Interesting read. Jane Doe claims a lot of the early 2000's SNL cast knew this was going on and witnessed it but said nothing. It really makes Jimmy Fallon look bad.

https://iapps.courts.state.ny.us/nyscef/ViewDocument?docIndex=JHDiFvAAIUfxZ1Q/TxLI3A==

How does it make Fallon look bad? It was Horatio Sanz that sexually assaulted her in front of Will Farrell, Maya Rudolph, Tina Fey, Rachel Drach, etc...

Because Fallon was a witness and knew she was a minor and still didn't do anything. All of them didn't.

Weird, hadn't heard about this until now.

That is bad, but it was Sanz who pulled her tits out in front of the cast and fingered her.

Did YOU read it? The criminal complaint is against Sanz, not Fallon.

I'm more surprised that Sanz likes poon. Always figured him for a gobbler.

Was the blurb about Chris Kattan in the affidavit really needed? I think anyone in the world reading that is like "oh yeah we assumed he does creepy **** like that all the time".

BadMoonRisin said:

---

Did YOU read it? The criminal complaint is against Sanz, not Fallon.

---

Yes. Sorry did not mean to insinuate that he was the target of the complaint. Only that he comes across as a major accomplice and stands the most to lose of those involved with the exception of Sanz.

TXAG 05 said:

---

Will be interesting to see what comes of this. While Fallon wasn't the one touching and kissing her(as far as we know) he definitely played a big part in putting her in those situations. But she also kept going back to those parties even though all that was going on.

---

This is a big reason I stopped going to industry parties. I didn't want to get named by association from just being there and something happening. I don't even attend my own wrap parties and I don't associate with my employees outside of production anymore.

uujm said:

---

TXAG 05 said:

---

Will be interesting to see what comes of this. While Fallon wasn't the one touching and kissing her(as far as we know) he definitely played a big part in putting her in those situations. But she also kept going back to those parties even though all that was going on.

---

This is a big reason I stopped going to industry parties. I didn't want to get named by association from just being there and something happening. I don't even attend my own wrap parties and I don't associate with my employees outside of production anymore.

---

But you don't seem to have a problem throwing other professionals under the bus for something that has been alleged, but not proven to happen.

No problem, it sounds like he had more to do with it than the gawking cast members for sure, I was just wondering why you said it looks bad for Fallon and not mention Sanz, who is the one who did the most egregious stuff.

For the record, here is what we (and people in affidavit) used to think about underage groupies/girls at parties 20ish years ago.

Jimmy Fallon was in Almost Famous - 15 year old boy was gang raped, under age girls are traded like a commodity

Will Farrell was in Old School - Main character gets drunk sleeps with a high school chick


Both are classic movies.


Even if Fallon or someone else reported it back then, would anything have even happened.

When the hell was he gang raped in Almost Famous?

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

When the hell was he gang raped in Almost Famous?

---

By todays standards

Ehh, I think just about any straight boy of that age would hardly consider what we see in that scene rape. Not to mention everyone involved being underage.

Playing a little fast and loose there, even by 2022 standards.

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Ehh, I think just about any straight boy of that age would hardly consider what we see in that scene rape. Not to mention everyone involved being underage.

Playing a little fast and loose there, even by 2022 standards.

---

Obviously it was written as a fantanstical version of Crowe's story. But a light hearted scene like that doesn't get put in a movie these days without going out of the way to make characters of age and consenting. And no way a scene like that ever gets in a movie with the genders reversed (i.e. the book scene from IT the movie left out).

Another Doug said:

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Ehh, I think just about any straight boy of that age would hardly consider what we see in that scene rape. Not to mention everyone involved being underage.

Playing a little fast and loose there, even by 2022 standards.

---

Obviously it was written as a fantanstical version of Crowe's story. But a light hearted scene like that doesn't get put in a movie these days without going out of the way to make characters of age and consenting. And no way a scene like that ever gets in a movie with the genders reversed (i.e. the book scene from IT the movie left out).

---

Didn't Licorice Pizza have a relationship involving an underage dude and an adult woman?

I'll agree there. So glad they left that out btw.

Claude! said:

---

Another Doug said:

---

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

Ehh, I think just about any straight boy of that age would hardly consider what we see in that scene rape. Not to mention everyone involved being underage.

Playing a little fast and loose there, even by 2022 standards.

