Support NeoGAF

[KSweeley]

Link: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/th...tional-enquirer-cruel-sex-change-story-999863

May 8, 2017

Richard Simmons isn't missing. For those looking for the fitness guru, try Los Angeles Superior Court, where Simmons is now standing up for truth and privacy in a huge libel lawsuit against the National Enquirer, Radar Online and American Media, Inc. Simmons is targeting a series of "cruel and malicious" articles published between June 2016 and March of this year that suggested he was transitioning from a male to a female, including reports of "shocking sex surgery," breast implants, hormone treatments and consultations on medical castration.

The complaint filed on Monday paints the tabloids' conduct as "particularly egregious," a cynical calculation that Simmons wouldn't sue because he wouldn't want to appear as frowning upon the act of transitioning from one gender to another.

"National Enquirer and Radar Online have miscalculated," reads the complaint, a copy of which was obtained by The Hollywood Reporter. "The National Enquirer and Radar Online have cheaply and crassly commercialized and sensationalized an issue that ought to be treated with respect and sensitivity. Principles of freedom of speech and press may protect their prerogative to mock and degrade the LGBTQ community. But freedom to speak is not freedom to defame. Mr. Simmons, like every person in this nation, has a legal right to insist that he not be portrayed as someone he is not. Even the most ardent supporter of sexual autonomy and LGBTQ rights is entitled to be portrayed in a manner that is truthful."

Neville Johnson, the attorney for Simmons, continues, "The law of defamation and false light invasion of privacy exist to vindicate this elemental right. The law protects the right of every person to be treated with decency and dignity, free from the deliberate propagation of falsehoods that have no motivation other than exploitation. It is to vindicate that right, and the rights of all persons to be portrayed with dignity and honesty with regard to their sexual identity, that Mr. Simmons files this lawsuit."

The lawsuit raises provocative issues. Past courts have grappled with the question of whether being called gay is actually a stain on one's reputation. Other courts have dealt with public accusations of cosmetic surgery in the reputational context. Results have been mixed. For instance, Tom Cruise once won a default judgment against a porn actor who claimed an affair, while a New York appeals court in 2012 ruled that defamation suits premised on one's sexuality are "based on the flawed premise that it is shameful and disgraceful to be described as lesbian, gay or bisexual."

Here, Simmons is bringing the first-ever defamation lawsuit over published reports of a sex change and framing it as a stand for dignity and the right to have a gender identity.

 

[Volimar]

Get paid Richard.

I know people will read this as an indictment of trans surgeries, but I think he's exaggerating his outrage for the lawsuit.

 

[Trojita]

Making up stories with no evidence isn't cool. Also outing someone's decision isn't cool either.

For those looking for the fitness guru, try Los Angeles Superior Court, where Simmons is now standing up for truth and privacy in a huge libel lawsuit against the National Enquirer, Radar Online and American Media, Inc.

Wait, so he'll actually be there?

 

[eosos]

They've been sued before, right? Feel like making crazy shit up is their business model.

 

[The Salt Life]

I'm honestly surprised they weren't sued out of business 30 years ago.

 

[LakeEarth]

Well crafted statement. Hope he gets paid.

 

[EloquentM]

They've been sued before, right? Feel like making crazy shit up is their business model.

It is. about 100 confirmed aliens in Hollywood thanks to national enquirer. A bit odd they would go this route though as it leaves them open for stuff like this.

 

[Volimar]

I'm honestly surprised they weren't sued out of business 30 years ago.

They have insurance that pays out their civil case losses. Their premiums go up a bit and they keep raking in the dough.

 

[Dirca]

I'm honestly surprised they weren't sued out of business 30 years ago.

Are you kidding me? They've been in circulation since 1926, and bullshitting since the 40's

 

[Socreges]

They have insurance that pays out their civil case losses. Their premiums go up a bit and they keep raking in the dough.

So, bullshit insurance is actually a thing. Wow.

 

[Alcotholic]

I wouldnt really take The National Enquirer seriously, but I dont mind RS making some bank off their dumbass publications.

 

[UrokeJoe]

They have insurance that pays out their civil case losses. Their premiums go up a bit and they keep raking in the dough.

Beaten. Yep

 

[TAJ]

They have insurance that pays out their civil case losses. Their premiums go up a bit and they keep raking in the dough.

Explain Gawker getting decimated by Hogan then.

 

[Syder]

I listened to that podcast that came out about him and it was total trash.

 

[louiedog]

They have insurance that pays out their civil case losses. Their premiums go up a bit and they keep raking in the dough.

Do they? In 2017?

 

[Deleted member 284]

So we can expect Thiel to help sue the National Enquirer into a long overdue sleep right? Right?

Oh wait, its the National Enquirer that proclaimed Trump the God King....never mind

 

[KSweeley]

Here's the cover of the National Enquirer that is central to this lawsuit filed by Richard Simmons, I remember seeing this at my local grocery store.

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

I wish Richard could end them all by himself.

 

[KSweeley]

Here's a copy of the lawsuit: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3705625-Simmons.html

 

[Tagg9]

Here's the cover of the National Enquirer that is central to this lawsuit filed by Richard Simmons, I remember seeing this at my local grocery store.

