"In his book, Feldman writes that Haim was raped at age 11 on the set of the 1986 film “Lucas,”.."
“The man who had stolen his innocence,” Feldman writes, “ . . . walks around now, one of the most successful people in the entertainment industry, still making money hand over fist.”
For years, there were accusations about Weinstein that weren't taken seriously. Will more people start taking Feldman and others like Molly Ringwald seriously about pedophilia in Hollywood? I've personally never doubted them.
Feldman can't name names for legal reasons (stupid statute of limitations in CA). He has said he/they are powerful and are "still making money hand over fist", so it probably wasn't a stage assistant. I'm tempted to list the names of the director and producer of the film "Lucas" here, but instead I'll just link the credits:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0091445/fullcredits?ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast Will people now believe Corey Feldman - (
New Window )
How about a pedophile and scumbag hunt?
The child predator situation in this country is alarming. When they had Sandusky, the implications that he was involved in a ring of powerful child traffickers had me hoping they would dig deeper and uncover some of these assholes, but no dice. The FBI keeps busting one operation after another, but no big names or operations seem to come to light. I hope these fucks get what's coming to them, one way or the other.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/84-children-rescued-120-human-traffickers-arrested-across-u-s-n812156 - ( New Window )
How about a pedophile and scumbag hunt?
Woody's a sick deviant
The limitations law should be changed.
Quote:
Woody's a sick deviant
But guys like him and Roman Polanski get standing ovations at award ceremonies by those self righteous pedophile enabling hollywood elites.
Otherwise, you don't find 'this is a really bad guy who's in a position where he could be doing this every day, did it to my good friend who ultimately killed himself, but I'm not talking' to be just a tad self-serving?
The whistleblower who was involved with the beginning of the Sandusky stuff did say the next phase of the story would be a larger underground circuit of pedophilia uncovered. Similarly I don't think that was made up either
Exactly, that's mentioned in the one article. Those people make me want to puke. And yet so many in this country seem to take the opinions of these hollywood/media elites seriously; like we should look up to them and trust their judgment.
Link - ( New Window )
How about the porn star that named tiger woods? No credibilty right? What does she know - just looking for that 15 minute of fame. Right.
And what is he worried about statute of limitations for? that's only criminal isn't it? So the people can't be prosecuted criminally, maybe he can at least protect other children.
If he's worried about being sued, that could open all kinds of publicity to the accused that could actually make things worse for them (if the story is true and he names the right person/people).
I think by specifically mentioning the film "Lucas" (everyone can look up the powerful men involved, i.e., the producer, director, et al.) and even for talking about this in the first place, he's doing the opposite of self serving.
I don't think this has helped his career. I believe he's put this out there to warn other parents.
If CA changed the statute of limitations law, which he is asking for, and he still didn't name names, you might have a better argument, imo.
I can sympathize with that - I don't want to make it seem like he's a bad guy in any way.
It's just that he's taken half a step forward - and he's waiting for someone else to pop up and take the ball the rest of the way. It's what he did with Jackson, and the others let him down. Maybe, given the fact that he's no longer being fed by that machine, he can take the rest of that step to bring those people to justice.
Imagine how many rich and powerful fucks in all walks of life must be involved for this to have popped up in a number of different industries and for it not to be uncovered yet.
And a more basic question - does Feldman actually make any Hollywood money these days?
Often, even if you win, you lose - financially and otherwise.
And there's what Greg linked.
What about Elijah Wood? He's said the same things in recent years. You gonna call Frodo a liar?
Often, even if you win, you lose - financially and otherwise.
And there's what Greg linked.
I get it's not easy - but why go half the distance then?
“I literally heard that they were ‘passed around,’” Arngrim said. “The word was that they were given drugs and being used for sex. It was awful–these were kids, they weren’t 18 yet. There were all sorts of stories about everyone from their, quote, ‘set guardians’ on down that these two had been sexually abused and were totally being corrupted in every possible way.”
Anyway, since we're talking about pedophiles in powerful places.....I'll go ahead and put on my tinfoil hat here and wonder about Penn State and Sandusky. There's still so much about that case that seems.....I don't know, incomplete to me. I wouldn't be surprised if there yet turned out to be some truth to the rumors that Sandusky was being protected by wealthy PSU boosters to whom he was pimping those Second Mile boys out.
