Posted on 10/07/2014 5:38:09 AM PDT by DemforBush
That's really all you need to know.
Hammer, meet nail. Not a lawyer, but I’ve got to believe Collins’s confession to his therapist is a form of privileged communication.
Additionally, California is a “two-party consent” state regarding the taping of private conversations. Ms. Grant was required to get the permission of her ex-husband and therapist to legally record their exchange. Obviously, she never asked either one, so not only is the tape inadmissible, she could be prosecuted as well.
Also, it sounds like these incidents occurred years ago, since of the girls was a relative of his first wife, who he divorced in 1978. What is the statute of limitations for such crimes? I’ll defer to legal FReepers, who know much more about the law than I.
Make no mistake: it sounds like Collins is a creep and pedophile—hard to believe that more victims won’t come forward. On the other hand, it’s also obvious that Ms Grant is trying to destroy her ex-husband; she gave up her acting career to raise their daughter, and in their divorce filings, claimed that she was “unemployable” as an actor, given her long hiatus from the business.
Apparently, she wants to make her ex-husband unemployable as well, and it looks like she has succeeded. However, Hollywood has rallied around pedophiles before (Roman Polanski comes to mind) and if he has enough high-powered friends in the business, he could work again in the entertainment industry.
Also guessing there is a lot of money at stake. He was he lead actor on a very successful series that ran for almost 10 seasons. By the time 7th Heaven finished its run, he was probably knocking down $150-$200,000 an episode, based on a 22-show season. Plus, as one of the stars, he may have received a small cut of syndication sales, which could net him millions more. If Grant signed a pre-up before their wedding back in 1985, she may get only a fraction of his wealth, estimated at more than $10 million (and I think that’s a low-ball estimate).
Popular tv show in syndication, ongoing royalties. He may never work again but he may never need to.
If the estranged wife in divorce proceedings had truly been all that concerned about the molestation, she’d have handled it in a way that would not jeopardize prosecution.
As it stands, it was used as a threat to get her way with settlement, and now it’s been used. Such a confession is inadmissible, I’m certain.
There appears to be a whole cabal of them out there, I’m sure they’ll find a way to take care of him. Messed up world.
She pulled the trigger on the threat, no doubt the recording was made with future divorce in mind because she sure doesn’t appear to have been concerned about prosecution. He’s not going to be too inclined to negotiate now, imho.
If only they would let them get married and not have this silly celibacy rule........oh.................wrong church, wrong person!
Not to derail the conversation too much in the direction of Polanski, but I have always been a little amazed that Hollyweird defends him so much. I do think he is was a talented filmmaker, but he definitely needs to do some time. The ultimate irony is that one of his best films is Tess, based on Thomas Hardy's novel. It tells the story of a naive, beautiful young girl who is raped by a predator. This rape essentially ruins her life. Polanski faithfully brought this story to the screen. You'd think it might have been some sort of therapy for him to have filmed such a story, and maybe he would have had an epiphany and turned himself in. Alas, no. What he did instead was embark on a sexual relationship with Nastassia Kinski, the (then) underage actress who played Tess. The guy seems to be a complete unregenerate sicko.
>>>It’s hearsay. It’s self-incriminatory. It’s confidential. And it’s beyond stale. Any DA would be a fool to prosecute this.<<<
It is not “hearsay” if there is a recording of it.
It is “self-incriminatory”, but so what? All confessions are. He was not being questioned by law enforcement or in court without waiving his right to remain silent, so no 5th Amendment issues exist.
Not sure what the California law about confidentiality is.
The “staleness” might be an issue for the DA. From the listening to the tape, it would seem that at least 2 of the 3 girls could be identified, possibly all 3. The tape alone would not seem enough to convict him, without victims coming forward.
The guy admits to exposing himself, multiple times to a girl when she was 11, 12 and 13 and putting her hand on his penis, at least once. He also admits to non specific incidents with 2 other girls.
