‘X-Men’ Director Bryan Singer Accused of Sexually Abusing Teenage Boy

'X-Men' Director Bryan Singer Accused of

The filmmaker's lawyer calls suit 'absurd and defamatory'

“X-Men: Days of Future Past” director Bryan Singer has been accused of sexually abusing a teenage boy in 1999 in a lawsuit filed Wednesday in Hawaii federal court.

The plaintiff, Michael Egan, claims he was 15 years old when Singer forcibly sodomized him, among other allegations. Egan’s lawyers, led by Jeff Herman, allege that Singer provided him with drugs and alcohol and flew him to Hawaii on more than one occasion in 1999. His suit claims battery, assault, intentional infliction of emotional distress and invasion of privacy by unreasonable intrusion, and it seeks unspecified damages.

Singer’s attorney, Marty Singer, called the lawsuit “absurd and defamatory.”

“The claims made against Bryan Singer are completely without merit,” the attorney said. “We are very confident that Bryan will be vindicated.”

SEE ALSO: The Secret Deal Behind ‘Spider-Man 2’ Plugging ‘X-Men’ (EXCLUSIVE)

Marc Collins-Rector, the former chairman of Digital Entertainment Network, an ambitious Internet startup that sputtered in the dotcom bust of 2000, is also cited in the Singer lawsuit, although he is not named as a defendant. He is accused of initiating the sexual abuse of Egan and arranging for Singer to assault Egan at a house in Encino, Calif.

Collins-Rector is a registered sex offender, having pleaded guilty in 2004 to luring minors across state lines for sexual acts.

The lawsuit alleges that Collins-Rector and his Digital Entertainment Network investors, including Singer, would lure young men to a house dubbed the M & C Estate in Encino to intoxicate and sexually assault them and that many in the Hollywood industry were aware of the “notorious parties.”

Egan, an aspiring actor and model at the time, claims that Singer provided him with several drugs, including cocaine, a pill identified as “green triangle” which is believed to be a reference to the drug Ecstasy, Xanax, Rohypnol, and Vicodin or Percocet, in addition to alcoholic beverages.

Herman is a sexual abuse attorney based in Boca Raton, Fla., who also represented the plaintiffs who accused Elmo puppeteer Kevin Clash of sexual abuse. He and Egan are scheduled to appear at a press conference on Thursday in Beverly Hills.

“Hollywood has a problem with the sexual exploitation of children,” Herman said in a statement. “This is the first of many cases I will be filing to give these victims a voice and to expose the issue.”

The suit claims that Egan was 14 or 15 when he moved to Los Angeles with his family to pursue an acting career. A friend from a small private school in the San Fernando Valley, Scott Shackley, introduced him to his older brother, Chad, in 1998. Chad Shackley, according to the suit, lived in the M & C Estate in Encino with Collins-Rector, and Egan and Scott Shackley would visit. Eventually, Egan was placed on the DEN payroll, provided with extravagant gifts, and taken via private jet on various trips, along with the opportunity to audition for acting and modeling jobs, the suit states.

But the parties at the M&C Estate were “well known and notorious” among “many men in the Hollywood entertainment industry,” the suit states, as they were “typically sordid and featured sexual contact between adult males and the many teenage boys who were present,” along with the distribution of alcohol and drugs.

Wednesday’s suit graphically detailed one of the encounters at the M & C Estate between Collins-Rector, Singer and Egan:

Collins-Rector ordered Plaintiff out of the pool, and Defendant Singer hugged Plaintiff and grabbed his bare buttocks. They then went to the jacuzzi where Collins-Rector had Plaintiff sit on his lap and fondled Plaintiff’s genitals. Collins-Rector then passed Plaintiff to Defendant Singer and Plaintiff was made to sit on Defendant Singer’s lap. Defendant Singer provided an alcoholic beverage to Plaintiff and mentioned finding a role for him in an upcoming movie that he was directing. Defendant Singer told Plaintiff how “this group” controls Hollywood, and that he was sexy. Defendant Singer masturbated Plaintiff and then performed oral sex upon him. Defendant Singer solicited Plaintiff to perform oral sex upon him which Plaintiff resisted. Defendant Singer flagrantly disregarded Plaintiff’s unwillingness to submit, and forced Plaintiff’s head underwater to make Plaintiff perform oral sex upon him. When Plaintiff pulled his head out of the water in order to breathe, Defendant Singer demanded that he continue which Plaintiff refused. Defendant Singer then forced Plaintiff to continue performing oral sex upon him outside of the pool, and subsequently forcibly sodomized Plaintiff.

When he was 17, Egan claims in the suit, he was flown to Hawaii to stay at the Paul Mitchell estate, and on the first of the trips he was instructed to spend the first two nights in a room with Singer. He claims that Singer forced him to inhale cocaine and later forced him to have oral and anal sex. Egan claims that Singer sexually assaulted him on a second trip to Hawaii as well.

Egan claims in the suit that he never “freely, voluntarily and knowingly consented to these sexual interactions, and often resisted them.”

The filmmaker, 48, is the director 20th Century Fox’s upcoming “X-Men: Days of Future Past” and most recently helmed “Jack the Giant Slayer” for Warner Bros.

(Stuart Oldham contributed to this report.)

Filed Under:

Want to read more articles like this one? SUBSCRIBE TO VARIETY TODAY.
Post A Comment 199

Leave a Reply


Comments are moderated. They may be edited for clarity and reprinting in whole or in part in Variety publications.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

  1. PETER says:

    So why wasn’t all of this outed years ago?