While it is not at all a surprise to me (my own wife had to speak to HR over sexual harassment at work) the #MeToo movement sure has been eye opening.
Also, not that he was the greatest actor or anything but I also find it strange that he cannot get ANY work at all. Not even a small part somewhere. There are roles that fit his skillset and character type.
Yep. It's not limited to Hollywood. Capitol Hill, Wall Street, Fashion Industry. You'll find it everywhere.
Again, he has his own family (he has at least one son) to protect financially.
Even if he's not making a living acting, do you think he wants to blow his savings on legal fees?
Are the doubters here willing to pay his lawyers?
statute-limitations-rape-feldman - ( New Window )
Again, he has his own family (he has at least one son) to protect financially.
Even if he's not making a living acting, do you think he wants to blow his savings on legal fees?
Are the doubters here willing to pay his lawyers? statute-limitations-rape-feldman - ( New Window )
That's a fair point, even if it doesn't cut off his money supply having to fend off a series of lawsuits would be just as effective.
Sheen has money, seems to have no filter, enjoys the limelight, was on the set of Lucas so probably knows the story, and Sheen enjoys #winning
Isn't him saying that it's happening enough? Why is he responsible for naming names? Shouldn't it be the parents due diligence to take the idea that it's happening and do their own due diligence when letting their child enter the field?
The Producer of "Lucas". He would fit Feldman's description.
If you're speaking only for yourself, you probably shouldn't assign responsibility to him.
Sheen has money, seems to have no filter, enjoys the limelight, was on the set of Lucas so probably knows the story, and Sheen enjoys #winning
Sheen doesn't strike me as the selfless type. He's not going to put himself out there unless he's going to benefit from it.
Quote:
In comment 13655974 Dr. D said:
Quote:
Woody's a sick deviant
But guys like him and Roman Polanski get standing ovations at award ceremonies by those self righteous pedophile enabling hollywood elites.
That's what's most troubling to me. It was actually considered chic and trendy to support Polanski.
Again, it's pretty freaking easy to look up the credits for "Lucas" and see the couple of powerful men that fit Feldman's description.
Why does he have to risk his life savings? If any parent reads these allegations and doesn't take them seriously because Feldman doesn't name names, you've got to be f*cking kidding me.
I think we will see some news break soon.
I think we will see some news break soon.
I really hope so, but I doubt it. Look no further than Sandusky for proof. All that attention, he claimed he was hiding others, and nobody was ever flushed out.
I'm more disappointed in law enforcement than anything else - if anyone should be able to work around people covering for higher ups, it should be them.
However only a very small part of the issue would be solved by hinting at the perpetrator and helping current parents of would be child actors keep their kids away from this animal.
This person would still be free to live life unencumbered and even if statutory justice cannot be met, their life should still be ruined for what they've done.
So, whether Feldman publicly has a press conference himself and names names (I wouldn't think that's necessary) or does it through a reporter it would be good to bring these people (or person) to justice in the court of public opinion. reporters protect their sources all the time.
I doubt Weinstein does time, but I'd be surprised if he works again. Haim's attacker should suffer a similar fate.
Does anyone believe that the parents who let their kids stay with Michael Jackson really had their best interest in mind?
This is one of those cases where the kids have no say, and anyone who is empowered to or responsible for their care likely doesn't give half of a shit. That's why you're hoping for a name, so that he can be named and shamed out of a job, if not to have someone come forward and press charges to put the fucker away.
So that the film industry doesn't move to Toronto?
Half kidding there, really no good answer to that question.
The Corey's were looked at as being drugged out weirdos who self-destructed when it is entirely possible they were hooked on drugs by predators who then robbed their souls. Horrific.
2) Why does CA Statute of Limitations prevent him from naming the alleged perpetrator?
3) I despise the current statute of limitations laws in most states, including NY. It has prevented my wife from getting full closure on her past. I have spoken to several local and state politicians about this. They will all say they support changing the laws, but there is no traction there.
But there's no guarantee that the profits from the book would cover the costs of getting sued. And if it's a break even, why on earth would you put yourself through it? You refer to the moral obligation on Feldman, but what about the moral obligation of Feldman to provide for his family which could be impaired or destroyed?
It may be that he doesn't want to face a slander or libel lawsuit, but that is civil, not criminal, and that has nothing to do with any SoL.
