Chris Pratt and Ana Farris the new Epstein??

There is a new media journalist named: Tiffany FitzHenry. She claims that Pratt and Farris get kids ducked up and pass them off to Hollywood elite.

She says she has court documents that corroborate this claim & first person witness testimony.

She posted about them in a story yesterday about the mom of a former boy bander who is going after all the people that abused her son.

She has a twitter but below is her website

tiffanyfitzhenry.com...

a reply to: SocratesJohnson

Looking at the headlines on that website, it seems to be rather click-bait-y. I didn't read any of the articles, so I do not know how much of the article is conjecture and how much is fact.

From what I have heard Pratt and Farris are pretty good people who have remained amicable in their divorce to do the best by their children as they can.

People can say a number of things, the question is can they prove them?

originally posted by: randomtangentsrme it seems to be rather click-bait-y.

just a tad.

a reply to: RoScoLaz5

I went and looked at the "boy band" article cited in the OP.

Tammy took me through a stunning timeline of events as well as provided me with emails, written witness testimonies and documents compiled for the civil lawsuit, all of which detail the years of torture and abuse her son suffered, the names of those who partook, those who knew, and those who covered it up.

They claim abuse, but only have a civil lawsuit, so no evidence of crimes or it would be a criminal lawsuit.
Click bait. BS.
Tabloid journalism.

Kind of agree, some of it looks like click bait.

Other stuff is straight from ATS...Hard core .conspiracies

But she name names and show pictures of the people she said is doing the dirt. She has over 109K following her in titter. If she’s not getting sued for naming names, with pics , I would say it’s juicy over click bait...what do I know, I think Epstein was a child trafficker, who didn’t kill himself

a reply to: randomtangentsrme

They filled a police report and nothing happened.

So they went civil

Is it hard to believe that the 5-0 would 69 this?
See: Harvey Weinstein and Kevin Spacey

a reply to: SocratesJohnson

It's not hard to fill out a police report. It's not hard to show evidence of wrongdoing if wrongdoing was documented.

Civil in this case (to me, an entertainment professional) suggests to me the parents decided to leave their minor in the care of their agent who took the child to industry parties which exposed the child to adult situations as the agent was socializing for their own gains and not acting as a guardian of the minor child (because they're not).

If nothing happened from the police report, it's not because of the police. It's because there is nothing to see here.

But by all means, I support you and your beliefs about an industry you are not involved in. I even support you in not understanding the difference between Criminal and Civil law.

But I also support this website's motto. But there, you need to help yourself. No one else can.

a reply to: SocratesJohnson

Obviously none of you read the article in its entirety, perhaps even you OP.

Chris and Anna are barely mentioned in the article, but the article itself is pretty explosive, implicating Disney and tying together the relationship Disney’s executives had with Epstein. They even flew on the Lolita express.

The author is reader funded, too. As in, no corporate sponsors.

It may look like click bate but looks can be deceiving.

This may have to be moved to RATS, methinks.

a reply to: randomtangentsrme

If nothing happened from the police report, it's not because of the police. It's because there is nothing to see here.

Right, because the powerful elite in Hollywood have never bribed LAPD to drop an investigation into sexual assault/pedophilia. That never goes on there *cough* Weinstein *cough*.

Your statement has to be one of the most foolish I’ve ever laid eyes on. It’s almost as if you’re shilling to protect Disney.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: SocratesJohnson

Obviously none of you read the article in its entirety, perhaps even you OP.

Chris and Anna are barely mentioned in the article, but the article itself is pretty explosive, implicating Disney and tying together the relationship Disney’s executives had with Epstein. They even flew on the Lolita express.

The author is reader funded, too. As in, no corporate sponsors.

It may look like click bate but looks can be deceiving.

This may have to be moved to RATS, methinks.

You are correct, I hadn't read it in it's entirety, I still haven't. I did read more, as I wanted to be sure I did not miss anything.
There are a lot of damning claims that warrant criminal prosecution. Claims are just that.
Civil case. No criminal proceedings.

I stand by my words.

originally posted by: ColdWisdom
a reply to: randomtangentsrme

If nothing happened from the police report, it's not because of the police. It's because there is nothing to see here.

Right, because the powerful elite in Hollywood have never bribed LAPD to drop an investigation into sexual assault/pedophilia. That never goes on there *cough* Weinstein *cough*.

Your statement has to be one of the most foolish I’ve ever laid eyes on. It’s almost as if you’re shilling to protect Disney.

Sure, a company I have never worked for and my past co-workers want to go back to work for, is ruling the world.
Perhaps gossip and no criminal case is just that.
Do I doubt the individual in question saw some questionable things? No.
Does that result in liability on anyone besides the parents? I do not think so.

Tell me, as you think my statements foolish, how much time have you spent in the performing arts?

a reply to: randomtangentsrme

Your personal question to me is irrelevant and appears as though it was meant to further distract from the contents of the article.

Shilling hard in overtime, you are.

a reply to: ColdWisdom

It's perfectly relevant. If you do not know the industry you cannot speak to it's practices or the situations this individual was exposed to. How many parties have you been at and had a drink, when children were present?
Never-mind.

You would think in regards to this article if there was such overwhelming evidence the lawyers would get PI's and they would be able to get one of the criminal allegations substantiated.

There are opportunities more than local PD for fact finding.

You take this at face value. I respect that.
This is where you and I differ. I again defer to the site motto, as well as a 3 decade career in theater and music (never Hollywood) to have suspicion on the claims.
If I am incorrect and there was foul play, I hope the folk involved are locked up if not worse.
But nothing I saw in the article is more than what I already posted.

a reply to: randomtangentsrme

I spent decades in the performing arts as well and it has many major pockets of darkness. Some people are more vulnerable than others due to age, isolation, naïveté. Just because you did not personally experience anything does not mean it is safe for all. It does not in anyway discredit this family’s experience or the experience of the dozens and dozens that have emerged in recent years.

There are so many variables to this. Going up against a behemoth such as Disney will not find you much support in the media. I imagine any truth would be pushed to the fringes of blogs and smaller publications. Look at who owns the media!

Your “experience” is not relevant. Buh-bye.

We should ask Corey Haims or perhaps Corey Feldman...a reply to: raedar