in the resale market.

Many of the large monopoly claims were thrown out during a pretrial hearing with Judge Subramanian last month, including an allegation that Live Nation’s industry power raises ticket prices and harms consumers.

The claim with arguably the greatest potential impact centers on whether Live Nation should own Ticketmaster. The two companies merged in 2010, a move that has frequently been considered controversial. Beyond the ownership of Ticketmaster, the DOJ claims Live Nation forces venues to sign exclusive contracts with Ticketmaster, barring the inclusion of other ticket vendors.

“For over a decade, Ticketmaster and Live Nation have promised reform, but meaningful competition has remained out of reach. The industry now stands at an inflection point: restore a competitive marketplace that supports innovation, or allow the status quo to continue narrowing options for American consumers,” Dustin Brighton of the Coalition for Ticket Fairness said in a statement.

“Yet the very competitors that could check this monopoly and restore balance are routinely boxed out by restrictive practices that limit innovation and reduce consumer options,” Brighton added.

Live Nation did not respond to a request for comment. When the complaint was first filed, the company called the claims “baseless.”

“Calling Ticketmaster a monopoly may be a PR win for the DOJ in the short term, but it will lose in court because it ignores the basic economics of live entertainment,” wrote Live Nation in a previous statement.

Next steps after the trial

If Live Nation loses the trial, the judge will decide how the company should be restructured, which could mean selling Ticketmaster to a competitor. Live Nation maintains the right to appeal such a decision, if it materializes, and take the matter to a higher court.

“If the court finds Live Nation violated the law, monetary penalties and behavioral commitments alone will not be sufficient,” Stephen Parker, executive director of the Independent Venue Association, said in a statement.

“The relief must be proportionate to the harm,” Parker added, “and that means structural separation of primary ticketing, resale ticketing, venue operation, national tours, advertising/sponsorship, and artist management must be seriously considered.”

Beyond the current DOJ trial, Live Nation is also facing a lawsuit from the Federal Trade Commission and a handful of class action lawsuits from groups of concertgoers.

Source link

Michael Jackson abused boy at homes of Elton John, Elizabeth Taylor, lawsuit says

Four siblings who were part of Michael Jackson’s secret “second family” have filed a lawsuit revealing the depths of the alleged sexual abuse they suffered as children, including claims that the singer molested one of the boys at the homes of Elton John and Elizabeth Taylor.

The lawsuit, filed against Jackson’s estate in California’s Central District Court on Friday, accuses the late singer of grooming, drugging, raping and sexually assaulting four of the Cascio children — Edward, Dominic, Marie-Nicole and Aldo — over the course of more than a decade, beginning when some of them were as young as 7. A fifth sibling, Frank Cascio, is not a plaintiff in the lawsuit.

The pop icon used code phrases such as “Can I have a meeting,” “Yogi Tea,” “Neverland,” and “Go to Disneyland” to encourage the children to engage in “extreme sex acts” with him, the suit alleges. He plied them with wine — “Jesus Juice” — and hard liquor — “Disney Juice “ — and used drugs to make them more compliant, according to the lawsuit.

The “Thriller” singer’s connection to the Cascio family began in the 1980s when he met their father, Dominic Cascio Sr., at a luxury hotel in New York where the father worked.

The lawsuit accuses Jackson of “insinuating himself” into the Cascio family by using “obsessive attention, lavish gifts, access to his celebrity lifestyle, and declarations that he loved and needed each of them.” He invited them to travel around the world with him and celebrated Thanksgiving, Christmas and his own birthday with them. He often spent long periods of time at their New Jersey home, where he also brought his own children, according to the complaint.

The chart-topping artist is accused of raping and molesting Edward “Eddie” Cascio at Elizabeth Taylor’s house in Switzerland as well as at Elton John’s home in the United Kingdom. Representatives for Jackson’s estate, Taylor’s estate and John did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The complaint alleges that the late singer abused the four siblings at international and national tour stops as well as at his Santa Barbara County estate, Neverland Ranch. That property became a central focus of the 2019 documentary “Leaving Neverland,” in which two of Jackson’s accusers, Wade Robson and James Safechuck, detail the abuse they suffered as children.

The complaint states that Jackson’s staff would help conceal and normalize his abuse of the Cascios; employees would deliberately book the parents hotel rooms away from their children, the suit says, so they could not tell how much time Jackson was spending with them.

