‘Atomic Blonde’ Producer David Guillod to Stand Trial for Sex Assaults

Hollywood talent management and Atomic Blonde producer David Guillod is preparing to go to court for alleged sexual assault Ted actress Jessica Barth when she was drunk and passed out after a dinner meeting in May 2012, a judge ruled Monday.

But in a separate decision that legal experts called “unusual,” a judge in Santa Maria, California, dismissed charges involving four other Jane Doe accusers in her high-profile case. Guillod. Judge James Voysey of Santa Barbara County questioned the credibility of the four women based on what they knowingly said or did in the hours immediately following the alleged assault.

Aside from Barth, the only other Jane Doe with alleged survivors of Monday’s hearing is an unidentified woman who claims Guillod raped and dominated her in late 2018 after meeting her at her home. restaurant in Los Angeles, where she worked as a waitress. The unidentified woman told investigators Guillod lured her back to his nearby Sherman Oaks mansion by claiming his daughter would be present as they continued a conversation that began with two glass of wine at her workplace. The woman accused Guillod, now 55, of serving her a third glass of wine at his home, and soon after, she started having bad luck.

“After that, her memory went fuzzy, piece by piece, piece by piece,” Santa Barbara County Deputy District Attorney Jennifer Karapetian said during Monday’s closing argument. At a glance, Jane Doe 5 could recall the scene where Guillod kissed her and “felt disgusted,” the prosecutor said. “She remembers [Guillod] vaginal intercourse with her and was strongly overturned and overwhelmed. ”

Guillod’s defense attorney, Philip Cohen, attacked the credibility of all six accusers in arguments that ended Monday. In the case of the service worker, he said the woman knowingly told the investigator she had waited two years to report the rape allegation because at first she “abbreviated” as “” you damn it and this disgusting old man loves you.”

Judge Voysey said on Monday he had no “benefit of direct witness statements following the incident” before making his decision to bring Jane Doe 5’s lawsuit to trial. “I just have a very horrible story she told,” the judge said. “Is that evidence beyond a reasonable doubt? I do not know. Is that the probable cause? It’s correct.”

In Barth’s case, Judge Voysey said he found the probable cause after reading text messages that Barth – who spoke publicly about her case but identified as Jane Doe 2 in hearing – sent to actresses Felicia Terrell and Guillod shortly after the alleged assault, the same day she went to the UCLA Rape Center for a four-hour sexual assault test.

“What I consider is what happened immediately after the event happened,” the judge said. “[Barth’s] statement on May 23, 2012, very much in line with what she claimed, about being so drunk that she doesn’t remember what happened. ”

“I miss zero from last night and I feel like he’s taking advantage of me,” Judge Voysey said, reading one of Barth’s passages to Terrell in court.

But when it comes to four other Jane Does – who allege they were raped while drunk and unconscious by Guillod between 2015 and 2020 – Judge Voysey said he was unable to find a probable cause.

In the case of Jane Doe 1, Judge Voysey said he simply could not believe that the young assistant was raped by Guillod in December 2014 after a night of binge drinking because the 21-year-old woman was still stay and work at Santa Barbara’s. wine for the rest of the weekend, instead of running away from the Buellton Marriott to get out of Guillod, who was 47 years old and a senior boss at her company at the time, Intellectual Artist Manager .

None of Jane Does testified at the preliminary hearing, and Judge Voysey stated that prevented him from assessing their credibility. In the case of Jane Doe 1, the judge said he instead relied on statements from retreat attendee Jeff Morrone, a fellow with the Board of Intellectual Artists, who knowingly said he testified Jane Doe 1 “cuddles” with Guillod the day after the alleged assault.

Deputy District Attorney Alexander Harrison told the court that Morrone’s statement was “at odds” with another company executive identified as Rebecca Ewing. He said Ewing recalled Jane Doe 1 acting quiet and retreating the next day, looking out of the ordinary in a hoodie and no makeup. Harrison said Ewing also recounted that the women and men were separated the next day and that she took a photo showing Jane Doe 1 on the opposite side of the table with Guillod at lunch later that weekend .

“There is reason to doubt [Morrone’s] statement,” said Harrison. “To turn it into something consensus reduces [the company’s] legal responsibility. I want the court to consider, he has an incentive to minimize the extraordinary nature of the action. “

Judge Voysey was adamant with his order.

