Top Stories

Thandie Newton Was Sexually Abused by a Director

Thandie Newton Was Sexually Abused by a Director

Thandie Newton is opening up about a horrific experience in which she was sexually abused by a Hollywood director during a casting session.

“A director, on a callback, had a camera shooting up my skirt and asked me to touch my tits and think about the guy making love to me in the scene,” the 43-year-old actress told W Magazine. “I thought, ‘OK, this is a little weird,’ but there was a female casting director in the room and I’d done weird stuff before so I did it.”

Thandie says years later, a producer approached her at a party and drunkenly said, “Oh, Thandie, I’ve seen you recently!”

“It turns out that the director was showing that audition tape to his friends after poker games at his house. And they would all get off on it,” Thandie added.

Thandie says that she’s opening up about the experience now to hopefully inform young people in the business of situations to avoid.

“ … One person will read this and it will stop them getting sexually abused by a director. That’s the person I’m interested in,” she said.

Just Jared on Facebook
Photos: Getty
Posted to: Thandie Newton

JJ Links Around The Web

WENN
  • Sam Smith was spotted in public for the first time since Coachella - TMZ
  • Ashton Kutcher and Mila Kunis have welcomed their second child! - Gossip Cop
  • Derek Hough is officially leaving DWTS - Just Jared Jr
  • Does Britney Spears have a new man? - Radar
  • Jennifer Aniston says she's joined the Mile High club! - Lainey Gossip
  • Amy Schumer is starring in a Barbie movie - The Hollywood Reporter
  • Orcus

    “power” attracts the worst people im glad she is speaking out

  • Orcus

    but why there are no names

  • FrenchGirl

    Give the name of the director ! I think I yet heard this story

  • Thames

    it sort of drives me crazy that they never name names. if you truly want to help, you’d name them. i think even if she was blacklisted and were to never work again, she’d be comfortable with the crapload of money she has and can still act in theatre or other places for her own enjoyment

  • guesteartt

    Look up the Corey Haim and Corey Feldman stories. The film industry and entertainment business in general is no place for minors and young adults who aren’t overseen by a caring family (see Chloe Moretz). Being a child star without appropriate supervision is playing Russian roulette.

  • Dee

    no names because 1) she still wants to work and 2) unless she has the tape, she has no proof and would be sued.

  • emncaity

    Does it matter to you whether what she said is actually true or not?

  • emncaity

    This is how this works, “Just Jared”: When you say “Thandie Newton was sexually abused by a director,” you are no longer relaying her allegations; you are now vouching for the truth of those allegations, no matter whether you’re a legitimate reporter or just a website news propagator.

    If you want to be the least bit journalistic and legit, it goes this way: “Thandie Newton claims sexual abuse by director, according to W Magazine.” Which is exactly the truth, and the _only_ thing you actually know is the truth.

  • emncaity

    True in general, but in no way verifies the truth of these particular allegations.

  • Jesus is coming…RUN!!!

    @emncaity:disqus what a strange question

  • Jesus is coming…RUN!!!

    If she named the director people would ask for proof

  • Jesus is coming…RUN!!!

    can you disprove these allegations. Amanda Peterson was raped, theres no proof but why would anyone doubt her. Look at the actors/directors/producers who have been charged and convicted of raping children ie Victor Salva and Marc Collins-Rector to name 2

  • xica

    Many young actresses experience this in Hollyweird for not saying probably almost everyone of them. Nobody is awarded to become a star.

  • emncaity

    It’s a “strange” question only to those who don’t understand how allegations of criminal and/or immoral activity are supposed to go in a community of rational adults.

  • emncaity

    You don’t understand how this is supposed to work, do you? Allegations of criminal or immoral activity are to be proved by those who assert them. Then you get into the question of what kind or amount of proof would be possible with a specific type of allegation, which is exactly why allegations of a sexual nature that happen with no witnesses are so hard to prove. The risk of unfairness and a wrongful outcome is tremendous to either person involved, either the accused or the accuser. This is why these situations are so tragic and difficult. (Cf. allegations of date rape. If true, it’s a heinous thing that has been done. But if the accusations are false and the person didn’t actually do it, it’s heinous in the other direction.)