Whether or not a DA can make a case at this point, the guy is a disgusting pervert and nobody should be making excuses for him or looking for ways for him to beat the rap.
I get the whole “bitter ex wife thing”, but some ex wives have good cause to be bitter, and his ex seems to be one of them.
>>>Also, isn’t it possible that patients describe fantasies in the course of therapy? Still would make Collins a sicko, but not necessarily guilty.<<<
If you listen to the tape, it is clear he is describing actual events, not fantasies.
It may be legal to record the conversation in California, but he can strongly argue that he had a reasonable expectation of confidentiality. Besides, the case would be tried in New York, where the recording may or may not be legal. It would not be difficult to have that tape suppressed. And there goes the prosecution’s case.
Unless the alleged victims are willing to testify, the case rests on the tape and the wife’s hearsay, and the latter is weightless.
Then, if I were he, I’d sue the ever-lovin’ crap out of the wife and the therapist who let this happen. Unless the therapist is a mandated reporter, she can kiss her license goodbye.
New York is a one party consent state so the recording would be totally legal and admissible there. CA is a two party consent state, but apparently there is an exception for seeking to document evidence of a crime.
This was not a “confession.” It was a legally privileged conversation between a patient and his therapy group. If he was unaware that he was being taped or if he had a reasonable expectation that that conversation fell within the bounds of confidence, then he could move to suppress. Without corroborating testimony from the alleged victims, who’s to say this wasn’t just some perv vocalizing a sick fantasy? And how did the wife come by the tape to begin with? If it was made with his knowledge for therapeutic purposes, this therapist is a goner. I can’t imagine any therapist letting a third party tape record a group session.
The wife made the tape during the session. I presume the therapist was not aware of this.
Listen to the tape, it was clearly not a “sick fantasy”, but a number of sick actions that he describes. He also speaks of them being on some disclosure list he gave to his wife.
According to TMZ:
“Here’s what Collins didn’t know at the time. Grant taped the therapy session. We’re told her lawyer advised her it was legal to secretly record the conversation because in California you’re allowed to secretly record conversations to gather evidence the other person committed a violent felony ... and molesting a child under the age of 14 qualifies.”
It really shocks me how so many want to defend this perverted sexual predator. Makes me wonder about people.
There’s not one FReeper defending a sexual predator here. Stop and think about what you’re reading before you post such wild accusations.
I just finished watching “Revolution” last night on Netflix, actually. His character on the show was kind of annoying. And that’s all I have to say about this.
>>>There’s not one FReeper defending a sexual predator here. Stop and think about what you’re reading before you post such wild accusations.<<<
I beg to differ. Some examples:
“It’s hearsay. It’s self-incriminatory. It’s confidential. And it’s beyond stale. Any DA would be a fool to prosecute this.”
“Then, if I were he, I’d sue the ever-lovin’ crap out of the wife and the therapist who let this happen. Unless the therapist is a mandated reporter, she can kiss her license goodbye.”
“He must be conservative. Libs get passes all the time.”
“”Estranged wife.”
That’s really all you need to know.””
The wife is every bit the scumbag he is. I still think he could make a good case that his admissions were made in a privileged setting and are not admissible. Again, the allegations need to be corroborated to carry any weight.
I am less critical of him than I would normally be of a child predator because it appears he was in this therapy group to help him deal with what he acknowledged was a serious problem. And his reward for addressing his illness is to have some c__t of an ex-wife secretly record his interactions with the group, all supposedly “for the children.”
SHE’S the one who should be in jail.
I am less critical of him than I would normally be of a child predator because it appears he was in this therapy group to help him deal with what he acknowledged was a serious problem. And his reward for addressing his illness is to have some c__t of an ex-wife secretly record his interactions with the group, all supposedly “for the children.”
SHE’S the one who should be in jail.<<<
So the one who exposes the child predator should go to jail, not the child predator who exposed himself to little girls and made sexual contact with them?
Your empathy for this pervert, and disdain for the woman who exposed his crimes, deeply trouble and concern me.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.