WTF? They photoshopped all of that? How National Enquirer stays in business is beyond me.

 

[Brawly Likes to Brawl]

Here's the cover of the National Enquirer that is central to this lawsuit filed by Richard Simmons, I remember seeing this at my local grocery store.

Oh my god, that's even worse than I imagined.

 

[Buddha Beam]

I thought he was riddled with dementia

 

[moggio]

From what I gather Richard Simmons wants to be left the fuck alone but he keeps getting disturbed by shitty tabloids and cunts making podcasts.

 

[Pyccko]

Man I'm just glad he's still alive. I was getting worried there.

 

[PSqueak]

I mean, how can anybody take Simmons' reaction as transphobic when the allegations themselves were using transitioning as a ploy for shock value?

Anybody thinking siding with simmons is being against trans people need to re evaluate the situation.

 

[Parch]

He hasn't been in the public spotlight much lately, so tabloids start making up shit. Perhaps they assume that he wouldn't respond or care. Guess again scumbags. You're getting sued.

 

[Smellycat]

Here's the cover of the National Enquirer that is central to this lawsuit filed by Richard Simmons, I remember seeing this at my local grocery store.

haha what the hell? How can they get away with stuff like that?

 

[KSweeley]

From what I gather Richard Simmons wants to be left the fuck alone but he keeps getting disturbed by shitty tabloids and cunts making podcasts.

According to the THR article, Simmons has been harassed and blackmailed by a stalker who gave false news about Simmons to the National Enquirer who published the story knowing it's false from Simmons own publicist who received an advance copy of said story:

Simmons admits to retreating from his 40-year career in television and fitness in early 2014. His absence from the media spotlight garnered attention itself, including from the celebrated podcast, Missing Richard Simmons. Others may have looked to capitalize on the situation.

"Starting from around May 2015, Mauro Oliveira, an individual who has blackmailed, extorted and stalked Mr. Simmons for several years with the intention of destroying the career and reputation of Mr. Simmons, contacted several press outlets, including the National Enquirer and Radar, and offered information on Mr. Simmons' disappearance in exchange for a fee," states the complaint.

Oliveira allegedly told the publication different stories about Simmons during multiple contacts. According to the complaint, the National Enquirer was told on one occasion that Simmons' absence was due to him being held hostage by a housekeeper who engaged in witchcraft. On another occasion, it was a sex change.

"All of these assertions were untrue, and were merely attempts by Mr. Oliveira to gain a profit in exchange for providing a false narrative about Mr. Simmons' leave of absence," continues the complaint. "While pitching around these ideas, Mr. Oliveira was simultaneously blackmailing Mr. Simmons, sending him emails and threatening to destroy his reputation with damaging press coverage unless Mr. Simmons paid Mr. Oliveira to stop."

As the National Enquirer began preparing its story about a sex change in June 2016, according to the court papers, the publication provided Simmons' publicist, Tom Estey, a copy of the unpublished article for review. Estey warned AMI's general counsel that they should "be prepared for a lawsuit."

Nevertheless, allegedly using Oliveira as its sole source, the National Enquirer published on article on June 8.

Just two days later, after the National Enquirer's initial story, Oliveira is said to have recanted his story about Simmons' gender transition via an email to Simmons and his manager. The email stated that Oliveira had been "misrepresented and betrayed and that such allegations were pure fabrications by others not [himself.]'"

Oliveira allegedly demanded money, and said that if Simmons paid him, he would be prepared to "go on record to discredit the story and defend Richard Simmons."

As the complaint puts it, "This email — part of a longstanding pattern of harassment of Mr. Simmons by Mr. Oliveira — further demonstrates that Mr. Oliveira was obviously not credible, and any reliance on him as a source was reckless and malicious."

Despite Simmons' denials, the Olivera email turned over to AMI and several more follow-up threats and demands for retractions, the National Enquirer "doubled-down" with a new article on June 15 repeating the sex-change allegation. Radar would post a story as late as March 22, 2017, stating that Simmons was "the latest Hollywood star to secretly undergo a sex change" and that he has "opted for a breast implant surgery, hormone therapy, and a host of other invasive changes to create the transformation the Enquirer reported."

 

[AlexFlame116]

Here's the cover of the National Enquirer that is central to this lawsuit filed by Richard Simmons, I remember seeing this at my local grocery store.

What in tarnation??? And they can get away with that Scott free normally?

 

[SuperStiltzkin]

Here's the cover of the National Enquirer that is central to this lawsuit filed by Richard Simmons, I remember seeing this at my local grocery store.

I wonder how they'll try to spin "YES THIS PHOTO SHOOT IS REAL"

 

[Emperor_Uriel]

Here's the cover of the National Enquirer that is central to this lawsuit filed by Richard Simmons, I remember seeing this at my local grocery store.

The media really needs to be trimmed down. Already we get too much real information, there's absolutely zero room for fake crap like this.

 

[Gordon Shumway]

I'm honestly surprised they weren't sued out of business 30 years ago.