---

Obviously it was written as a fantanstical version of Crowe's story. But a light hearted scene like that doesn't get put in a movie these days without going out of the way to make characters of age and consenting. And no way a scene like that ever gets in a movie with the genders reversed (i.e. the book scene from IT the movie left out).

---

Didn't Licorice Pizza have a relationship involving an underage dude and an adult woman?

---

Yeah. And it was really glossed over. I liked the movie a lot, but it was pretty strange.

I read through it.

As far as the events depicted prior to age 17 (age of consent in NY), the worst of it seems to be drinking beer and the time Sanz had her sit on his lap at party. I don't know if that is illegal unless she was restrained against her wishes. Unseemly? Inappropriate? Sure. Illegal? I don't think so.

The worst, perhaps only, openly sexual contact was detailed in the complaint after she turned 17 (the age of consent in NY). Again, while incredibly unseemly and inappropriate it is not illegal. Whether it's right or wrong, she will need to have a witness state they heard or saw her protesting Sanz's physical activity I think.

Late 20's men physically contacting, in almost any way other than a brief hug perhaps, an underage girl or girl in HS (even if 17 or 18) is creepy and inappropriate to me - I have daughters. A 60 year old and 20 year old is creepy to me, age of consent aside. But if we are talking the law - not sure what would stick here. NBC Pages might be her age, not sure why she even includes pages making moves on her in the complaint. Usually with predators you will see more than one victim come forth, especially after the first victim speaks up - I'm not aware of any other accusers in this case, are there?

But mostly I'm looking at the big picture and wondering about the goal - 20 years after the events, tries to name drop as many big names as possible to cause embarrassment and perhaps force a settlement, blames NBC for all the alcoholic drinks and getting admitting into parties and served. A lot of embarrassing behavior alleged, but other than serving a minor I don't know what else was illegal by definition of the law. Sexual assault is a definite possibility if people testify her protests were ignored. I know this isn't a criminal case but a lawsuit against some big dollar people and entities.

You might want to read it again.

maroon barchetta said:

---

You might want to read it again.

---

Why, you don't agree grown men hanging around high school girls is unseemly and inappropriate?

Complete Idiot said:

---

maroon barchetta said:

---

You might want to read it again.

---

Why, you don't agree grown men hanging around high school girls is unseemly and inappropriate?

---

No, Complete Idiot, you said in your post that the worst of it was her sitting on the lap of Sanz.

Read it again. That wasn't the worst of it.

Username checks out.

Complete Idiot said:

---

maroon barchetta said:

---

Complete Idiot said:

---

maroon barchetta said:

---

You might want to read it again.

---

Why, you don't agree grown men hanging around high school girls is unseemly and inappropriate?

---

No, Complete Idiot, you said in your post that the worst of it was her sitting on the lap of Sanz.

Read it again. That wasn't the worst of it.

Username checks out.

---

You might want to read it again.

---

Oh, so she wanted the unrequested hand action?

Ok. Got it.

Yeah it's 20 years later.
Maybe she turned 17 in all this and kept going back to the parties. Because you know, celebrities and SNL and stuff.
You can't ply a minor with alcohol and then try to give her a pelvic exam like an unlicensed OB/GYN.

And of course she name dropped all over the place. More names = more money in the settlement.

maroon barchetta said:

---

Complete Idiot said:

---

maroon barchetta said:

---

Complete Idiot said:

---

maroon barchetta said:

---

You might want to read it again.

---

Why, you don't agree grown men hanging around high school girls is unseemly and inappropriate?

---

No, Complete Idiot, you said in your post that the worst of it was her sitting on the lap of Sanz.

Read it again. That wasn't the worst of it.

Username checks out.

---

You might want to read it again.

---

Oh, so she wanted the unrequested hand action?

Ok. Got it.

Yeah it's 20 years later.
Maybe she turned 17 in all this and kept going back to the parties. Because you know, celebrities and SNL and stuff.
You can't ply a minor with alcohol and then try to give her a pelvic exam like an unlicensed OB/GYN.

And of course she name dropped all over the place. More names = more money in the settlement.

---

I mentioned like 10 things in my post, and your only reply was "you should read it again". I had no idea what you were referring to. But you've made it clear you did not read the affidavit closely - it mentions what specifically happened when she was 15, 16, and 17 - nor did you read my post closely - since I mentioned the worse thing BEFORE she turned 17, not the worst thing in the whole affidavit. She didn't get a pelvic exam when she was a minor, since the age of consent (i believe, correct me if I'm wrong) was 17 at the time.