    You, on the other hand, seem to think that once an allegation is made, it should be believed unless and until it is disproved. That’s the internet mentality and the age of irrationality talking.

    Further, the fact that similar things have happened (or may have happened) in other cases does not establish the truth of the allegations in this case.

    It comes down to the fact that if you lack rationality and critical-thinking skills, you’re just going to believe what you want to believe or feel like believing, what you’re afraid might be true, or what makes for exciting online gossip and discussion.

    Meanwhile, if the person accused here is actually innocent, people like you contribute to the ruination of his life.

  • Jesus is coming…RUN!!!

    @emncaity It was during an audition, she willingly did it. All she is doing is warning other actors.

  • Jesus is coming…RUN!!!

    She’s just telling her story and warning other actors.

    Growing up I was told never to volunteer at church, no one knew why but people just said just don’t. 20 years later we found out a priest who served at our church raped 6 boys and moved to another church.

    You talk about rational thinking yet things were a different playing field for victims 5,10, 20, 40 yrs ago.

    If you scroll down the interview she states “ … One person will read this and it will stop them getting sexually abused by a director. That’s the person I’m interested in.”

    Why are you so angry over this story? She’s just warning actors.

  • Legendary Trolly

    No one wants to hear your trash, unless you tell us his name. Thats how you can protect people from him. You sound like your looking for attention unless u out him. Out him or stfu

  • emncaity

    Not sure you’d call it “willing,” in the sense that she wouldn’t have been “willing” to do it if she’d known what it was for. I mean, it was falsely represented. (If she’s telling the truth, I mean.)

    Regardless, what does this have to do with the question of whether her accusations are actually true or false?

  • emncaity

    Clearly there are a lot of situations like that, where you had priests who were being protected by the church hierarchy.

    But the situation isn’t directly analogous, actually. In the Newton case, we’re talking about her accusations being broadcast far and wide to the public, and many in the public who automatically believe any allegations that anybody makes. That is irrational and wrong. The fact that any given case might turn out to be true doesn’t change that.

    However, when it comes to her telling people she knows, that’s different. It limits the damage if she’s not telling the truth (because only those few people know), and it helps people who might _really_ need to know (as opposed to the general public), if she _is_ telling the truth, which of course is good.

    Then we have your situation, which is similar to this latter possibility with Newton — the usefulness of warning somebody about an actual danger. So sure, that’s obviously worthwhile. (Happy you avoided it, too.)

    I have no idea why you think I’m “angry.” Maybe it’s because I’m more direct than you’re used to. People don’t usually challenge these kinds of ideas on this particular subject, but they need to be challenged.

    I also don’t know what you mean by the “playing field 5,10, 20, 40 yrs ago.” The “playing field” for alleged victims has been tremendously friendly for _many_ years now — in fact, far _too_ friendly during the abuse-hysteria of the 1980s and 1990s, when zealous prosecutors made careers on getting convictions based on the “accused is as good as guilty when the crime is heinous enough” rationale. It’s probably not quite as bad now as it was then with regard to how willing nearly everybody was to accept false allegations as true, but it is exactly the point that this very comment list is full of people who believe Newton’s allegations without a shred of proof, without a conviction, without evidence or cross-examination, only on the simple fact that she made the claims.

    Point is, I don’t see it as a matter of a “playing field,” because it’s not a game. It also shouldn’t favor anybody one way or the other. When people talk about “erring on the side of the victim,” even the fact that they would say “victim” rather than “alleged victim” is exactly the problem. You can’t err on _anybody’s_ side if you want to avoid real, devastating wrongness. There is no fudge room. It has to be right.

    Which is exactly why this entire subject area is so frustrating and difficult. In so many cases, it’s just not possible to know, to a legal standard or otherwise, whether such allegations are true. So you end up possibly doing a disservice to an actual victim, but also possibly ruining the life of a falsely accused person.

    Anyway, this is what bothers me so much about people jumping in and automatically assuming what she said is necessarily true.

A Member of Townsquare Entertainment News | Advertise here