You are on page 1of 5
(ONE CNN CENTER, Atlanta, GA 90803-2762 DAVID ©. VIGILANTE ‘Senior Vice President - Logal May 31, 2018 Via Electronic Mail Robert M. Schwartz, Esq. Irell & Manella, LLP 1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Re: Morgan Freeman Dear Mr. Schwartz: ‘These are the words of your client to a young female reporter, captured on video: Freeman: “My goodness, are you married?” Crossan: “No.” Freeman: “Fool around with older guys?” This outtake was published last week by Entertainment Tonight in the wake of CNN's report, when it became apparent that the ET reporter was not alone in her experience of being on the receiving end of sexualizing remarks from Mr. Freeman. ‘While the words are disturbing to read it is even more uncomfortable to watch. Mr. Freeman’s eyes move from Ms. Crossan’s legs, to her face, and to her legs before he licks his lips and says, “I'm just asking.” As Ms. Crossan gets up to leave Mr. Freeman looks her up and down and stares at her behind as she walks away and mutters, “look at yourself.” female-reporters-in-past-et This behavior is exactly what CNN’s report is about. CNN’s reporting shows that Mr. Freeman has a troubling habit of demeaning and sexualizing women, whether they encounter him professionally or work for him, which goes back years. That is the gravamen of CNN’s reporting. It was accurate when reported by CNN. It remains accurate now. The story addresses one of the most important social questions of our time: should women be forced to endure this: type of treatment in exchange for the privilege of engaging in their chosen profession? As you know, the central requirement of any retraction demand is that you identify which aspects of the story you contend are false. Under California law that means you must provide “written ‘timetNere Company May 31,2018 Robert M. Schwartz Page 2 notice specifying the statements claimed to be libelous and demanding that those statements be corrected.” Cal. Civil Code sec 48(a)(emphasis added). Your letter does not do that. Designed for press consumption, itis rife with empty speculation, overheated rhetoric, and in some instances plainly false assertions. And this is the first time I have received a letter citing to anonymous Reddit criticism as support for a lawyer's retraction demands. In reality much, if not all of CNN’s report remains unchallenged by you. Rather than identify any specific aspects of the CNN’s report are false or wrong you engage in a lengthy and baseless ad hominem attack on one of the women who reported the story -- because she too was the recipient of these kinds of unwanted remarks — and outright mischaracterizations of the report itself. For example, your accusation that CNN’s reporting was misleading about the extent of the remarks that prompted its investigation is belied by the very text of the article. CNN makes it abundantly clear to the reader that the all the entire encounter was not captured on video. Thus, your central criticism of the report is simply not true, and the suggestion you or your representatives made to multiple media outlets that the entire encounter was recorded is false. You need to correct it. Similarly, you criticize CNN for “downplaying” the reaction of the respective HR personnel, but in fact that is reported in the very next two paragraphs. Same font. Same sized type. Asif that were not reckless enough, you even go so far as to infer that Ms. Melas’s concerns were racially motivated, You know this to be false as well, offered not in furtherance of any legitimate retraction demand but only to advance a cynical diversionary strategy to bolster Mr. Freeman by unfairly threatening and discrediting Ms. Melas. Indeed, Ms. Melas has already received a threat from one Los Angeles publicist who wrote, “I'm alerting all PR people to never allow their male clients to interview with you.” On top of that Ms. Melas and members of her family have received death threats that are striking for their graphic nature and vulgarity. This trolling, your false inferences of racism and the professional bullying Ms. Melas has received are what make so many women afraid to come forward. ‘The overheated protestations in your letter do not cast any shadow on the central gravamen of CNN’s story --- that Morgan Freeman engaged in a pattern of behavior that demeaned and sexualized women, whether or not they were in his employ. And when you consider the admissions Mr. Freeman has made, the aspects of CNN’s reporting that are not challenged by you and the subsequent revelations of others who were victimized by your client it is abundantly clear that the report was accurate. MORGAN FREEMAN DOES NOT DENY SEXUALIZING AND DEMEANING LORI McCREARY ‘You engage in some sleight of hand with your criticism related to Ms. McCreary by denying something CNN did not say -- that your client harassed Lori McCreary. But that is not what CNN May 31,2018 Robert M,Sewate ase reported. CNN wrote: “McCreary herself has also been the subject of demeaning comments by Freeman.” The specific remark Freeman made in front of several hundred people was: “She wants to be thought of as serious, but you can't get away from the short dresses.” Far from denying he made the remarks he actually stood by them (again on video) when he told the Today show: "It was just something I said in jest about when [ first met her, it was more than 20 years ago," he said to Guthrie. "How is that news?"") Although this was already linked to in the article I have included a link for your review: hitps://www.today.com/video/morgan-freeman-talks-see-me-2-magic d reprise-701294 147 * MORGAN FREEMAN DOES NOT CHALLENGE REPORTING THAT HE REPEATEDLY TRIED TO LIFT THE SKIRT OF A YOUNG PRODUCTION ASSISTANT ‘You decline to address many of the very specific allegations made about your client’s conduct in CNN's report, Among them is that of a young female production assistant on “Going In Style” who said she was subjected to almost daily harassment by your client and is quoted as saying about one incident that Freeman, “kept trying to lift up my skirt and asking if I was wearing underwear.” ‘One must assume you are not demanding a retraction of these allegations. * MORGAN FREEMAN DOES NOT CHALLENGE REPORTING THAT