While I don't appreciate the hypocrisy in suggesting I didn't read it closely, I do think we pretty much have the same opinion regarding the actions of the adults. Creepy, inappropriate, disgusting, perhaps even illegal if there are additional details elsewhere or there are witnesses who testified she protested or was restrained. I'm perfectly fine with Sanz getting impacted by this since his behavior was wrong, perhaps Fallon too since he seemed close to it all. All the other names mentioned didn't necessarily seem fair, and while NBC should be held responsible for serving minors I don't know if they should be held responsible for Sanz's actions.

It would be more compelling if the affidavit included her saying no, or being restrained when attempting to leave, or clearly illegal activity beyond the serving of a minor. Including text like "he leered at me on a rooftop" or "he gave me a rose and was affectionate" in the same document as "he digitally penetrated me" kind of weakens things. Highlight the illegal activity. Highlight the damages to you as well - did you suffer personally or professionally would help build a better case in the absence of clearly illegal activity. Otherwise the timing - 20 years later and only after Sanz texts an apology stating "you can #metoo me!" - sounds like a money grab. Even if it is, I'm good with it if it makes any other creeps think twice about their behavior. Can you imagine being 30 years old and giving a high school girl a rose and kissing her on the cheek?

Complete Idiot said:

---

maroon barchetta said:

---

Complete Idiot said:

---

maroon barchetta said:

---

Complete Idiot said:

---

maroon barchetta said:

---

You might want to read it again.

---

Why, you don't agree grown men hanging around high school girls is unseemly and inappropriate?

---

No, Complete Idiot, you said in your post that the worst of it was her sitting on the lap of Sanz.

Read it again. That wasn't the worst of it.

Username checks out.

---

You might want to read it again.

---

Oh, so she wanted the unrequested hand action?

Ok. Got it.

Yeah it's 20 years later.
Maybe she turned 17 in all this and kept going back to the parties. Because you know, celebrities and SNL and stuff.
You can't ply a minor with alcohol and then try to give her a pelvic exam like an unlicensed OB/GYN.

And of course she name dropped all over the place. More names = more money in the settlement.

---

I mentioned like 10 things in my post, and your only reply was "you should read it again". I had no idea what you were referring to. But you've made it clear you did not read the affidavit closely - it mentions what specifically happened when she was 15, 16, and 17 - nor did you read my post closely - since I mentioned the worse thing BEFORE she turned 17, not the worst thing in the whole affidavit. She didn't get a pelvic exam when she was a minor, since the age of consent (i believe, correct me if I'm wrong) was 17 at the time.

While I don't appreciate the hypocrisy in suggesting I didn't read it closely, I do think we pretty much have the same opinion regarding the actions of the adults. Creepy, inappropriate, disgusting, perhaps even illegal if there are additional details elsewhere or there are witnesses who testified she protested or was restrained. I'm perfectly fine with Sanz getting impacted by this since his behavior was wrong, perhaps Fallon too since he seemed close to it all. All the other names mentioned didn't necessarily seem fair, and while NBC should be held responsible for serving minors I don't know if they should be held responsible for Sanz's actions.

It would be more compelling if the affidavit included her saying no, or being restrained when attempting to leave, or clearly illegal activity beyond the serving of a minor. Including text like "he leered at me on a rooftop" or "he gave me a rose and was affectionate" in the same document as "he digitally penetrated me" kind of weakens things. Highlight the illegal activity. Highlight the damages to you as well - did you suffer personally or professionally would help build a better case in the absence of clearly illegal activity. Otherwise the timing - 20 years later and only after Sanz texts an apology stating "you can #metoo me!" - sounds like a money grab. Even if it is, I'm good with it if it makes any other creeps think twice about their behavior. Can you imagine being 30 years old and giving a high school girl a rose and kissing her on the cheek?

---

A rose and a kiss on the cheek. Did he think he was on The Bachelor?

The sad answer may be yes, that's what he thought. Isnt the bachelor on like season 30 or something? It probably started back in the 2000-2002 timeframe. Which is wild to realize.

Creepy cast members of SNL watch Sanz playing with a 17 year old who has been given alcohol to make her more compliant. Men and women cast members stand by and gawk.....