I've never understood people's fascination for that crap..

 

[moggio]

Reminds me of the classic:

If only the National Inquirer was 0.00001% as funny as the Sunday Sport.

 

[Xyrmellon]

Who's to say the Enquierer is wrong??? No one has seen Simmons for years.

Also, they have broken several big stories, including the John Edwards affair and love-child.

 

[SliceSabre]

Just as a rule I never take anything in the National Enquirer seriously, but I can understand why someone would take them to court.

I treat them like I treated Weekly World News.

 

[rockinreelin]

Explain Gawker getting decimated by Hogan then.

Looks like they had a bad insurance policy and coverage.

https://www.law360.com/articles/562091/gawker-not-covered-for-hogan-sex-tape-row-insurer-says

http://news.psu.edu/story/416994/20...ker-could-have-avoided-hogan-payout-insurance

I bet it is extremely expensive and Denton thought he could always use the first amendment as a shield.

 

[Brakke]

Explain Gawker getting decimated by Hogan then.

There's actually an answer to this. Gawker did have insurance for cases like that. Hogan (slash Peter Thiel via the lawyer) specifically structured his claims to prevent the policy from paying out, and refused any settlements that might've been paid by the insurance.

 

[Brakke]

Also, they have broken several big stories, including the John Edwards affair and love-child.

It's funny how this is the only one anybody can ever cite in the "they didn't make it up" column.

 

[PillarEN]

Get em Richard. That's pure crap on their part.

 

[tearsintherain]

Good for him, being a celeb doesn't mean papers just get to make shit up about you and make loads of money on it. No proof, no story run.

 

[Hydrus]

Hope he wins. The poor guy has been begging people for years to leave him alone and the shit media continues to stalk him.

 

[SolidSnakex]

Richard always seemed pretty awesome and had a good sense of humor in his Stern appearances. Without question the best semi-regular guest that Stern ever had on the show.

 

[NoFaceNico]

Who's to say the Enquierer is wrong??? No one has seen Simmons for years.

Also, they have broken several big stories, including the John Edwards affair and love-child.

Exactly. I was especially miffed by this line:

The National Enquirer and Radar Online have cheaply and crassly commercialized and sensationalized an issue that ought to be treated with respect and sensitivity.

Maybe he hasn't undergone the full sex-change transition and therefore, by some definition, is not a "woman" anatomically? So then maybe Simmons is more offended by them bursting his bubble of privacy and he's getting back by taking them to court for not being 100% correct in their reporting? It's a possibility.

I hope Simmons is being totally up front just for the sake of making the strongest case against them, but there are a lot of unanswered questions. I've been on his side during the whole time he was asking to be left alone, but if he's going to take them to court then we need clear answers.

 

[slit]

Who's to say the Enquierer is wrong??? No one has seen Simmons for years.

Also, they have broken several big stories, including the John Edwards affair and love-child.

Simmons! If they were right I doubt he would sue. That would eventually come out.

I hope Simmons is being totally up front just for the sake of making the strongest case against them, but there are a lot of unanswered questions. I've been on his side during the whole time he was asking to be left alone, but if he's going to take them to court then we need clear answers.

No we don't, just because he has retreated from public life doesn't mean anybody can just say anything about him. He doesn't owe you an answer.

 

[rackham]

Cruel doesn't need to be in quotes. Making up lies about people and putting it in your publication which thousands of people at least see is indeed cruel

 

[LyleLanley]

Just as a rule I never take anything in the National Enquirer seriously, but I can understand why someone would take them to court.

I treat them like I treated Weekly World News.

That's a bold rule you live by.

 

[NoFaceNico]

No we don't, just because he has retreated from public life doesn't mean anybody can just say anything about him. He doesn't owe you an answer.

Uh no.

When you sue someone, they have a right to confront their accuser and build a defense just as the accuser builds their case. If he goes forward with his suit, he will have to open up and provide answers to their questions whether he likes it or not. That's the direction he chose to take with a lawsuit. He could have made a public statement against their article or just kept to himself as he was before and in that case you're right, he doesn't owe anyone an answer. But now with a lawsuit it is a matter in open court.

 

[slit]

Uh no.

When you sue someone, they have a right to confront their accuser and build a defense just as the accuser builds their case. If he goes forward with his suit, he will have to open up and provide answers to their questions whether he likes it or not.

Uh yes.

He doesn't owe YOU anything unless you are part of the case. You said WE need clear answers. Are you the Enquirer?

 

[Xyrmellon]

It's funny how this is the only one anybody can ever cite in the "they didn't make it up" column.

A quick Google search would show you:

-Gary Hart affair
-They broke the case in the Ennis Cosby murder by offering a reward
-Tiger Woods (how many women there really were)
-Some of the OJ stuff
-Rush Limbaughs drug addiction

and more. Yes, they're sensational, but they do get quite a bit right.

 

[NoFaceNico]

Uh yes.

He doesn't owe YOU anything unless you are part of the case. You said WE need clear answers. Are you the Enquirer?

I'm part of the public and the court will be a matter of public record. WE are owed answers if that's where he wants to take his claim.