Jim Cummings Accused of Sexual Assault

[willard]

Don't you mean Geoffrey Rush?

Wasn't Depp cleared of his ex-wife's claims in court? I believe he's seeking damages against her for job opportunities lost because of her abuse claims.

I didn't know about that. But I did read that Rush successfully sued the Daily Telegraph for slander for the article on his alleged misconduct. Although they are appealing.

[disneyboy20022]

This...is truly disturbing if true. I'm not going to join in on whose actually being truthful or not til more evidence comes to light.
Part of it could be the fact he voiced Darkwing Duck and was and still is my favorite cartoon character as a kid and holding out hope this isn't true.

I'm not a fan of Trump, but there are people who are guilty of this sort of thing no matter what political views they may have. So whoever said leave politics out of this I second the motion.

[blackcauldron85]

The restraining orders were also what at first made me think she was telling the truth. Though I'm not sure how that works, do you need any proof against the abuser to request a restraining order, or do authorities always believe the alleged victim to prevent possible risk of violence?

You're in a court, so you need to hold your right hand up, "the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so help me God.". But you don't need "proof;" in many cases that's hard to provide for domestic abuse. But the judge is trained; the person getting the restraining order tells their story to the judge.

[D82]

You're in a court, so you need to hold your right hand up, "the whole truth, nothing but the truth, so help me God.". But you don't need "proof;" in many cases that's hard to provide for domestic abuse. But the judge is trained; the person getting the restraining order tells their story to the judge.

Thanks for explaining it to me, blackcauldron85! It makes sense to do it that way. In that case, I guess the restraining orders don't necessarily prove Jim's ex-wife is telling the truth. We'll see what happens with all this.

By the way, the website that broke the news has published a new article about it:

‘Winnie the Pooh’ Actor Jim Cummings and Ex-Wife Investigated by Child Protective Services
https://theblast.com/jim-cummings-winni ... -services/

[Mickeyfan1990]

WONDERFUL NEWS!!!! ALL THOSE NASTY ALLEGATIONS WERE FALSE!!!

https://boundingintocomics.com/2019/05/ ... l-assault/


Thanks the good Lord up in Heaven, I knew someone like him couldn't be capable of committing such acts.

[Disney Duster]

I have been searching for evidence of both John Depp and Jim Cummings being cleared of their allegations in court, as in the judges have found them innocent. Haven't found anything. Any help guys?

[Sotiris]

Thanks the good Lord up in Heaven, I knew someone like him couldn't be capable of committing such acts.

How exactly is one vague tweet from him (because that's literally all the article is) evidence the allegations were false?

[estefan]

Something I've noticed is that the only websites reporting the Jim Cummings allegations have been gossip rags (including the original source, which is just some tabloid website founded by TMZ alumni) and websites that just copy and paste other stories rather than provide their own journalism. The New York Times, Vanity Fair, The Hollywood Reporter, Variety and other reputable sources known for their exceptional work in reporting MeToo stories haven't published a single thing about the Jim Cummings accusations.

That's the main reason I haven't immediately jumped on the "Jim Cummings is cancelled" train. I think we have a responsibility as readers to figure out what is legitimate journalism and what is tabloid nonsense. We immediately turn our noses up at the National Enquirer and other bogus magazines in the supermarket check-out line. So why do we instantly believe everything we read online? Misinformation is rampant on the Internet. Remember that bogus claim that went around about the backstory of Andy's father in "Toy Story", which Andrew Stanton then had to debunk? Things like that.

[Disney's Divinity]

I wouldn't be surprised if it hasn't been reported very much for the same reason the stuff about Lasseter and Schumacher was under-reported. People in the animation industry or involved in BTS jobs with Disney seem to be treated as if they're irrelevant. The rest don't report it because most readers' reactions will be: "Who?" I imagine voice actors would be treated as even more inconsequential than executives. And that means less people will read the story if the publications reported it, which means less money in their pockets than if they focused on other things.