  2. Melissa says:

    If he is guilty I might not see the knew X-Men movies. As much as I want to and cant wait for days of future past and apocalypse . I won’t see a Woody Allen movie because he’s a pedophile! I won’t pay money to support the projects of someone like that

  3. Justin Kelly says:

    If singer loses does this mean the next x-men movie after days of future past might actually be worth watching?

  4. Kimberly says:

    “The Usual Suspects” is about deception by the devil.

  5. Jacques Strappe says:

    Actually, your claim couldn’t be further from the truth. The greatest number of pedophilia cases by far, involve adult men and underage girls.and this typically occurs within a family structure with the pedophile being related to the young female victim most often as a father, stepfather or uncle. The media tends to gloom on to and sensationalize the high profile cases either involving large, storied institutions like the Catholic Church and Penn State or favorite conservative targets like the “immoral”, “liberal” culture of Hollywood and its celebrity inhabitants. There are NOT gradations of acceptable pedophilia whether the adult perpetrator and young victims share the same sex or different–it is ALL reprehensible, immoral and unlawful behavior. I suppose the media fascination with gay pedophilia cases might be tapping into an unspoken consensus that heterosexual pedophilia is just a little more “normal” and acceptable or a little less perverted. This would be horribly wrong, if it were true, and do nothing to address and correct the much more common form of pedophilia crimes being committed each day in this country, even in those “church-going” families living in those “perfect” homes in those “idyllic” communities.

  6. James Jeans says:

    That’s all fine and well, but there’s another little principal in this country called “innocent until proven guilty”. Unfortunately, that means very little to people who’re determined to throw Singer under a bus. Even if he’s found innocent, he’ll be carrying an unspoken stigma against him for the rest of his career. FOX is already pulling trailers with his name on them from TV. It’s like he’s already been convicted, and that’s pretty pathetic.

  7. Masha says:

    Mhm, actually they mostly involve men molesting girls, but yeah.

  8. Todd Brown says:

    Just do a google on Bryan Singer and pool parties, there is pictures of him groping 14 year old boys. It’s disgusting.

    Very very very brave of this victim to come forward. I hope this takes down this sickening Hollywood habit and those that defend and support it. It is just like the Jimmy Saville case in UK.

    Sick in my gut.

  9. rachelkatie says:

    Why wait 15 years?

  10. bryan singer says:

    You guys really don’t read what is going on…the mother took this to the police right away….2 of the people charged fled the country

  11. Lobo says:

    Wait, I thought ghey was the highest calling one could aspire to?

  12. Robert says:

    I agree that the pervert should be punished 100%

  13. Robert says:

    I agree 100%!

  14. Andrew Riley says:

    Casting couches are a thing, and hetero men and women have been accused of using them before and will be again. The fact that gay men and women in Hollywood are accused of using them should come as no surprise. The difference in this case is the plaintiff is claiming ‘forcible sodomy’ that’s criminal and should have been forwarded to the police 15 years ago. Because it wasn’t this case in it’s entirety reads like extortion after the fact. Plain and simple.

    • Larry says:

      I’m pretty sure that ‘extortion’ would entail the plaintiff trying to bribe the defendant before actually filing the lawsuit. And that bribery attempt would then be revealed by Defendant Singer as evidence that there is no basis for the lawsuit.

      Claiming that the lawsuit itself is ‘extortion’ seems a tad bit bassackwards, as there is nothing to be gained now until the defendant is actually found guilty – and if that happens, it means a crime was committed, and it is no longer a case of ‘extortion’.

    • enough is enough says:

      “The difference in this case is the plaintiff is claiming ‘forcible sodomy’ that’s criminal and should have been forwarded to the police 15 years ago. Because it wasn’t this case in it’s entirety reads like extortion after the fact. Plain and simple.”

      So. According to you, if 15 years has passed between an alleged molestation and the public accusation / criminal complaint thereof, the passage of that length of time in and of itself (1) automatically exonerates the person accused of doing the molesting, and (2) automatically convicts the accuser as an extortionist. “Plain and simple.”

      What about 13 years? Does the accused become 13/15 or 86.6% exonerated, and the accuser 86.6% instead of 100% an extortionist?

      What if 20 years has passed? Does the accused get a courtesy gift and the accuser get “extra time” charges?

      Just trying to figure out how you arrived at your personal failsafe standard of “15 years afterward = lyin’ sack o’ sheeet.” And what evidence from legal precedent you have used to arrive at that standard.

      Jerry Sandusky’s Victim No. 10 was first molested in 1997. Grand jury charges re: this victim were not filed until December 2011. A passage of 14 years. Guess that means Victim No. 10 was only 6.7% truthful, right?

      Because every single victim of sexual abuse always speaks up right away. Instantly. Always. In every case. This is universally true. And charges always, always get filed promptly. Lickety-split. Before Friday at 5 PM. Unless Friday is a national holiday. In which case, end of day Thursday. Lag time = LIAR!!!!!

  15. Victoria says:

    Why is Singer hanging around with Marc Collins-Rector, a registered sex offender?

    • rachelkatie says:

      Didn’t the Sandusky victims try to have him arrested back in 1997 if not prior. Wasn’t an attorney mysteriously found dead? Didn’t the prosecution actively seek out more victims once the case finally went to trial? Wasn’t it a criminal case?

      This is a lawsuit 15 years later. It just seems odd to wait so long and not pursue criminal charges.

      I won’t be shocked if it’s true but it does make one wonder why it took so long and why there is no criminal trial.

  16. PETER says:

    The parents are always also responsible. As is the victim himself for getting into a dangerous scenario like that and remaining in it. But I work and live in Hollywood and despise gay guys in power who use threats and promises to get sexual favors from young actors. They are truly disgusting.