Because if he names names, he can be held liable for slander and be subject to lawsuits.
Unless he has footage of the acts, and especially if a studio is tied to the claims, he will likely have to spend a crapload of $$ defending himself, once again becoming a victim.
They don't anymore, the statute of limitations was repealed last year and there were loopholes on the 10 year limit anyway, but because Haim is deceased it complicates things regarding the 10 year statute of limitations loophole.
This is where my wife is. As a young girl into her teens she was molested. When she finally came forward her family didn't take her seriously because it was a family member. It wasn't until her mid-20s that she began dealing with this in therapy and the it was far too late. In that regard, there is no real sense of closure for the victims.
Quote:
2) Why does CA Statute of Limitations prevent him from naming the alleged perpetrator?
Because if he names names, he can be held liable for slander and be subject to lawsuits.
Unless he has footage of the acts, and especially if a studio is tied to the claims, he will likely have to spend a crapload of $$ defending himself, once again becoming a victim.
The burden would be on the plaintiff to prove that Feldman is lying, not on Feldman to prove that what he is saying is true.
FYI...California eliminated the statute of limitations in 2016.
It was all over the news with the Bill Cosby trial.
Quote:
2) Why does CA Statute of Limitations prevent him from naming the alleged perpetrator?
Because if he names names, he can be held liable for slander and be subject to lawsuits.
Unless he has footage of the acts, and especially if a studio is tied to the claims, he will likely have to spend a crapload of $$ defending himself, once again becoming a victim.
I understand his position. It just infuriates me how difficult it is for victims. And, I believe Feldman was abused as well. So, it is not just dealing with the nightmare of a deceased victim.
The mental and emotional trauma is indescribable. This is why I get so angry when people here (and in general) get cavalier about a male teenage student having sex with a female teacher, but up in arms when it is a female student and male teacher. In either case, the teacher is acting inappropriately, illegally, immorally, and abusing their position of authority...even if it appears to be consensual. The long term affects are immeasurable.
1. This is a Hollywood story, and Hollywood stories are likely to generate more interest than college football stories, especially on in a global sense. Disclaimer: I don't mean to categorize the Sandusky situation as a college football story. I don't see it that way, but others do. It's much more than that.
2. There is tremendous buzz right now regarding abuse in Hollywood. It's a very hot topic. I don't think the Sandusky disgrace generated the same energy and urgency (sadly).
3. Social media. What kind of social media presence did the Sandusky story have? Very little. The Hollywood abuse thing is screaming all over social media, for example, #metoo. Social media can be very powerful.
I'm hopeful that people will be "outed", although there are multiple significant reasons for skepticism. I'm going with "hopeful" because I'm just that kind of person and it's something I really want. This stuff has to end.
I'm talking about how the legal options a plaintiff would have could tie things up for years and force Feldman to spend his time and money all while opening new wounds.
Would you consider contacting him and telling him you would defend him in a libel case if he named names?
Quote:
The burden would be on the plaintiff to prove that Feldman is lying, not on Feldman to prove that what he is saying is true.
I'm talking about how the legal options a plaintiff would have could tie things up for years and force Feldman to spend his time and money all while opening new wounds.
True....but Feldman is not necessarily without options to fight back. While I don't know the ins and outs of California law and Statutes of Limitations, if the plaintiff were to bring these issues up, then he would likely be opening the door for Feldman to assert counterclaims in the millions of dollars for pain and suffering, lost earnings, and other damages relating to the alleged abuse. With the plaintiff's already difficult road to prove that Feldman is lying, plus potential liability on counterclaims by Feldman, Feldman could be in position for a good settlement if a perpetrator were to actually bring a slander or libel lawsuit.
Would you consider contacting him and telling him you would defend him in a libel case if he named names?
Definitely an issue....but someone willing to make a name for him or herself would also likely take a financial risk to potentially reap a huge reward, in both money and publicity.
Truth is a complete defense, but it doesn't pay the attorney's fees.
Plus, Feldman would be able to counter-sue for legal fees and damages.
Given the high profile nature of this case, I can almost guarantee a Gloria Allred type would do it pro-bono.
The risk a pedophile has of suing a person who accuses them of a a true act of pedophilia is enough of a deterrent IMO - especially if their closet is littered with more skeletons like it probably is.
