Robert De Niro’s company has been ordered to pay more than $1.2m (£982,000) to his former personal assistant after it was found to have engaged in gender discrimination and retaliation – but a jury found the star was not personally liable for the abuse.
A judge ordered De Niro’s company, Canal Productions, to make two payments of $632,143 to his long-time personal assistant Graham Chase Robinson.
De Niro, 80, who spent three days at the two-week trial, including two in the witness box, has been ensnared in duelling lawsuits with Ms Robinson since she quit in April 2019.
Image: De Niro arrives at court. Pic: AP
Ms Robinson, 41, said De Niro and his girlfriend Tiffany Chen teamed up against her to turn a job she once loved into a nightmare.
De Niro and Ms Chen each said during evidence that Ms Robinson became the problem when her aspirations to move beyond Canal Productions led her to make escalating demands to remain in the job.
In two days in the witness box the actor told jurors he boosted Ms Robinson’s salary from less than $100,000 (£82,000) annually to $300,000 (£245,000) and elevated her title to vice president of production and finance at her request – despite her responsibilities remaining largely the same.
De Niro said when she quit Ms Robinson stole about $85,000 (£70,000) in airline miles from him, betrayed his trust and violated his unwritten rules to use common sense and always do the right thing.
At times De Niro acknowledged from the witness box many of the claims Ms Robinson made to support her $12m (£10m) gender discrimination and retaliation lawsuit.
He agreed he had asked her to scratch his back on at least two occasions, dismissing a question about it with: “Ok, twice? You got me!”
Advertisement
He admitted he had berated her, though he disputed ever aiming a profanity her way, saying: “I was never abusive, ever.”
He also denied ever yelling at her, saying every little thing she was trying to catch him with was nonsense and that, at most, he had raised his voice in her presence but never with disrespect.
Then, he looked at her sitting between her lawyers in the courtroom and shouted: “Shame on you, Chase Robinson!”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:35
April 2022: De Niro on political ‘big untruths’
‘Emotional and mental breakdown’
Ms Robinson said she quit her job during an “emotional and mental breakdown” that left her overwhelmed and feeling like she had “hit rock bottom”.
She said she has since suffered from anxiety and depression and has not worked in four years despite applying for 638 jobs.
“I don’t have a social life,” she said. “I’m so humiliated and embarrassed and feel so judged. I feel so damaged in a way. … I lost my life. Lost my career. Lost my financial independence. I lost everything.”
‘Acivil rights trial’
De Niro’s lawyers sued Ms Robinson for breach of loyalty and fiduciary duty even before her lawsuit was filed against him in 2019.
They sought $6m (£5m) in damages, including a return of the five million airline miles.
In a closing argument on Wednesday, De Niro’s lawyer Richard Schoenstein said the miles that were taken were worth about $85,000. He said jurors could order Ms Robinson to return some of her salary, but, he added: “We’re not looking for you to punish her.”
In his closing, Ms Robinson’s lawyer Brent Hannafan called the two weeks of court proceedings a civil rights trial and urged jurors to return a verdict “not just for Ms Robinson, but for all civil rights litigants”.
De Niro has won two Oscars and is currently starring in the Martin Scorsese film Killers Of The Flower Moon.
He is the man behind the biggest-selling electronica record of all time, but the success of Moby’s album Play came with some unwanted side effects.
His fifth record, the album charted at 33 upon its release in the UK in May 1999, and fell out of the Top 40 after just a week. But despite the lacklustre initial response, Play started to pick up steam, slowly climbing the chart until it reached number one in April 2000.
It stayed there for five weeks and remained in the Top 40 until March 2001, re-entering the Top 100 several times over the next few years.
While Moby had experienced success with Go, the breakthrough 1991 single from his self-titled debut album, Play was next level. Even if you don’t know the album, you’ll know at least some of the songs – Porcelain, Why Does My Heart Feel So Bad?, Honey, and Natural Blues. The record was ubiquitous and fame hard to escape.
Image: Pic: Adam Warzawa/EPA/Shutterstock
“I think fame and fortune are, probably, empirically two of the most destructive forces on the planet,” he says, speaking from his home in Los Angeles. “I mean, if fame and fortune fixed things, Kurt Cobain and Amy Winehouse would still be making records.
“I guess it’s a very easy system to buy into, especially in a place like… in New York, in Los Angeles, in these big cities that are driven by ostentation and consumption and the need for external validation. It’s hard to resist those temptations. But then… you look at the consequences of that.
“I’d rather try and live a rational life and not necessarily let other people’s concerns dictate what my concerns should be.”
Now sober and with a few years between him and those heady days of peak fame, in recent years Moby has been doing something few established stars in his position would do – giving his compositions away for free.
“I have a house, I have a car, I have some hoodies, I have food in the fridge, I don’t really need anything more,” he insists. “To live and work in a way where I’m not driven by money, why not use that as an opportunity?”
Selfless selfishness or selfish selflessness
Image: Pic: Wael Hamzeh/EPA/Shutterstock
Over a decade ago, the musician came up with the quietly radical idea of making a free music licensing platform, MobyGratis. The idea was simple and rather exciting, he admits – to allow anyone unrestricted access to hundreds of his compositions to use them however they wish. From film scores to remixes, whatever.
“It’s either selfless selfishness or selfish selflessness, meaning I’m giving these things away but the benefit to me is I get to see what people do with it,” he says.