The entertainer showed the siblings pornography and photos of naked children to desensitize them, the complaint alleges. He told them that his life, their lives and that of their family members would be destroyed if people knew what was going on.

“He told them to stay away from therapists and to avoid women, who he told them were ‘evil,’ ‘sneaky,’ ‘liars,’ and could ‘smell’ if something sexual had happened,” the complaint states.

For decades after the initial 1993 sexual assault claim against Jackson surfaced, the Cascio family did not speak up against the singer.

The performer convinced the parents to withdraw Aldo Cascio and Marie-Nicole Cascio from school on two occasions to “prevent disclosure of the abuse and gain more access to them,” the complaint alleges. The second time was shortly after authorities raided Neverland Ranch in 2003.

The Cascios’ longtime relationship with the superstar became known to the public when they appeared on Oprah in 2010.

During the appearance, they were billed as Jackson’s secret “second family” and said that they were reluctant to come forward but wanted to “show the world who Michael really was.” At the time, the family said that the siblings were never abused and that they didn’t believe the accusations against Jackson.

As the four siblings aged and exposés such as “Leaving Neverland” came out, their statements about their childhood relationship with the pop star shifted. In 2019, several members of the Cascio family entered a confidential settlement agreement with Jackson’s estate agreeing to remain silent about their relationship to the singer.

That agreement provided for Jackson’s estate to pay each sibling five annual payments of about $690,000 as compensation “for the many years that Jackson abused each of them and that the Jackson Organization enabled and covered up the abuse,” according to the complaint. The Cascios say that this amount is “wholly inadequate,” noting that the singer reportedly paid $25 million in 1994 to settle the abuse allegations made against him in 1993.

Now, the four siblings are challenging the agreement as part of their recently filed lawsuit, alleging that they were coerced into signing it without understanding their rights.

“Buried within the Document’s legalese was a purported release of the Estate from liability for Jackson’s crimes, and language that prohibited Plaintiffs from reporting Jackson’s crimes to law enforcement or anyone saying anything negative about Jackson, or holding the Estate accountable in court for its and Jackson’s wrongdoing,” the complaint alleges.

Marty Singer, an attorney for Jackson’s estate, decried the lawsuit as “a desperate money grab” in a statement to People. A representative for Singer did not immediately respond to The Times’ request for comment.

“The family staunchly defended Michael Jackson for more than 25 years, attesting to his innocence of inappropriate conduct,” Singer told People. “This new court filing is a transparent forum-shopping tactic in their scheme to obtain hundreds of millions of dollars from Michael’s estate and companies.”

The four Cascio siblings are asking a jury to award them financial damages — including some potentially tripled damages because they were abused as children — over their allegations of sexual abuse and cover-up. They are also asking the court to throw out the 2019 agreement they say was used to silence them and are also seeking a ruling that the estate cannot force their claims into private arbitration.

Source link

Silent Witness viewers issue same complaint about BBC show ‘just give us crime’

Silent Witness fans were left baffled after the latest episode of the BBC One crime drama featured an internal monologue scene

Silent Witness viewers were left scratching their heads over one scene in the latest episode of the BBC programme.

Monday night’s instalment (March 2) of the crime drama saw Dr Nikki Alexander (Emilia Fox) and Jack Hodgson (David Caves) and their fellow pathologists examining what appeared to be the suicide of a British-Chinese pro-democracy activist.

The woman’s remains were found in water and it was initially believed to be a suicide. However, as Nikki and Harriet Maven (Maggie Steed) delved deeper, evidence began suggesting something more sinister had occurred, reports the Express.

During the post-mortem examination, Maggie’s inner thoughts were heard, with her reflecting: “Shame, a quality which alerts us of the gap between who we are today and the best version of ourselves. It’s not a disparagement of the essence of our being, but a reminder of who we could be. Inspiring. Helping us to rise. Not driving us to despair.”

She continued: “Shame is an overlooked quality in a society which rewards celebrity over accomplishments.”

The sequence baffled many viewers, prompting a flurry of reactions on X, previously known as Twitter.

“I have never heard such droning piffle as Harriet’s ‘Shame’ soliloquy,” commented one, whilst another simply questioned: “Harriet???”

“What’s with the internal monologue, a meditation on shame in Silent Witness? Just give us the crime story,” remarked someone else.