Anyway, as I said in my first post:

Even if this turns out to be false the way the Johnny Depp stuff did, finding out he was a Trump supporter was enough to think he must be a garbage person.

[Sotiris]

Something I've noticed is that the only websites reporting the Jim Cummings allegations have been gossip rags (including the original source, which is just some tabloid website founded by TMZ alumni) and websites that just copy and paste other stories rather than provide their own journalism.

How is that relevant in this case where their source was legal documents filed in court?

[estefan]

I wouldn't be surprised if it hasn't been reported very much for the same reason the stuff about Lasseter and Schumacher was under-reported. People in the animation industry or involved in BTS jobs with Disney seem to be treated as if they're irrelevant. The rest don't report it because most readers' reactions will be: "Who?" I imagine voice actors would be treated as even more inconsequential than executives. And that means less people will read the story if the publications reported it, which means less money in their pockets than if they focused on other things.

The John Lasseter stories were pretty widely reported. The Hollywood Reporter even broke the story, with Vanity Fair, Variety and other trusted publications doing their own investigative journalism on the matter. THR and Variety also published stories about Thomas Schumacher.

I've long had a philosophy of not reading and paying attention to tabloids, because they are often gossipy and untrustworthy. The Blast is a tabloid website founded by former TMZ employees. I have my own list of trustworthy news sources that I use and pay attention to, because they hire actual reporters and journalists and not paparazzi.

[Disney's Divinity]

I know the Lasseter story eventually got wider coverage. It took a while for it to gain any traction, just going by other sites I visited that covered MeToo stories that didn't take any notice of it for quite a while.

Either way, you quite deftly sidestepped Sotiris.

[Mickeyfan1990]

Thanks the good Lord up in Heaven, I knew someone like him couldn't be capable of committing such acts.

How exactly is one vague tweet from him (because that's literally all the article is) evidence the allegations were false?

"Jim disputed Stephanie’s claims and pointed out that she had threatened his career with Disney, “I will go and I will ruin your reputation … I am going to tell people Winnie the Pooh is a woman beating, drug addicted freak!”"

[Sotiris]

"Jim disputed Stephanie’s claims and pointed out that she had threatened his career with Disney, “I will go and I will ruin your reputation … I am going to tell people Winnie the Pooh is a woman beating, drug addicted freak!”

That's what he is claiming she said. It does not disprove the allegations made against him by his ex-wife.

[disneyboy20022]

Apparently people are watching this and believe this proves he didn't.




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogzLHM9 ... ture=share


I hope he didn't, but I'm not jumping on either band wagon of guilt/innocent until I hear info from more credible news sources, not these knock of TMZ websites.

Oh and a Darkwing Duck Facebook page is apparently chatting about this thread.

[estefan]

Either way, you quite deftly sidestepped Sotiris.

I actually didn't, as shown by me explaining my stance on tabloids. My rule of thumb has long been "would I use this news source in an academic paper?" This is basic stuff they teach you all the way back in elementary school about checking what are legitimate sources and only using reputable publications when citing sources.

In high school and college, if I turned in an essay or assignment and one of my sources in the bibliography was JonsMovieScoopBlog.com or something fishy like that, I would probably have gotten a mark off. Major newspapers and magazines hire professional investigative journalists and have proper vetting processes for a reason. Like I said, we have a responsibility to fact check what is being fed to us by the Internet and rely only on reputable sources when reading and learning the news, especially in this clickbait filled age.

[Sotiris]

Major newspapers and magazines hire professional investigative journalists and have proper vetting processes for a reason. Like I said, we have a responsibility to fact check what is being fed to us by the Internet and rely only on reputable sources when reading and learning the news, especially in this clickbait-filled age.

Sigh. In this case, the tabloid's source was legal documents, not a third party whose claims or reputation may be questionable. What exactly are you questioning here? That these documents exist? Whether his ex-wife actually made those allegations against him? Jim Cummings himself confirmed she did on his Twitter account.