“When I hear an allegation of rape, I look at the facts,” he said. “She was very drunk. She is dancing on the table. She drank all 10 glasses of wine. Her dress was pulled up high so everyone could see her underwear. Her behavior is outrageous. She was excessively drunk. But look what happened the next day. If she feels like something has happened to her, she won’t stay there. It was Saturday night. She would go back to LA and say, ‘I’ve had enough of this. I finished this,’ and left. That would be reasonable and consistent for people who feel they have been raped.

“I watched what she did. She has returned. She ‘cuddled’ him,” the judge continued. “I just don’t find her believable because of that behavior.”

Judge Voysey also denied rape charges from two Jane Does, who allege that Guillod raped them on the night of the same day in January 2015 after giving them alcohol allegedly laced with something. He cited the women’s messages to Guillod after the incident, which was pleasant and did not accuse him of any wrongdoing.

Jane Doe 6’s case involves an unidentified Russian woman who met Guillod on the Luxy dating app in 2020, while he lost custody on $1 million bail after when he pleaded not guilty to the alleged attacks on the first four Jane Does.

At the time, the 28-year-old woman, while Guillod was 53, told investigators she had fainted after drinking alcohol at Guillod’s home on a second date and woke up to find him having sex. with her. In her final argument, Cohen argued that the woman recalled telling Guillod she did not consent to anal penetration, and Guillod complied. He also highlighted a written exchange later that morning in which Guillod wrote, “had a great time, hope you do too” to which the woman replied forcefully. mean, “me too, good night.”

Judge Voysey’s decision means Guillod is no more face a possible life sentence in the case. His bail was reduced from $2 million to $100,000, and he is ordered to return to court next month to re-arrange on eight counts related to Barth and Jane Doe 5.

Santa Barbara County prosecutors, meanwhile, have many options to revive the case, experts say Rolling Stone. They can ask the newly assigned trial judge to review and possibly overturn Judge Voysey’s decision. They could file a new case and hold a new preliminary hearing, possibly calling Jane Does to the witness stand this time. Or they could try the route of a secret grand jury.

“My office will evaluate the case based on Judge Voysey’s rulings and decide how to proceed from here,” Karapetian said. Rolling Stone.

“I wouldn’t be surprised at all if they refused to be able to argue with another judge,” said Samuel Dordulian, a former sex crime prosecutor in Los Angeles County who now represents victims in the cases. civil court, said.

“They’ll probably expect another judge to have a higher appreciation for how people don’t always react the way you’d expect out of embarrassment or stigma,” he said. Rolling Stone. “It is not uncommon for survivors to still not appreciate or even process what really happened. They are often very confused. It took a few days for them to reminisce and rethink what had happened. So it’s not uncommon for them to still seem like they’re still being intimate with someone, cuddling or holding hands, because they’re still processing. They are not sure. They don’t come out and scream, ‘I just got raped, don’t touch me. “They’re still processing. It takes days if not weeks or even longer.”

In the case of Jane Doe 1, she visited the UCLA Rape Center on December 16, 2014, two days after the alleged assault.

“It’s unusual for a case like this to be dismissed in the first place because the standard of evidence is so much lower than the ‘evidence beyond reasonable doubt’ required at trial,” said attorney Leonard Levine. , a powerful defense attorney unrelated to this case, told Rolling Stone.

“It is very unusual to dismiss a rape case like this – where the allegation is, ‘He raped me’ – based on how [an alleged victim] Levine said. “If this case goes to trial, prosecutors will bring in a rape trauma specialist who will testify that this is not unusual, that women have no idea what happened, they embarrassed or scared, some women even go out with their rapist again for various reasons. So there are a lot of psychological reasons why, in the opinion of some experts, this would happen. As a defense attorney, I would argue, there is another plausible explanation: That didn’t happen. But those are often argued in front of a jury. For a judge to reach that conclusion, especially when there is no confidence in the witness [through live testimony]is unusual. ”

Barth first detailed her allegations against Guillod in a 2017 guest column in The Wrap. She did not name him in her original post, but she did identify him publicly a few days later, telling The Wrap that another alleged victim had read her post. and contact Guillod’s name in the subject line of the email.

https://www.rollingstone.com/movies/movie-news/atomic-blonde-david-guillod-rape-assault-trial-jessica-barth-1357071/ ‘Atomic Blonde’ Producer David Guillod to Stand Trial for Sex Assaults

Sarah Ridley

USTimesPost.com is an automatic aggregator of the all world’s media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, all materials to their authors. If you are the owner of the content and do not want us to publish your materials, please contact us by email – admin@ustimespost.com. The content will be deleted within 24 hours.

Related Articles

Back to top button