Another queried what the character was “prattling on about it”, adding: “She’s talking in riddles.”

Another posted: “Silent Witness venturing into thought monologues now? Or is Harriet good at ventriloquism.”

Somebody else said: “Not keen on the latest series of Silent Witness after the awful episode last week and now cheesy internal monologues. New writers?”

However, other people who had tuned in to the drama appreciated the technique, with one remarking on the platform: “Oh I like the way they’re doing this one. Inside everyone’s heads.”

The instalment of Silent Witness was part one of the two-part series finale episode, which is entitled Shame. The second part of the story, which will conclude season 29 of the hit show, is scheduled to be broadcast on Tuesday March 3.

For the latest showbiz, TV, movie and streaming news, go to the new **Everything Gossip** website.

Ensure our latest headlines always appear at the top of your Google Search by making us a Preferred Source.** Click here to activate**** or add us as your Preferred Source in your Google search settings.**

Silent Witness broadcasts on BBC One

Source link

Soho House sued after bartender alleges she was ‘drugged and raped’ by her supervisor

A bartender who worked at Soho House’s exclusive Soho Warehouse in downtown Los Angeles is alleging a supervisor at the posh membership club and hotel drugged and raped her, according to a lawsuit filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on Wednesday.

The woman, who filed as Jane Doe, said in her complaint that she was “subjected to repeated sexual advances and unwelcomed physical touching” by one of her supervisors, Leonard Marcelo Vichique Maya, immediately after she began working as a bartender at Berenjak, the club’s restaurant, in September 2025.

Doe is suing Vichique Maya, Soho House, Soho House Los Angeles and Soho Warehouse for sexual harassment, retaliation and other claims..

“This is as egregious an instance of callous corporate indifference to workplace sexual violence that anyone can experience,” said her attorney Nick Yasman of Los Angeles-based West Coast Trial Lawyers in a statement.

Representatives for Soho House and Vichique Maya were not immediately available for comment.

Doe has further alleged that Vichique Maya made “numerous comments” about her appearance, propositioned her to be his “hook-up buddy” and told her that she “would be pregnant by now” had they met earlier, all within earshot of her supervisors and colleagues.

After two weeks on the job, Doe said that she reported Vichique Maya’s conduct to two male supervisors, including Soho House’s floor manager and food and beverage director, states the complaint, but “neither took any semblance of corrective or investigatory action.”

According to the suit, Doe claims that despite “his pattern of harassing behavior and complaints,” the company, did not address his alleged misconduct. ”

She claims his behavior escalated after a “team-bonding” work event on Sept. 13, where Doe said she became disoriented after drinking with supervisors and co-workers, eventually losing consciousness, and woke up naked in Vichique Maya’s apartment.

“Paralyzed and speechless despite her consciousness slowly returning, Plaintiff was condemned to simply watch in horror as [sic] MARCELO repeatedly raped her inanimate body,” states the suit.

The next day, Doe said that she reported to her floor manager that Vichique Maya had “sexually assaulted her.”

She said her general manager “confirmed” that he “appeared to be preying” on her during the work event, telling her that “These things happen between coworkers.”

When she proclaimed that she could no longer work with Vichique Maya,” she said the general manager dismissed her concerns telling her: “I have a restaurant to run; I can’t have it blow up on me.”

Despite informing three managers that she was “raped,” Doe said she was continuously scheduled to work shifts with Vichique Maya during which he repeatedly sexually harassed her.

In December, Doe filed a complaint with Soho House human resources, and she was assured that an investigation would be opened and “immediate corrective action” taken.

However, during the investigation, Doe said that she was placed on indefinite leave while Vichique Maya continued working. A month later, she was informed the company had completed its investigation and found her report of rape “was uncorroborated” and he “would not be disciplined.”

In February, the plaintiff said that she was forced to quit her job.

One of the first, exclusive members-only social clubs, Soho House debuted in London in 1995 and quickly became the bolt-hole of choice for celebrities and the deep-pocketed. It expanded globally with 48 houses in 19 countries.

It drew high-profile investors, including Ron Burkle through his investment fund Yucaipa.

In 2021, the company filed for an initial public offering on the New York Stock Exchange, but it has faced financial challenges. .

Last year, Soho House went private, selling itself to a group of investors including Apollo Global Management and actor Ashton Kutcher, who also joined its board of directors, at a $2.7-billion valuation.

Source link