IMO they'd be better served (if it's true) issuing a swift denial, maybe even threaten to sue, and hope it goes away.
Lastly, Feldman has a very low net worth, he's at risk of losing almost nothing. In fact in the court of public opinion it could even help to have him viewed sympathetically.
Plus, Feldman would be able to counter-sue for legal fees and damages.
Given the high profile nature of this case, I can almost guarantee a Gloria Allred type would do it pro-bono.
The risk a pedophile has of suing a person who accuses them of a a true act of pedophilia is enough of a deterrent IMO - especially if their closet is littered with more skeletons like it probably is.
IMO they'd be better served (if it's true) issuing a swift denial, maybe even threaten to sue, and hope it goes away.
Lastly, Feldman has a very low net worth, he's at risk of losing almost nothing. In fact in the court of public opinion it could even help to have him viewed sympathetically.
Bingo.
Plus, Feldman would be able to counter-sue for legal fees and damages.
Given the high profile nature of this case, I can almost guarantee a Gloria Allred type would do it pro-bono.
The risk a pedophile has of suing a person who accuses them of a a true act of pedophilia is enough of a deterrent IMO - especially if their closet is littered with more skeletons like it probably is.
IMO they'd be better served (if it's true) issuing a swift denial, maybe even threaten to sue, and hope it goes away.
Lastly, Feldman has a very low net worth, he's at risk of losing almost nothing. In fact in the court of public opinion it could even help to have him viewed sympathetically.
Well Allred has never been afraid of a TV camera, let's see her step up and make the pro bono offer. And while maybe Feldman's low net worth would create sympathy with a jury, it wouldn't pay any attorney's fees.
It’s just a dumb subject upon which to strike a partisan tone. As a previous poster noted, this is something that cuts across many industries…potentially anywhere there exists a powerful vs subjected dynamic. Weinstein & young women seeking roles. Foley & DC pages. Hastert and his student (?). Coaches & their players. And of course Clergyman & children. To name only some. (I’d cite a couple more high profile men but that would send the thread to deletion).
Important to highlight a distinction between harassment and actual physical abuse (especially toward minors) but it’s all fucking disgusting.
Hopefully these “elite” outlets – like, also, the Globe and its Spotlight reporting – continue to expose the odious who sliver among us. Seemingly a thankless endeavor if the tone of the OP is representative.
agree
Quote:
says is true and he has proof or even corroborating witnesses it would be beyond risky for anyone to sue him for libel or defamation.
Plus, Feldman would be able to counter-sue for legal fees and damages.
Given the high profile nature of this case, I can almost guarantee a Gloria Allred type would do it pro-bono.
The risk a pedophile has of suing a person who accuses them of a a true act of pedophilia is enough of a deterrent IMO - especially if their closet is littered with more skeletons like it probably is.
IMO they'd be better served (if it's true) issuing a swift denial, maybe even threaten to sue, and hope it goes away.
Lastly, Feldman has a very low net worth, he's at risk of losing almost nothing. In fact in the court of public opinion it could even help to have him viewed sympathetically.
Well Allred has never been afraid of a TV camera, let's see her step up and make the pro bono offer. And while maybe Feldman's low net worth would create sympathy with a jury, it wouldn't pay any attorney's fees.
until someone actually sues there are no attorney fees. Easy for me to say since it's not me.
Excellent post.
Quote:
Isn't why this poor slob doesn't name names, it's why does CA have the statute of limitations law for child rape?
So do most states. In NYS there is a statute of limitations. I believe you have 5 years from the committed act for child sexual abuse. It is really ridiculous, as many (most?) victims don't come forward until years later for a variety of reasons. Sexual abuse can be crippling for anyone, but it is especially true of a child and it has long lasting effects. Many can't even begin to deal with the trauma until well into their adulthood, when the statute of limitations is long gone.
This is where my wife is. As a young girl into her teens she was molested. When she finally came forward her family didn't take her seriously because it was a family member. It wasn't until her mid-20s that she began dealing with this in therapy and the it was far too late. In that regard, there is no real sense of closure for the victims.
Matt, Excellent post and I feel for your situation and your wife's trauma. People that have experience with this understand perfectly well why very strong people often do not come forward and the many institutional barriers to doing so. Survivors of molestation that come forward are to be applauded and protected, not chastised for doing too little too late.