HE MASSAGED A YOUNG INTERN WITHOUT HER CONSENT In another situation, CNN reported that it learned of your client’s behavior from a former male employee who was troubled by what he saw. He referred to Freeman as a “creepy uncle.” This employee witnessed Freeman massaging the shoulder a young intern and saw the visible discomfort it created for her ~ the intern got visibly red and wiggled out of Freeman's unwanted grasp. This witness also told others at the time, who corroborate that he told them. Again, your letter is silent about this and this aspect of CNN’s reporting remains unchallenged. * MORGAN FREEMAN DOES NOT CHALLENGE REPORTING THAT HE SEXUALIZED FEMALE ATTENDEES AT HIS 79™ BIRTHDAY PARTY 51 Given that you do not represent Ms. McCreary CNN will not respond to your demands in ths letter, other than to say it stands by its reporting, May 31,2018, Rober M. Scivarte Paget You also decline to dispute an incident CNN confirmed through several sources, including a writer for “Madam Secretary”, at Freeman’s 79" birthday party, where Freeman allegedly went around a circle looking women up and down well inside their personal space. This was described by a witness as follows: Freeman went up to women in the circle and would "stand maybe within an inch of their face and just look them up and down and not say anything, and then would move on to the next woman and he'd stand like within an inch of their face and look them up and down and not say anything, and it was really, really strange." "It was really weird and he did it to every woman but of course he Gidn't do it to any of the men, He didn't speak to any of the men." Again, your letter does not address CNN’s reporting of the incident. ¢ SUBSEQUENT REVELATIONS FROM OTHER WOMEN WHO WERE SEXUALIZED BY MORGAN FREEMAN FURTHER CORROBORATE CNN’S REPORTING In addition to the exchange included at the top of this letter, others have also come forward on the record. Activist and former Entertainment Tonight correspondent Janet Mock shared her own experience. And again, your client's remarks were captured on video: “You got your dre halfway between your knee and your hips, and you sit down across from me and you cross your legs.” (The video of this is included in the first link above.) And this is how it made Ms. Mock feel: "For me, as a young woman of color, who is a reporter and a fan of popular culture, I was deeply disappointed that someone who was seen as America's grandfather was susceptible to such disturbing behavior and felt comfortable enough to do that as cameras were rolling, and that he could take claim of my body and look at it before even looking into my eyes.” Similarly, People magazine published a first person account by reporter Maggie Parker. Ms. Parker wrote about a lewd comment your client made implying he wanted to see her naked at the premiere of “Now You See Me” in 2013. CNN included both Mock’s and Parker's accounts in its May 26 follow-up article. They are also not addressed in your letter. In contrast to the disturbing omission of any reference to these damning incidents and reports, your letter devotes significant attention to Tyra Martin and her reaction to the remarks made to her by Mr. Freeman that CNN reported. But while you focus on the fact that Ms. Martin found Mr. May 31,2018 Robert Me Schaar Pages Freeman's remarks less upsetting than have other recipients, you ignore the fact that CNN reported that that was her reaction. Further, neither you nor Ms. Martin deny the referenced remarks by Mr. Freeman were in fact made. All told, CNN’s report included information from 16 different sources and it spoke to many more in pursuit of this story. The women on the receiving end of your client’s unsolicited attention and approaches are often afraid to come forward by name. As Ms. Melas’s own experience has shown, they often receive threats to their livelihood and their well-being from partisans for the accused. That is the power dynamic people like Morgan Freeman abuse when they deny the basic dignity of a woman they treat as an object. Is it your position that these women and witnesses are lying? To the contrary, ‘we must assume that Mr. Freeman’s apology is ari acknowledgment that he said and did much if not all of what CNN reported, and that his behavior was unacceptable, or else what was he apologizing for? Indeed, reduced to its essence Mr. Freeman does not deny the claims but says he was just joking. That is not a defense. It is not an excuse. And it does not render the CNN report inaccurate. As [am sure you are aware, California has a robust Anti-SLAAP law. See Civ. Proc. Code secs. 425.26 et seq. Your baseless threats aimed at scaring CNN off this important story are exactly what this law was designed to protect against. Importantly, this law requires an award of attomeys" fees to a prevailing defendant. CNN has successfully pursued this remedy in the past and will not hesitate to do so here. This is undoubtedly a matter a serious public concern and merits the extensive efforts CNN invested into this important story about such a well-known public figure. CNN stands by its reporting and is prepared to fight aggressively any attempt to intimidate it into silence. Lastly, in your haste to publicize your outrageous accusations against CNN and its reporters it is apparent that you did not even run a superficial conflict check. Had you done so you would have earned that your firm has been actively representing CNN and its affiliates in several intellectual property matters. In fact, your partner and my colleague communicated as recently as this, week. And as you are undoubtedly aware, you personally have represented our sister div: ‘Warner Bros. in numerous cases, and your firm is currently representing Warner Bros. in an industry-wide class action lawsuit. The tone and content of your letter is already beyond the pale, but this context makes it especially troubling to us. We will be evaluating how to handle this serious conflict of interest and unfortunate breach of good faith over the coming days. mn This leter is sent without prejudice and is not intended to be an exhaustive recitation of CNN’ dies, privileges and defenses under the law, all of which are hereby reserved.

You might also like