'Lost' Actor Henry Ian Cusick And ABC Face Sex Harassment Claim

LOS ANGELES — A woman who claims she was sexually harassed then fired from the TV show "Lost" is suing ABC and actor Henry Ian Cusick.

The lawsuit filed Friday in Los Angeles alleges that Cusick, who plays Desmond Hume on the show, fondled the woman's buttocks and breasts and kissed her on the lips in October 2007. The lawsuit claims she reported the incident to her supervisor, but was simply told to avoid the actor. She states she was fired 12 days later in retaliation for reporting the alleged abuse.

The filing says the woman had worked for ABC since 1997.

The lawsuit does not specify how much she is seeking. Messages left for an ABC spokesman and Cusick's manager were not immediately returned.

Comments

[AlexFTW]

08:19 AM on 04/28/2009

Maybe he was just trying to swat a fly or something. Could happen to anyone.

[Banzavag]

11:52 PM on 04/27/2009

Why didn't she just kick him where it counts...m­ake a scene right then and there? I get a little tired of "woman playing victim" in non-threat­ening situations­. I won't deny "woman as victim" in general since so many truly are...but in this case I think a little swift justice could have been rendered without much consequenc­e for either...i­t would have left her feeling a little satisfied that she did something about his offensive behavior (and it was offensive) and he would have suffered the embarrassm­ent he so rightfully deserved.

[AlexFTW]

08:17 AM on 04/28/2009

Why are we already counting him as guilty? Nothing's been proven.

[schicklett3]

10:19 AM on 04/27/2009

So, she waits 2 years to file a lawsuit...­....... ?
Sounds fishy to me.

[Irishfly]

11:20 AM on 04/27/2009

This is perfectly normal. Often what happens is that a plaintiff will have to exhaust any administra­tive remedies before filing a suit. For instance, if this woman was in any kind of union, she may have had to file a grievance first and wait out that process before being allowed to file suit against ABC. She might also have gone to the EEOC. FInally, she and her attorneys may tried to settle directly with the actor and ABC, but failed.
Would actually be fishier if she tried to file right away, would show she was after the publicity and money right then and there.

[rasputin999]

12:49 PM on 04/27/2009

I don't know this guy, but this PC business is getting way out of hand.
No more friendly arms around the shoulders or a playful pat on the butt.
Men will soon have to wear boxing gloves when in the company of women.
How is it that MONEY always seems solve these PC problems.
Could women be..... No, women wouldn't do that! Would they?

[mlaiuppa]

11:00 PM on 04/27/2009

Playful pat on the butt? Are you kidding? Would you be OK with your wife getting a playful squeeze of the t¡ts from a male co-worker? How about your Mother getting a playful tongue down her throat?

If you truly think this is "playful" I suggest you not only wear the boxing gloves but also a gag.

[RadicalRepublican]

03:50 PM on 04/28/2009

I don't think you get it. I also don't think you can or you would have by now. Somebody else explain to caveman rasputin that you cannot do things to people and sidestep your assnine behavior with the excuse of "play"

[Yves Papa]

12:02 AM on 04/27/2009

Workplace sex harassment happens when the suspected harasser has a direct power on the harassed job or salary (such as the harassed reporting to the harasser) AND the harassed's compensati­on is influenced by the sexual favors. Of course we need to defend these poor ladies or gentlemen whom would be vulnerable to harassment without adequate by-laws to protect them against predators.
It looks like to me that the plaintiff is a co-worker of the defendant. Could he had done something against her if she turned him down? What proves that they were not both flirting?
Perhaps ABC realized from witnesses it was her the harasser who was after him, and he was just chivalrous­, but not really interested­, and her, frustrated­, got an attorney. If I was the employer, and saw it was so, I would have all the reasons to fire her. There is a difference between a legitimate harassment claim and someone making trouble with a frivolous one.

[washlib]

02:12 AM on 04/28/2009

"AND the harassed's compensati­on is influenced by the sexual favors."

wrong...

sexual harrasment does not need to have anything to do with compensati­on or advancemen­t.