    • enough is enough says:

      So frequently, there is an unhealthy family dynamic from whence the young person comes, making them vulnerable to exploitation and abuse. The child or teen desperately needs at least one stable, nurturing, positive & unconditionally supportive adult in their life — and, tragically, this is what is all too often lacking. The abuser/predator positions him/herself as that grown-up figure — lavishing the child or teen with (seeming) acceptance, praise, affection (usu not overtly sexual at first, then escalating to the sexual), gifts, etc.

      “Love-bombing.” Very similar to the tactic used in cults. Both cults and pedophiles rely on finding needy, often marginalized people with fragile identities. In both scenarios, it is about power and control. The sexual abuse is a manifestation of this power and control. The sexual violation of one human being by another is one of the worst violations that can happen. In the case of children and teens, sexual molestation can and often does end up scarring them for life, because the abuse interrupts and permanently damages the formation of their sense of self-worth, their emotional makeup, their ability to trust others and both their conscious and subconscious approaches to / engagements in sex.

      I see a lot of comments here along the lines of “teens are not so innocent these days” remarks that are not-so-subtle attempts to minimize not just the specific allegations in this case but also the vile currents of our culture at large. In certain eras and societies, and America was one of them for at least several decades in the 20th century, preserving and protecting the innocence (esp the sexual innocence) of children and youth was seen to be a social good. If your first reaction to this story was one of suspicion as to the character of the teenage Mr. Egan rather than utter disgust and anger at the possibility that the allegations could be true —– I kind of have to wonder why the innocence of young people, and the potential violation thereof, is no longer a primal thing in your heart, and to you, 14- and 15-year-olds are just reflexively and collectively lumped in now with all the other two-legged cretins and hustlers of our species.

      • enough is enough says:

        The euphemism “lost innocence” was a phrase I never used. So, sure, you can go ahead & despise it with regard to sexuality, but since “innocence” can and is frequently used to mean “not experienced” (as in the term “innocence vs. experience” used in artistic themes), “lost innocence” means “no longer not experienced” in that sense. I don’t see this as objectionable, let alone despicable, but you are entitled to your opinion.

        Your second point of criticism is also directed at something I never said. I didn’t criticize anyone for “not immediately condemning Singer.” What I actually said was some people’s immediate & first reaction to this story was to assume nefarious motives on the part of Mr. Egan. I find that reaction strange as the first thing that would come to someone’s mind & to be the first & only thing they comment on.

      • Matthew says:

        First of all, I have to say I despise the euphemism of “lost innocence” regarding sexual activity.

        Secondly, maybe those you’re criticizing for not immediately condemning Singer are observing the foundational tenet of out legal system: presumption of innocence for the accused, until proven otherwise.

  17. Aaron says:

    While I do understand the rage people feel about this, our laws here in America are crazy concerning sex offenders. If someone gets drunk and urinates in public they can be labeled a sex offender and have to register their entire life. Each state has very different laws that are so inconsistent that it makes it very difficult for anyone to be rehabilitated. But there are heaps of people here who have gone through therapy or programs and developed conscience and the ability to make good choices and have been rehabilitated. It’s terrible that they had to do something and get caught in order to get better, but people do get better. I’m not trying to defend sex offenders but the more educated we are the more we can help stop this behaviour. Why waste money on someone who peed in public vs. someone who actually committed a sex crime? I hope Bryan Singer is innocent. I like his movies and he seems intelligent in his interviews. This guy sueing him sounds like a typical young gay guy trying to make it big without doing any kind of work…they hunt older, rich gay guys and whore themselves out to them, then when it doesn’t work out they sue them for rape, etc. This happens all the time with younger twinky gay kids. But if there are older gay guys in Hollywood doing this, they need to be stopped.

    • Victoria says:

      Um, Aaron? The laws aren’t there to “rehabilitate ” sex offenders. As you don’t seem to know, most pedophiles cannot be rehabilitated. The laws are there to protect the public from sex offenders.

      And what does peeing in public have to do with this case?

      I also recall that both Corey Haim and Corey Feldman were molested as kids by some bigwig Hollywood power play, and that neither of them came forward until they were in their thirties.

      Additionally, some news organizations are reporting that the alleged victim of Singer also filed a report with the police. You don’t get any money by going to the police.

      And it you think it’s easy filing a civil sex abuse suit, or that it’s an easy way to get money. I had a friend who filed a suit against a prominent child psychiatrist after he came forward and learned that his case was too old for a criminal case. The doctor’s lawyers’ raked the poor victim over the coals, and subjected the victim to many degrading depositions.

      But the victim prevailed. Other victims of the doctor came forward, and when he learned that, he quickly settled with my friend.

      But filing a sexual abuse suit is a painful, painful ordeal for all victims.

    • enough is enough says:

      Singer is not being accused of peeing in public.

      But nice try in attempting to shift the blame to the plaintiff here. (“This guy sueing [sic] him sounds like a typical young gay guy trying to make it big without doing any kind of work …”)

      So you are well-versed in Mr. Egan’s entire work history, are you? You have interviewed his agent, his manager, have compiled documentation of auditions, training, expenses, etc?

      If there are, as you say, “typical young gay guy(s)” who “try to make it big without doing any kind of work,” then it is especially incumbent upon the people (in this case, adult gays) in positions of power who are potential targets of the teenage hustlers, to inoculate themselves against blackmail & extortion attempts.

