The score is now 2 for the women who have sued Casey Affleck and 2 for the two women who also worked on the film with Joaquin Phoenix. A deadlock. Well, I don't know what to think. When the first lawsuit was filed I said to myself that it was pretty detailed and believable, but the denial was so adamant that it made me pause. Then when the second woman came forward and filed suit it really sounded like Casey Affleck was not the guy everyone thought he was.
With that being said, two women who worked on the film came forward with what look like statements that were probably written for them because they sound too perfect. One of the statements though adds more intrigue and juice to the first lawsuit. In that lawsuit, one of the things mentioned was the hooker and transvestite party. The statement supporting Casey says,
"I was in Las Vegas at that shoot, and I never saw anything like that happen. Casey's wife and his children were in town with him. Casey is a great guy, and it's clear that he's a very warm, family-centric person. The real Casey isn't the one who was described in these suits. Nothing I've ever witnessed would lead me to think he could ever do anything like that."
I think it will be pretty easy to verify the party of hookers and transvestites if it happened. Casey has been threatening to counter sue the two women and I think is getting close. I thought though it would be for defamation or something they did to deserve not being paid. Instead though it looks like the suits will focus on the fact the two women broke confidentiality agreements. You know, if that is the only argument you have, then it makes me think the two women who sued may have a case.
Oh, this is getting interesting. Did the wife go to the hooker and transvestite party?
ReplyDeleteI think the second suit said they all stayed with Phoenix to save cash - wouldn't it be pretty easy to ascertain whether or not that was the case, or whether he was staying with his wife and child?? I'm leaning on the side of the complainants here; they don't seem to be your average gold-diggers - Uchitel those ones from a mile away.
ReplyDeleteHa. Uchitel.
ReplyDeleteNot sure who to believe cause right now everything is hearsay, until there is solid evidence all we have is the word of the people involved.
ReplyDeleteHas Joaquin made any kind of statement yet?
That statement is nice and vague, isn't it?
ReplyDelete"Your honor, my friend Lorelei and I have spent time with Mister Casey and all, and we just want you to know that he isn't a big mean horrible person who would use big bad mean awful words ever, cuz we've never heard him say anything that wasn't the kindest, sweetest, warmest, most family-centric kind of thing in the whole world and all," said the deposition. And the judge promptly threw out the case!
ReplyDeleteWhy do I feel like I am getting played again and again by these two?
ReplyDeleteWhether Casey is an a-hole or upstanding family man, whether the case is true or not, everyone is once again talking about Bye. Good. and his arty director friend/brother-in-law.
Who knows what's real, fake, or just crap to get us all to pay attention. I was, am, and will forever remain bored by all of this. Mockumentary indeed. Who's mocking who exactly?