Walters practically blamed the victim - for such an outrageous accusation!
Do you think it's appropriate that Barbara Walters in a TV interview completely dismissed Feldman's allegation without consideration that it might be true? Treating him like he's an irresponsible nutjob?
Do you think it's appropriate that Woody Allen (accused by multiple people of being a child molester) and Roman Polanski (a known child rapist - drugged and sodomized a 13 year old girl) get standing ovations at award ceremonies?
Your big problem is that I called them hollywood/media elites?
The word "elite" bothers you that much?
He's pretty much the definition of elite.
The term is splitting hairs anyway. The point was that Hollywood has no problem lauding and fostering people who have had some really nasty allegations tossed their way.
It’s just a dumb subject upon which to strike a partisan tone. As a previous poster noted, this is something that cuts across many industries…potentially anywhere there exists a powerful vs subjected dynamic. Weinstein & young women seeking roles. Foley & DC pages. Hastert and his student (?). Coaches & their players. And of course Clergyman & children. To name only some. (I’d cite a couple more high profile men but that would send the thread to deletion).
Important to highlight a distinction between harassment and actual physical abuse (especially toward minors) but it’s all fucking disgusting.
Hopefully these “elite” outlets – like, also, the Globe and its Spotlight reporting – continue to expose the odious who sliver among us. Seemingly a thankless endeavor if the tone of the OP is representative.
Lastly, Feldman has a very low net worth, he's at risk of losing almost nothing.
For almost anybody the potential of losing everything one has doesn't feel like "nothing".
Quote:
Lastly, Feldman has a very low net worth, he's at risk of losing almost nothing.
For almost anybody the potential of losing everything one has doesn't feel like "nothing".
Do you know the standard for winning a libel or defamation case?
If the allegations are true, I would not expect a lawsuit.
I'd expect some boisterous denials, threats of lawsuits, and then nothing.
You almost literally can't win if the claims against you are true.
Quote:
Quote:
Lastly, Feldman has a very low net worth, he's at risk of losing almost nothing.
For almost anybody the potential of losing everything one has doesn't feel like "nothing".
Do you know the standard for winning a libel or defamation case?
If the allegations are true, I would not expect a lawsuit.
I'd expect some boisterous denials, threats of lawsuits, and then nothing.
You almost literally can't win if the claims against you are true.
I am not disputing that, just pointing out that losing everything doesn't feel like nothing as you noted for a reason he should proceed.
maybe this isn't a big deal to some, but a standing ovation for a convicted child rapist ain't too cool, imo.
Before anyone accuses me of using a biased website, I don't know anything about the site. I just know it has the video of the standing O for a child rapist.
lonk - ( New Window )
1. This is a Hollywood story, and Hollywood stories are likely to generate more interest than college football stories, especially on in a global sense. Disclaimer: I don't mean to categorize the Sandusky situation as a college football story. I don't see it that way, but others do. It's much more than that.
2. There is tremendous buzz right now regarding abuse in Hollywood. It's a very hot topic. I don't think the Sandusky disgrace generated the same energy and urgency (sadly).
3. Social media. What kind of social media presence did the Sandusky story have? Very little. The Hollywood abuse thing is screaming all over social media, for example, #metoo. Social media can be very powerful.
I'm hopeful that people will be "outed", although there are multiple significant reasons for skepticism. I'm going with "hopeful" because I'm just that kind of person and it's something I really want. This stuff has to end.
I truly hope that you're right and I'm wrong, and that things will be different this time around. Just that after all of the Weinstein hubbub, knowing that the only outcome is that one guy will have to retire early (and keep all his money) doesn't give me a lot of confidence.
Poor slob? That's some bedside manner there, doctor.
I was simply saying #1 the statute of limitations which was preventing him from coming forward was removed in CA in 2016 and that fear of being sued (if he is telling the truth and has proof) should not be the main reasons why he doesn't.
He should do whatever he is comfortable with, but there are a few ways to mitigate his fears of lawsuit.
Priests of the Catholic Church or Hollywood Producers. It doesn't matter.
But as the one article linked above shows, documentaries on the Catholic Church pedophiles can get Oscar nominations. Documentaries on Hollywood pedophiles can't get made (or if they are made it's with no financing, no distribution, recognition, etc.)
Because the middle of a game thread is nowhere to declare that your grandfather molested you as a child.