      It is the SAME unwritten rule of common sense as with pro athletes & rock stars, and the young female groupies who throw themselves at them. 1. Make sure the person throwing themselves at you is age of legal consent. 2. Parties, strangers, booze & drugs are a baaaaaad combination. 3. Do not put yourself in a situation where you can be accused of rape. Ever. Your reputation, your career, your wealth and your very freedom are at stake. If protecting yourself involves having other (non-accusable) people in the same room, signed consent forms, or recording the, ahhh, proceedings (in accord with whatever the laws are regarding making such recordings), then so be it. Better awkward than in court or in prison.

      Singer was in his mid-30s at the time of these alleged incidents. Plenty old enough to know better, if he was indeed being targeted by person or persons with intentions of extorting him.

      As others have mentioned, there are enough details in just the allegations recited in this article which can be investigated.

    • Very level-headed and in touch with what’s happening. It’s harder for older people to understand this twink / daddy phenomenon, and how quickly our youth is growing up – watching hardcore acts at the click of a button at 11 and 12, when we walked a mile to buy a Playboy.

  18. Mr. Bernard Wijeyasingha says:

    These days 15 year old “boys”, especially those in that part of the nation (Hollywood) are not that innocent. Even across the nation 15 year old teenagers know the difference. They are as “mature” about human sexuality as any adult. Most of them have already engaged in sex. The stench of “opportunism” cannot be ruled out. Lesson here is if one is wealthy, then do not put yourself in a situation where you can be sued.

    • Larry says:

      Wow. I thought the lesson here was ‘Don’t screw around with minors’.

      Are you saying that if someone isn’t wealthy, they can play tiddlywinks with a minor in a hot tub, or engage in other activities that would result in a lawsuit against someone more wealthy?

      Your willingness to excuse those in Hollywood solidifies my decision, years ago, never to pay to see a movie again.

    • Victoria says:

      Absolute stuff and shocking nonsense. You sound like a pedophile excuser. 15 year old boys are NOT as mature as any adults. I know boys who were molested at 15 by priests who have committed suicide.

    • Les Legato says:

      No 15 year old has the level of experience or knowledge to interact sexually with adults without the adult taking advantage.

      Stop defending pederasty.

    • enough is enough says:

      “Know the difference” about what? What are you implying? I somehow missed the allegation where Mr. Egan claimed he was a virgin until Mr. Singer deflowered him.

      Mr. Egan’s sexual history (whether plentiful, lacking, or somewhere in between) as a teenager is IMMATERIAL and IRRELEVANT. This is an accusation of a SERIOUS CRIME. Not someone crying that their innocent widdle feewings got huwwt.

      Unless this case can be shown to be an extortion attempt, unless the allegations can be proven false, unless Mr. Egan can be tied to other similar accusations against other similar powerful Hwood figures, then Mr. Egan’s character is NOT ON TRIAL.

      By the way, “ambitious” does not equal “asking to get sexually abused.” Because you seem to be confused on this point.

  19. Doth he protest too much? says:

    while i don’t doubt the ‘exploitation’ of younger people (male & female) by older persons in positions of power and influence – this kid wasn’t “forced” to continually return to these parties nor be flown to hawaii. doesn’t ever make abuse of ‘power’ right but ….

    • The victimization process is not one defining act of sodomy or drugging, it’s months of coercion, blackmail, and psychological warfare. Is the wife partly to blame for staying with a husband after the first spousal rape? Is a patient to blame for seeing a doctor or therapist after they’ve molested them once? Your blaming the victim bullshit belongs in the last century. That day is done. Think before you speak.

  20. Paul Verlaine says:

    It’s not enough just to be a pretty young man There’s a price to pay to be a movie star.

  21. VAL says:

    Believe. Every. Word. This type of grotesque behavior happens in this town everyday to young teens (Boys and Girls). Often unreported for fear of safety,backlash, and public scrutiny.

    Watch any recent interview with Corey Feldman. This scenario happened to Corey Feldman, Corey Haim (RIP), members of NSync (Pearlman case), children of Woody Allen (Pedophilia against his own children), and countless others who are equally ashamed to come forward.

    History of evil repeats itself and Singer has (and many others) a history of this deviant perversion and association with others who were convicted of such (DEN); For this reason it is plausible to believe the victim in this case.

    The moral of these insipid tales: Parents, DO NOT leave your children alone around these mentally ill, perverse men and yes, that may include your church as well.

    Equally, the law should make even the thought as heinous as the act: A punishment that should include castration, shock therapy (Real rehab), while in solitary confinement.

  22. Da5id says:

    Apt Pupil Scandal: The Sequel.

  23. snapjudy says:

    Michael Egan is very brave for coming forward about being sexually abused by director Bryan Singer. It takes a lot of courage to speak up and take action about being sexually abused as a child. This is not an easy thing to do, but it’s very rare that a child predator has only one victim. Some have many. Child predators need to be kept far away from kids forever.

    Something to keep in mind-
    Child predators are very cunning and manipulative. They know every trick on how to groom, threaten, lie, and put into their victims to
    keep quiet. They also appear to do a lot of goods things, they can be very charismatic and you may think they would never harm a child. They have to be this way, in order to not get caught and to continue to abuse

    Sexual predators are often powerful and well-loved. It would be comforting if those who preyed on the vulnerable were obvious social misfits whose appearance would somehow set off alarm bells and give us the willies or the creeps. They rarely do. Usually, predators are among the last people we would suspect of sexually violating others. While they are grooming the child and even family members, they devote lots of time and energy building trust with them by giving them money and gifts. They tend to make the child feel that they are special and loved.