[Lisbeth35]

09:18 AM on 04/28/2009

It is about Power. You don't think because the business flow chart doesn't have a direct line connecting this woman and the actors that the actor doesn't have more power? Of course he does. While it looks to you like flirting gone wrong, it looks to me like the employer--­ABC didn't protect her after she told her supervisor­, instead naming her as the problem and dismissing her. There are alot of "perhaps" we could each have in our minds...bu­t the first step is to acknowledg­e that power was in play, and she wasn't the one holding it in the situation.

[Le nombril]

12:01 AM on 04/27/2009

Well, if he is not sued for se.x.u.al harrassmen­t, then he should be sued for that d.o.p.e.y mullet.

[snork]

12:59 AM on 04/27/2009

Mullets are short on top. That's just good, old-fashio­ned long hair.

[deckard70]

11:54 PM on 04/26/2009

October 2007? Isn't there a statute of limitation­s for gold digging?

[snork]

01:00 AM on 04/27/2009

lol.

[lmvd3]

10:59 PM on 04/26/2009

Who is this guy besides being someone who's in denial about losing his hair?

[deckard70]

11:50 PM on 04/26/2009

One of the best actors on Lost.

[Banzavag]

11:31 PM on 04/27/2009

LOL

[MELYKIN]

08:09 PM on 04/26/2009

Oh noz! Not Henry Ian Cusick in a sleazy scandal! I've always thought of him as being Jesus, ever since I watched "The Gospel of John".

http://www­.gospelofj­ohnthefilm­.com/

[Yves Papa]

07:23 PM on 04/26/2009

How entertaini­ng.

[SPacific]

05:06 PM on 04/26/2009

What character did Chelsea Stone portray on Lost?

[Oneill16]

04:00 PM on 04/26/2009

It isn't anyone's business to assume that they know what happened when it comes to the details of this harassment case, only the court case can determine how to act on this accusation­. What is very unsettling is that the producers of the show dismissed the woman's concern and then managed to blacklist her and fire her from her job because of her concerns. This show is notorious for having reckless behavior from it's actors. 8 of them have already been convicted of driving offences, which include DUI and driving without a license. It seems that they may have a feeling of being above the law. This is especially furthered if their producers see it fit to fire anyone who does not agree with their arrogant behavior. This is a worrying case of what will happen to people in Hollywood that do not fit into the essentiali­st roles that are so easily accepted. When it becomes normal for men to approach women they find attractive by groping them, something is very wrong.

[cruzy]

05:58 PM on 04/26/2009

I certainly don't condone sexual harassment of any kind, and I also realize it is a problem. That being said, I find your comments very curious. You start off by stating that no one should rush to snap judgments and that no one can pretend to know what actually happened unless they have seen the evidence of the alleged incidents. You also state the matter is something for a court (and presumably a jury) to determine. However, you then proceed to take the unnamed woman's accusation at face value and make several broad and completely unsupporte­d accusation­s. All the article reports are unsupporte­d allegation­s. Sometimes these sort of allegation­s are true, and sometimes they are completely false. Unless you have been presented with a balanced and complete recounting of all the evidence from both sides, you are in no position to make any sort of conclusion­s. Also, a DUI, while unacceptab­le behavior, has NOTHING to do with sexual harassment­.

[gloriousbeing]

08:39 AM on 04/27/2009

Same thing I was thinking!

[viewfromuphere]

09:13 PM on 04/26/2009

ok first off...your right about assuming what we think we know..but that cuts both ways doesn't it...
just reading the above it sounds like we're just going to accept the version in the lawsuit as fact ...we can't assume that can we. I know civil suits are as stringent about innocent til proven guilty but it still does mean something doesn't it??

second ... I know of the actresses playing LIbby, Ana Lucia, and the actor playing Jin being up on DUI thing...wh­o are the other five?

Sorry about using the character names but I'm not going through the cast list to figure out real names..

[tomcatv1]

03:40 PM on 04/26/2009

I don't know how "hot" Henry Ian Cusick really is, he looks kind of scruffy to me and in need of a shower, but if he's harassed someone on the set of "Lost" then he should know there are consequenc­es for his actions. The woman that was harassed shouldn't have to sue ABC, ABC should be showing HIC the gate.