Seems to be a different tone here, don't you think?
Maybe I could've left out my feelings about not wanting to be lectured by so many who have, imo, been looking the other way and enabling this type of thing.
Anywho, I've spent way too much time here. Have a nice day.
I was simply saying #1 the statute of limitations which was preventing him from coming forward was removed in CA in 2016 and that fear of being sued (if he is telling the truth and has proof) should not be the main reasons why he doesn't.
He should do whatever he is comfortable with, but there are a few ways to mitigate his fears of lawsuit.
Sorry if I misinterpreted you point
The entertainment...especially the film industry...is very incestuous ...macro and microwise. Lots of nepotism...go along to get along. And the point of profiting parents is a good one ...including selling and selling out their kids to keep the $$$ rolling in...and "Theater Mom" types who enjoy the limelight.
You must also remember 2 things:
These kids became teens and the whole drug and liquor environment fed their need to keep $$$ rolling in to enjoy those things..and...
Besides the 'who will believe a former drugged out kid now looking for attention' person...even if they do...the WHOLE story comes out... and some 'shitty parents' will also be 'outed' in a way and its possible they may want those things to not be revealed.
A final point...Hollywood / entertainment industry has friends in high places. And friends in low places( like where aforementioned drugs came from)...including people that have no problem with murder(for us old folks the suspicious deaths of Marilyn Monroe and TV Superman George
Reeves for example). People can suddenly disappear..or..people like Robert Downey can make 'comebacks'...even very hyped like CSheen in spite of doing things that would make them pariahs in any other industry.
Quote:
every woman close to me has been either sexually abused or assaulted. Mom, daughters, gf, ex gfs ex wife etc. Its far more pervasive than many realize. Ask around...
While it is not at all a surprise to me (my own wife had to speak to HR over sexual harassment at work) the #MeToo movement sure has been eye opening.
Agreed. My sister posted something on facebook from two decades ago that was very disturbing, and I'd never known about it. And my wife told me about something that happened too.
Tarantino sometimes gets on my nerves but I give him credit that he didn't just feign shock as so many other close to Wienstein did, but has come out and said he knew.
“I knew enough to do more than I did,” the director told the New York Times on Wednesday. “There was more to it than just the normal rumors, the normal gossip. It wasn’t secondhand. I knew he did a couple of these things....”
"What I did was marginalize the incidents,” he said. “Anything I say now will sound like a crappy excuse...."
Much more details in the linked article below.
Link - ( New Window )
No, you brought it up unsolicited, in the middle of a game thread.
If you're declaring that your grandfather molested you as a child during a football game, in the middle of a game thread on a football board, I don't think you should be pointing any fingers over who comes off looking good.
"Shit, OBJ dropped that one, he would've had the first"
"Oh yeah, you think that's bad, my grandpa molested me when I was 8"
You're the one making light of child molestation on a football board - in the middle of what was at the time a football thread about a live game. I don't think I need to make my case any further, you're a troll trying to derail conversations here, and this one was going pretty well until you turned up, so I'll leave it at that.
Quote:
In comment 13655974 Dr. D said:
Quote:
Woody's a sick deviant
But guys like him and Roman Polanski get standing ovations at award ceremonies by those self righteous pedophile enabling hollywood elites.
The Whoopi Goldberg quote on Polanski was insane and sick. They don't care in general. Scum.
What a dumb bitch.
Can anyone imagine referring to a 13 year old girl being raped vaginally and anally as - "not rape rape"?
The girl was drugged and repeatedly said no. But it wasn't "rape rape"? If that's not rape, WTF is?
On the View discussing Polanski she tried to insinuate his rape wasn't "rape rape" as he wasn't as bad as people were making it out to be. Like drugging a 13 old isn't as bad as breaking into a house I guess.
Sad and disgusting
Can anyone imagine referring to a 13 year old girl being raped vaginally and anally as - "not rape rape"?
The girl was drugged and repeatedly said no. But it wasn't "rape rape"? If that's not rape, WTF is?
That's what's so insane. That many would stand and cheer him. My opinion is that deviance and depravity is their norm. What concerning adults to is fine. But there seems to be no level
Of Abuse they think was bad before this came
Out. Walters is a pile of shit too. Why the fuck would Feldman lie?
David Nicksay the producer is a different story.