    We must overcome the dangerous myth that because someone is successful or warm or caring, he or she couldn’t have done that!
    So let’s hope that anyone who may have knowledge or may have been harmed by Bryan Singer or anyone connected to a Hollywood sex ring, will find the courage to speak up, get help, and contact law enforcement, no matter how long ago it happened.

    Silence is not an option anymore, it only hurts, and by speaking up there is a chance for healing, exposing the truth, and therefore protecting others.
    Judy Jones, SNAP Midwest Associate Director, USA, 636-433-2511, SNAPJudy@gmail.com
    (SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, is the world’s oldest and largest support group for clergy abuse victims. SNAP was founded in 1988 and has more than 15,000 members. Despite the word “priest” in our title, we have members who were molested by religious figures of all denominations, including nuns, rabbis, bishops, and Protestant ministers and increasingly, victims who were assaulted in a wide range of institutional settings like summer camps, athletic programs, Boy Scouts, etc.)

  24. rjschwarz says:

    Corey Feldman suggested similar things about Hollywood. I wonder if he was talking about the same gang.

    I’ll give Singer the benefit of the doubt, the claim that he took the kid to Hawaii as said should be easy enough to prove or disprove and the rest will fall from that.

  25. Baffled says:

    Where were the kid’s parents during all this? They let their 14 year old son fly unaccompanied to Hawaii to shack up with some strange man? I think they should be the real target of this lawsuit.

  26. Kevin says:

    This is the kind of thing for which there would be evidence, specifically in the form of flight records for the accuser. Hold off on deciding who you believe until we see what evidence there is.

  27. The Only Gaffer says:

    Yeah, it’s all the fault of liberals. And mutants. Don’t forget to blame the mutants.

  28. Cookie says:

    The timing of the lawsuit seems suspect, but the fact that Singer hangs with a convicted pedophile and they were at the alleged parties together is equally suspect. Even if he’s found guilty of no crime, using your power in this way for aspiring, young actors is gross, and it would be regardless of the director’s sexual orientation.

  29. joanieday says:

    Egan’s lawyer needs to look into what happened on the set of “Apt Pupil” a few years ago when minors were order (by Singer) to drop their towels during a shower scene. Rumor has it that some of the stills from this scene disappeared. I think some suits were filed in court but do not know the outcome.

  30. Melissa says:

    It’s true what “Sofia says” said that when people have stuff like that happen to them, it can take years to come forward and many victims don’t ever report the abuse they suffered. The statistics on rape and sexual abuse all over the world are inaccurate because so many cases go unreported. I live in Australia and in the past few years there have been several stories on sexual abuse that occurred in boys homes and orphanages decades ago and all these men in their fifties and sixties have only now been able to talk about the things that happened to them when they were younger than ten. I do know that there are some disgusting people out there that are opportunists and wrongly accuse people of rape and sexual abuse to try to get a pay day. But any allegations should be investigated. I believe in innocence until proven guilty and none of us really know what happened in this case except the people involved. What ever happened I think that pedophiles are the scum of the earth and I think anyone who is proven guilty of it should be tortured to death, because they are guilty of torturing their victims and people shouldn’t have to pay taxes that pay for them to go to prison and be put in protection. Two of the things I hate the most about the laws in my country is that gay marriage is still not legal here and when pedophiles are convicted of doing these awful things to people 98% of the time at least the sentences they get are too light, when they go to jail they are put into separate part of the jail so they don’t get murdered by the other crims( everyone knows that if they commit a crime and go to jail there is a risk of getting stabbed, beaten, raped or murdered, but pedos are given more walls, bars and guards to keep them from those same risks as people that have committed less serious and harmful crimes, and its the tax payers that foot the bill). They should be jailed for life without parole at the very least as they can’t help what they’re attracted to and therefore cannot be rehabilitated! There is no sex offender registry in Australia and the most fucked up thing is that it’s against the law to publicly name convicted sex offenders, and you can actually go to jail for doing so. There is an amazing radio host here called Darren Hinch who was put under house arrest for two years I think it was for naming a pedophile on his radio show and the only reason he wasn’t jailed was because he was undergoing cancer treatment at the time, Im pretty sure he got off his house arrest early but it never should’ve happened to begin with, and as awesome as he is as soon as he got off house arrest he named another one and got away with it that time. If I ever found myself being attracted to a child I would do the world a favour and kill myself straight away, and any pedophiles reading this I beg you to do the same!

  31. MichaelZ says:

    To be clear, Singer AND Egan are equally guilty. Egan is guilty of having sex to quench his thirst for fame, and then being an opportunist, blackmailing Singer when the fame thing didn’t work out. The “forced to do this and forced to do that” bullshit is ridiculous.

    Singer is guilty of using his power to seduce underage GAY teenagers who wouldn’t give him the time of day without his money & power. FOR DECADES that I know of first hand.

    Egan will get a settlement from Singer, orchestrated by the king of all douches (Marty Singer). Welcome to Hollywood!

    • enough is enough says:

      “Equally guilty”? Are you freaking kidding? Are you a NAMBLA mouthpiece? A teenager does NOT have the same capacity for maturity or judgment that an adult does. The nerve cells in the frontal lobes of their brains lack the same amount of myelin that adult brains do. As a result, the nerve cells are not fully “connected” — thus, the notoriety of teenagers for not thinking long-term and being unable to evaluate the full, complex and often years-down-the-road consequences of their actions.

      In the eyes of the law, teens are NOT viewed as adults, unless particularly extreme behavior (notably, homicidal violence without any remorse, and demonstrated psychopathic tendencies) is involved.