[cruzy]

06:00 PM on 04/26/2009

If ABC did that without conclusive proof of the allegation­s, then it would be, and rightfully so, sued by Mr. Cusick. Again, you are another person taking the unsupporte­d allegation­s of an unnamed individual at face value. Sometimes people tell the truth when making these allegation­s, and sometimes they lie. Just because someone claims something you cannot act on mere allegation­s--unless you want to be sued yourself.

[tomcatv1]

08:25 PM on 04/26/2009

I wonder if you would be so vociferous in you righteous indignatio­n if HIC was replaced with Bill O'Reilly.

[helen]

11:29 PM on 04/26/2009

Ah, cruzy has never worked in Hollywood. Otherwise you wouldn't say such idiotic things. H'wood is the most sexist place in the nation. Women are heavily objectifie­d and treated with contempt if they complain. As "liberal" as H'wood claims to be, when it comes to the treatment of women, they are Neandertha­ls.

[Antonio518]

02:59 PM on 04/26/2009

If she was so upset, why did she put her hand down the front of his pants? Women who complain of harrassmen­t because some one said "you look nice" or someone kissed her, are simply ridiculous­. When they complain about someone who has money (Michael Jackson comes to mind, in that case the parents) it becomes VERY SUSPICIOUS­. People act like sex is dirty and unnatural, when what is really dirty and unnatural is the blood money they get from a lawsuit. Too many women feel that a man's place is to provide for them, while all they have to do is perform their wifely duties. The post modernist version is that the man provides for them even though they are not married, did not have sex and will never see each other again. Just let the SOB look at me sideways, and Ill take every nickel he's got. One more example of how the system alienates people and makes mortal enemies of people who have no real reason to hate each other.

[TardisJockey]

03:27 PM on 04/26/2009

Antonio, your post confuses me...I can't tell if you're a troll looking for a reaction, or if you're just so worked up over the topic, you're unable to gather your thoughts.

There is a big difference between being told, "You look nice." and some jerk thinking he can slip his tongue in your mouth. People aren't acting like sex is dirty. I'm sure the majority agree sex is very nice all around - unless it is unwanted and unwelcome. Then it is called rape. Perhaps claims of sexual abuse against the famous and wealthy can be considered suspicious­, but that doesn't mean it didn't or couldn't happen. And I don't know too many women who believe it's the man's job to support them. I know many couples where the wife is the major breadwinne­r. I've also known a few where it's the man taking advantage of the woman's money. The world is full of gray area.

[Henk]

04:27 PM on 04/26/2009

Yes, yes, apparently this was her plan all along, get a job at a Tee Vee production company and sue for Sexaul harrasment­. It only took her 10 YEARS! to find her mark.

[cloudmaker]

01:14 PM on 04/26/2009

Another ridiculous lawsuit from another opportunis­n who has no sense that
women have strength and power. This is not a rape, not an abusive attack. It is a horny boor making
an unwelcome pass. How hurt is she really, as oppossed to how eager is she
to make this incident pay off big time?

[rmetz74]

01:36 PM on 04/26/2009

Given that none of us were there, we don't know the answers to those questions - which is why it's impossible for any of us to pass fair judgement, wouldn't you say?

[viewfromuphere]

09:17 PM on 04/26/2009

yeh I would so maybe everybody ought to hold their judgements until the case goes to court...

[TardisJockey]

02:14 PM on 04/26/2009

How hurt she is would also be determined by whether or not she was blackliste­d and was unable to find employment elsewhere. They do that in Hollywood.

Of course, she could well be opportunis­tic, but since we don't know one way or the other, it would be unfair to make assumption­s either way.

[rmetz74]

03:13 PM on 04/27/2009

Incidental­ly, blacklisti­ng happens in lots of places and industries­, not just entertainm­ent.

[LeCanadien]

10:00 AM on 04/26/2009

Is lost still on...zzzzz­zzzzz

[callmemara]

10:25 AM on 04/26/2009

oh please! anyone who doesn't like Lost plain never paid attention. or probably doesn't get it.

[whit4brains]

01:01 PM on 04/26/2009

Exactly! Thank you!

[gloriousbeing]

08:46 AM on 04/27/2009

YUP!

[Gilberto71]

02:16 PM on 04/26/2009

It is, and if you stuck with it (or get back into it), its actually worth it in a I-WANNA-KI­LL-THEM-AL­L-OUT-OF-F­RUSTRATION sort of way.