[Matt]

If this was actually true and there was proof it would be all over the news. I honestly don’t believe he would do any of this. I met him at a comic con last year, although he came off a bit cold of a person, he still lit up with joy in his eyes when he saw my Winnie the Pooh shirt and drawing I drew for him as a gift. (I have pictures as proof. ) So I’m glad it seems like the judge called BS on his ex-wife’s claims.

[disneyboy20022]

Major newspapers and magazines hire professional investigative journalists and have proper vetting processes for a reason. Like I said, we have a responsibility to fact check what is being fed to us by the Internet and rely only on reputable sources when reading and learning the news, especially in this clickbait-filled age.

Sigh. In this case, the tabloid's source was legal documents, not a third party whose claims or reputation may be questionable. What exactly are you questioning here? That these documents exist? Whether his ex-wife actually made those allegations against him? Jim Cummings himself confirmed she did on his Twitter account.

Yes the accusations exist in court documents, but have we seen the entire documents? I'm not really siding with either party for right now and in a wait and see what happens.

I know people are saying, oh I met him at once at a comic con and believe he's innocent is not a valid argument to make. I mean.... there's people in this me too stuff that have turned out to have a dark dark past. Again, I'm not saying Jim Cummings right now is guilty or innocent, but we must keep that thought in perspective and not to base judgment on someone you met once a comic con event.

[Mickeyfan1990]

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainmen ... story.html

""Winnie the Pooh” voice actor Jim Cummings and his ex-wife both bear some of the blame in their wild family court battle in Los Angeles, a judge has ruled.

“The court finds that each party has engaged in some form of abuse,” Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Shelley Kaufman ruled following a hearing last week.

Judge Kaufman issued mutual domestic violence restraining orders against each former spouse and said they will remain in place for three years.

The stay-away orders were granted after Cummings, the Hollywood veteran who voiced Winnie the Pooh and Tigger in Disney’s 2018 movie “Christopher Robbin,” faced off in the court against ex-wife Stephanie Cummings over allegations of sexual assault, animal abuse and a crotch shot referencing former Congressman Anthony Weiner.

The sparring ex-spouses share two minor daughters, and Stephanie accused Jim of slapping her on the buttocks and forcibly kissing her in front of one of the girls in 2011, after their divorce was finalized.

She also alleged he raped her, sent her an unsolicited picture of his penis, mistreated two family pets and cut her off from their kids.

Jim denied the allegations and said Stephanie didn’t visit their daughters for “nearly 10 months” and tried to blackmail him last year with threats she would go public with her “false allegations.”

In her order obtained Monday by the Daily News, Judge Kaufman said Jim would retain sole physical custody of the kids but that the couple should share joint legal custody.

She said Stephanie could resume regular visitation with the girls as soon as she completes “a minimum of three conjoint therapy sessions with each child.”

Her lawyer Larry Backman said Monday he was mystified by the ruling.

“Upon reflection of the court's order, while I understand that the court was child-focused in this matter, having given the children's best interest priority, I have to respectfully disagree with the court's conclusions,” he said in a statement to The News.

“When the court found that the evidence presented by Stephanie supports a finding of sexual assault/rape, committed by James Cummings, only to then find that text messages sent by Stephanie threatening to disclose his years of abuse, both sexual and emotional, somehow has parity with his sexual deviance so as to support a finding that both Cummings and his wife should be viewed in the same light as primary aggressors, necessitating mutual restraining orders, that conclusion is lost on me,” he said.

Jim’s lawyer did not immediately respond to a request for comment from The News.

In court paperwork filed previously in the case, Jim denied his ex-wife allegations of sexual abuse and other misconduct.

He said he only “jokingly” sent her a picture of his underwear-covered body part after a lewd photo appeared on Weiner’s Twitter account in 2011.

He said his caption referenced Weiner’s “exposure incident” and talked about a “mutual friend” running for Congress to replace Weiner."