      In addition to the wildly unequal judgment & moral development between Mr. Egan and Mr. Singer at the time of these alleged incidents due to the age disparity (Mr. Singer would have been in his mid-30s), there was also the wildly unequal power differential between them. There can be NO equality when the relationship is so lopsided and one person has enormous amounts of money & power, and the other person is a nobody whose career prospects & livelihood depend upon pleasing the powerful person and/or remaining silent about abuse.

      Furthermore, the allegations never state that Mr. Egan gave Mr. Singer drugs or alcohol. HELLO. This alone would have been highly illegal even if no sexual contact had occurred. People who have done this have faced felony charges in many states.

      Only if the alleged sexual contact was consensual, and done in the context *without* drugs or alcohol, would you then, MAYBE, be in the territory of “law was broken but nobody got hurt.” (Although the law is the law for a reason … refer back to first paragraph about youths’ lack of capacity for sound judgment.)

      But “equally guilty”? That is an incredibly repulsive assertion, and reflects an abhorrent moral stance.

  32. Jake says:

    Was Cruise and Travolta at the Encino party?

  33. Kevin P Stiles says:

    How long did they “wait” for that lostprophets guy? Too long.

    Singer has previous cases like this and bought himself out of it. It looks like it finally caught up with him.

    His day has come. Goodbye sir your scumbag child abusing type not wanted here.

  34. Beat Me Up says:

    Amm, regardless if these ‘allegations’ are true or not isn’t it sort of irresponsible to post all the details here? Might be best to wait if/or/until they are proven in a court of law. This is Bryan Singer, not some chump B movie director (as much as I dislike the trailer to the above film.) Where’s the respect and is this in the public interest? I think not.

    • enough is enough says:

      “This is Bryan Singer, not some chump B movie director (as much as I dislike the trailer to the above film.) Where’s the respect and is this in the public interest?”

      Your comment doesn’t make sense.

      — You imply that Brian Singer is “too big” of a name to get this kind of accusation splashed all over the news. (“Where’s the respect?”) And then you suggest the story is not newsworthy (“is this in the public interest?”). Can’t have it both ways. The bigger the name, the more likely something is to be considered news.

      — In the context of this story, how does having directed the X-Men franchise separate Mr. Singer from “some chump B movie director”? Are you suggesting that Singer is too successful and/or too well-known to …. what, exactly? To be accused of a crime like this? To have stories hit the news about his being accused of a crime like this? Is there a special moral authority // free pass (“one rape, three gropes, five glances at naked minors”) that a director gets if he/she has > $100 million movies, but which a “chump B movie director” would be denied just cuz he/she hasn’t directed a big hit?

      I thought everyone was supposed to be equal before the law here in America.

      (I know. HA HA. GET REAL. But in earnest … using box office as a measure of that which confers respect, moral authority and unaccountability to law and society? Seriously?)

    • Where is the respect? He makes shit with a high gloss on it, are you kidding me? The biggest opportunity of his career he took a shit on Superman. And the lawsuit is public record, and this news magazine wants hits and traffic to their sponsors in the margin. Anything else?

    • Kevin P Stiles says:

      Latest news: Age 15!!!!!!

      It’s looking worse and worse for Mr Singer. His ass is in jail.

  35. Jdrv says:

    “Egan, who is now in his 30s and will appear at a Thursday news conference at the Four Seasons Hotel in L.A., was forcibly sodomized by the director when he was 15 in the late-1990s,”

    That’s right he was underage when he got ass raped while drugged. The more people defend this guy the more we know you are paid shills or worse pedos your damn self.

    • Ed Anderson says:

      It is clear by this story mentioning the victim’s full name and how he was raped, that the intention of this writer is to embarrass this victim and scare other victims not to come forward in homosexual rape cases. This is more of a political attack from the homosexual community on the victim than anything. In most rape cases, if the victim is a woman, her name is never disclosed to the public.If this were a catholic priest, or a woman things would be different.

      • Aaron says:

        The plaintiff/”victim” went public by filing a lawsuit using his real name, rather than filing with an alias. That was the plaintiff’s decision, which was made in collaboration with his attorney. The writer is not held to any standard of care concerning privacy, that the plaintiff/”victim” and his attorney are not holding for him.

  36. John says:

    The age of consent in Hawaii is 16, making pedophile or child abuse comments makes you look dumb and detracts from the real point of this allegation which is rape.

    • That’s not a defense, it’s more of a sign on guilt. Remember, this is a civil matter. That age of consent shit would matter if this were a legal matter. It may be one day, but now it’s simply a lawsuit. Makes it very suspicious how they fly them to where the age of consent is 16.

    • Nick says:

      Well to be fair, anyone can just make up a story. Are we supposed to believe this guys story on face value? 15 years later? How about waiting until theres some evidence before we drag a potentially innocent mans name through the mud? Is that asking too much?

      • enough is enough says:

        Yes, it is reasonable to wait for results of official investigation, multiple sources, corroboration, evidence, etc., before making up one’s mind about someone’s innocence or guilt in the case of an accusation of criminal behavior. By that standard, I think most (not all, but most) of the commenters here have been pretty reasonable, in that they have refrained from “convicting” Mr. Singer of the accusations.

        It is also pretty reasonable, in my opinion, to make a comment along the lines of, “If these accusations are true, this is monstrous and inexusable behavior,” and/or, “If these things are true & it turns out that this is a pattern, he should go to prison.” Again, these sorts of remarks are convicting no one, merely acknowledging the terribly serious nature of the accusations and the extreme punishment that anyone guilty of the accused crimes would deserve.