“There are a lot of things about the current digital media climate that are terrifying and baffling and confusing, but one of the things I love is the egalitarian nature of it.”
The idea of giving his music away for free runs somewhat contrary to the AI copyright battle many artists are currently speaking out over, with the likes of Ed Sheeran and Damon Albarn calling for greater protections in law to prevent artificial intelligence software from scraping their work to learn from it.
Remix culture and creative processes
“I completely appreciate and respect the concerns that other people have,” says Moby. “I think they’re incredibly valid… but for me personally, I don’t know. Maybe it’s naive and stupid of me, but I kind of just ignore it.
“I put this music out there and you sort of hope for the best, which probably is completely dim-witted of me. Part of remix culture is seeing how people reinterpret your work; sometimes it’s mediocre, sometimes it is bad, but sometimes it is so inspired, and I can actually learn a lot from other creative processes.”
The dance artist also takes issue with how the act of giving and compassion more generally has come to be seen, and references Elon Musk‘s comments on Joe Rogan’s podcast in April, when the billionaire said: “We’ve got civilizational suicidal empathy going on.”
Moby says that while “we live in this world of fear, selfishness, desperation and viciousness”, he supports “anything that is a rejection of the manosphere… anything that rejects Elon and the idea that empathy is a weakness and reminds people that life can be simple and decent.”
He jokes: “I’m definitely becoming like the weird old guy that you’ll see in the mountains, sort of like not making eye contact and mumbling about chemtrails or something.”
This is a man who is aware his approach to fame, fortune and giving stuff away is somewhat out-of-keeping with the times we’re living in – but the thing is, Moby doesn’t seem to care.
A lawyer representing Sean “Diddy” Combs has told a court there was “mutual” domestic violence between him and his ex-girlfriend Casandra ‘Cassie’ Ventura.
Marc Agnifilo made the claim as he outlined some of the music star’s defence case ahead of the full opening of his trial next week.
Combs has pleaded not guilty to one count of racketeering conspiracy, two counts of sex trafficking and two counts of transportation for prostitution. If convicted, he faces up to life in prison.
Ms Ventura is expected to testify as a star witness for the prosecution during the trial in New York. The final stage of jury selection is due to be held on Monday morning.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:51
Why is Sean Combs on trial?
Mr Agnifilo told the court on Friday that the defence would “take the position that there was mutual violence” during the pair’s relationship and called on the judge to allow evidence related to this.
The lawyer said Combs‘s legal team intended to argue that “there was hitting on both sides, behaviour on both sides” that constituted violence.
He added: “It is relevant in terms of the coercive aspects, we are admitting domestic violence.”
Image: A court sketch showing Sean ‘Diddy’ Combs (right) as he listens to his lawyer Marc Agnifilo addressing the court. Pic: Reuters
Ms Ventura’s lawyers declined to comment on the allegations.
US District Judge Arun Subramanian said he would rule on whether to allow the evidence on Monday.
Combs, 55, was present in the court on Friday.
He has been held in custody in Brooklyn since his arrest last September.
Prosecutors allege that Combs used his business empire for two decades to lure women with promises of romantic relationships or financial support, then violently coerced them to take part in days-long, drug-fuelled sexual performances known as “Freak Offs”.
Combs’s lawyers say prosecutors are improperly seeking to criminalise his “swinger lifestyle”. They have suggested they will attack the credibility of alleged victims in the case by claiming their allegations are financially motivated.
An ex-model has tearfully told a court that being sexually assaulted by Harvey Weinstein when she was 16 was the most “horrifying thing I ever experienced” to that point.
Warning: This article contains references to sexual assault
Kaja Sokola told the film producer’s retrial that he ordered her to remove her blouse, put his hand in her underwear, and made her touch his genitals.
She said he’d stared at her in the mirror with “black and scary” eyes and told her to stay quiet about the alleged assault in a Manhattan hotel in 2002.
Ms Sokola told the New York court that Weinstein had dropped names such as Penelope Cruz and Gwyneth Paltrow, and said he could help fulfil her Hollywood dream.
“I’d never been in a situation like this,” said Polish-born Ms Sokola. “I felt stupid and ashamed and like it’s my fault for putting myself in this position.”
Weinstein denies sexually assaulting anyone and is back in court for a retrial after his conviction was overturned last year.
Image: Weinstein denies the allegations. Pic: Reuters
The 73-year-old is not charged over the alleged sexual assault because it happened too long ago to bring criminal charges.
However, he is facing charges over an incident four years later when he’s said to have forced Ms Sokola to perform oral sex on him.
Prosecutors claim it happened after Weinstein arranged for her to be an extra in a film.
“My soul was removed from me,” she told the court of the alleged 2006 assault, describing how she tried to push Weinstein away but that he held her down.
Ms Sokola – who’s waived her right to anonymity – is the second of three women to testify and the only one who wasn’t part of the first trial in 2020.
Image: Miriam Haley testified previously in the retrial. Pic: AP
Miriam Haley last week told the court that Weinstein forced oral sex on her in 2006. The other accuser, Jessica Mann, is yet to appear.
Claims against the film mogul were a major driver for the #MeToo movement against sexual harassment and abuse in 2017.
Weinstein’s lawyers allege the women consented to sexual activity in the hope of getting film and TV work and that they stayed in contact with him for a while afterwards.