        Also, “potential innocence” with regard to being accused of a crime covers a wide range of things, and you will find differences of opinion from individual to individual. Every accused is “potentially innocent” unless and until shown to be guilty (“beyond a reasonable doubt” being the legal standard in criminal cases; in the court of public opinion, lines between innocence & guilt are more vague & fluid).

        When a formal accusation of a crime is made, the reputation of the accused immediately comes into play. Both someone’s overall reputation, and their reputation as to the specific thing of which they are being accused. Do note that there are at least half a dozen comments here along the lines of “this ain’t exactly a secret” (Singer’s sexual preferences), and not a single one, zip/zilch/zero, saying, “He has a sterling reputation; he could NEVER have done this.” So … “potentially innocent” in terms of the court of public opinion seems to have been a waymarker that already got passed a while ago.

        What happens legally, of course, another matter. And as several have noted, the accusations will be investigated, and the investigation will give us a glimpse of whether the details stand up to scrutiny and therefore whether they do or don’t lend weight to the accusations & the likelihood that crimes were committed. None of us knows, at this point, the answer to the legal questions.

    • Sofia says:

      It’s morally wrong to drug and rape a teenager. PERIOD.

      • enough is enough says:


        Cocaine is a controlled substance. It would have been illegal for Mr. Singer to have coerced (or “forced,” in the language of the suit) Mr. Egan into ingesting it. Mr. Egan’s age at the time would have no bearing on whether or not such a thing was criminal. If cocaine was purchased and/or supplied by Mr. Singer & pushed to Mr. Egan, then that would have been a crime. The purview of the suit is civil, however, so the cocaine thing is incidental to what Mr. Egan’s legal complaints vs Mr. Singer are. But there is possible criminal behavior beyond whether the sex was or wasn’t consensual.

        As someone else has also mentioned, transporting a minor across state lines and then having sex with that minor makes someone look awfully guilty of something, and knowledgeable of both the law and the serious (and potentially criminal) nature of their behavior, if (a) the minor was legally not the age of consent in their state of residence, and (b) the state to which they were transported had a lower age of consent which made the minor “fair bait” instead of “jail bait.”

        FYI, currently (don’t know what the laws were in 1999), California’s age of consent is age 18. It’s felony to have sex with a minor if there is a more than a 3-yr age difference between the minor and the other person.

      • Jason Gowler says:

        It is morally wrong to RAPE. PERIOD!!!

      • imsnooping says:

        True. But this is a legal matter. As such, the laws are what matter.

        If Egan was above the age of consent in Hawaii at the time this took place, then he’ll have to prove that he didn’t consent to the sex. His age alone isn’t enough to do the trick.

  37. Sandra Manzi says:

    This wouldn’t be the first time someone did this,especially in Hollywood… a young kid wanting to be in the movies and abusive people around…. using young kids, girls and boys….

  38. Pete says:

    Why would he go to Hawaii with them? Twice???? Sounds fishy.

  39. Frank says:

    He did something with Singer and was close to the age limit but was not violently raped. He went back because he was gay and hoped something good would come of it. No one has commented about the DEN connection. They were found guilty of all sorts of nasty things. That the guy was involved with that says something.

    • Sofia says:

      What is this DEN you talk about and the connection?

      • Mike-in-cinci says:

        Digital Entertainment Network. Marc Collins-Rector, the former chairman, is mentioned in the story.

    • Jdrv says:

      Frank you are wrong he said when he refused he was 15 and he grabbed him out of the pool and raped him. Do you think he raped him softly?

      • frank says:

        Now that I think about it the time line does suggest he was under aged during Den. Digital Entertainment Network. That would be a big since the people in Den were convicted. If he had made that claim back then it would have been taken seriously. I thought there was an investigation.

      • frank says:

        I meant that it probably wasn’t forced. Den was a dot.com where all sorts of weird things went on. If this guy worked there it suggests he was not naive at all, although it was an early dot.com so it could overlap when this guy was a teenager.

  40. Pat says:

    Let’s not burn him at the stake until he’s convicted people.

    • The Only Gaffer says:

      No, let’s just investigate him and prepare to read the testimony of dozens of other young men who were molested by this creep.

    • imsnooping says:

      Not to get all technical here…but this is a civil suit, not a criminal indictment. Singer will either be found liable or not (or settle out of court).

      I’m not familiar with the relevant statutes of limitation in California or Hawaii. It’s possible he could still face criminal charges. But 15 years is a long time….and I can’t imagine the evidence a prosecutor might cobble together now would clear the burden.

      The fact that they crossed state lines could throw another wrinkle into it.

      Anyway, the important point here is that Singer has not been charged with crimes. He’s being sued for civil damages (like Ron Goldman’s parents successfully did to OJ after he was acquitted of the murders).

      • Victoria says:

        There’s a well known case in northern California involving child psychiatrist Dr. William Ayres. He had the first ever sex ed series for kids on television, in the 1960s on PBS . He was molesting boys back then. He just pleaded no contest to molesting boys from 15-20 years ago.

        Also, prosecutors in Massachusetts in recent years have convicted priests who molested boys in the 1950s and 1960s.

      • Sofia says:

        In the UK, jimmy saville who never went to court (which sickens me)… ended up the biggest pedophile in history of Britain. Some of the cases were 25-50 years to come
        forward. It’s fear and humiliation that stops them.

        Let’s see what happens when stones are unturned. He has a history.

  41. Bill Hawkins says:

    Plaintiff went back to Hawaii for a second trip?
    Why ???

    • imsnooping says:

      “The Catholic schoolboy went back to mass to serve as an altar boy a 2nd (or 3rd, or 25th) time. Why?”

      It’s important to remember that people below the age of consent *can’t* consent to sex. Thus the moniker.

      Even if Singer could produce a video of the plaintiff saying he wanted it (and knew full well what “it” was), etc. etc., it wouldn’t change anything.

    • James whitely says:

      Threats,bribes, fear, scared??

      Who knows. Answers are needed.

  42. someone is looking for a payday and the timing of this lawsuit is set to capitalize on the imminent release of Singer’s “comeback” movie X-Men: Days of Future Past … any aspiring young model, actor, whatever that gets invited to these type of socials hears the rumors about them long before they attend their first one so they know exactly what they’re getting into and you can always not take the drugs, say no or simply leave if you feel you can’t control yourself … and if career connections are made and you end up successful then there was no “victim”

    • enough is enough says:

      “any aspiring young model, actor, whatever that gets invited to these type of socials hears the rumors about them long before they attend their first one so they know exactly what they’re getting into and you can always not take the drugs, say no or simply leave”

      No, they DON’T “know exactly what they’re getting into.” Even a call sheet that spelled out beforehand the time and location of a premeditated sexual assault, would be insufficient for a teenager to “know exactly what they’re getting into.”

      As for the “just say no or just leave” — You’ve evidently never been a young person in that kind of situation. A fact for which you should be eternally grateful. Those who have been in that situation can attest to the feelings of powerlessness, confusion, paralysis and frequent silence that overtakes them in those critical moments before and during the assault. The young person DOES NOT, CANNOT GRASP, let alone take control of and smartly respond to, a predator in the act of molesting them. That is exactly what the predators count on. Confusion. Immobilization. Shock. Shame. Silence.

      Jeebus. You act like these young people are fully equal, fully aware, self-confident, powerful, in-charge grown-ups. They are not. That is the whole point!!

      • DrEvel1 says:

        And you act as though they are all simpering little boobies, incapable of understanding anything and totally without resources. Isn’t it possible that one of them might be aware of the occasion and even eager for the experience? Can’t you conceive that someone might go into such an engagement without shame or trauma, perhaps even with enjoyment? That the source of whatever shock and shame they might feel is that drummed into them afterward, by all those quasi-well-meaning folks who demand that shock and shame is all that they are allowed to feel? Whatever influence and brainwashing might be exerted before the interaction is undoubtedly overwhelmed by the influence and brainwashing brought to bear by the establishment with its insistence on horror and trauma. Sad.

    • James whitely says:

      It’s not his first time. He had “run ins” with teenage boys on Apt Pupil. He got away with it then.

      This time hopefully he won’t.

      Don’t support child abuse, he was brave to come forward.

      • Jon says:

        Are you talking about the lawsuit from the extras complaining they were forced to strip naked for a SHOWER SCENE? Which was found to be without any merit, thrown out, and is thought that the ‘victims’ were trying to capitalize on the fact that the director and several of the cast and crew were gay.

  43. GoHomeLoser says:

    I don’t know that I’ll ever understand how, as a 17yr old, you could be forced to perform oral and anal sex….at a party, with lots of people about….and be so traumatized by this that you later go with the same guy on a trip, where you’re forced once again to have oral and anal sex, and you’re so traumatized by -this- that you go on a -second- trip with the guy.

    • DrEvel1 says:

      Excellent questions. Also worth asking how a strapping and presumably not unattractive and well-built young 17-year-old can be repeatedly “forced” to have sex – on several occasions – by a middle-aged and out-of-shape man. And then conveniently forget about it until 15 years later, when the “perpetrator” has just had a hit movie come out? Quid pro quo retroactively defined as too much quid, not enough quo? If there is any “trauma” involved, it’s inflicted principally by the folks telling the guy that he ought to feel traumatized and by all those telling him that he has a fat paycheck coming after all those years. Retroactive rewriting of a straightforward commercial transaction is ridiculous, the more so when it’s dressed up in patently illegitimate pseudo-psychology.

  44. How perfectly timed by the plaintiff and his lawyer. Infact the most cynical of people would say its no coincidence this suit comes out on the eve of singers comeback movie. Luckily this wont be judged on forums but in a court. I hope SInger countersues for defamation.

  45. Neil Tomlin says:

    What this guy has been getting away with behind the scenes is disgusting, him and his entourage get away with shocking behaviour whilst other people turn a blind eye to it!!
    I hope more people step forward and make a case against him!!

    • Ruth says:

      Hey, how about you stop judging people based on the accusations and wait until the court does it? Are you the only one here who hasn’t noticed that this comes out JUST before the X-men movie? It’s people like you that contribute to ruining people’s careers by dragging their name in the mud, when it comes out that they didn’t actually do anything at all.

      • James whitely says:

        I say who cares about a fictional movie. This is a victims life!!! A disgusting act is a disgusting act. He has a history of it too.

        He will go court with all his child abuse baggage. Let’s see how that goes.

        These famous heads always seem to get away it. It’s sick.

  46. denise says:

    reckon this is one that he couldnt settle privately with…

  47. Another Hollywood bigshot.

  48. Peter folks says:

    Everyone google:

    Bryan singers film “apt pupil” + “teenage boys in shower”.

    It’s not his first time he committed such child abuse.

    You’re going to prison matey!!!!!!!!

  49. Debulator says:

    I have no dog in this fight but Egan’s claims sound similar to a guy in Philadelphia who made similar allegations regarding a powerful sex ring involving men and boys, after the Jerry Sandusky scandal made headlines. In the latter case was bogus.

More Film News from Variety