Arnold had hoped that the short run-up to the election would keep his past from coming to light. But an avalanche of revelations begins today.
Six women who came into contact with Arnold Schwarzenegger on movie sets, in studio offices and in other settings over the last three decades say he touched them in a sexual manner without their consent.
In interviews with The Times, three of the women described their surprise and discomfort when Schwarzenegger grabbed their breasts. A fourth said he reached under her skirt and gripped her buttocks.
A fifth woman said Schwarzenegger groped her and tried to remove her bathing suit in a hotel elevator. A sixth said Schwarzenegger pulled her onto his lap and asked whether a certain sexual act had ever been performed on her.
According to the women's accounts, one of the incidents occurred in the 1970s, two in the 1980s, two in the 1990s and one in 2000.
"Did he rape me? No," said one woman, who described a 1980 encounter in which she said Schwarzenegger touched her breast. "Did he humiliate me? You bet he did."
Four of the six women told their stories on condition that they not be named. Three work in Hollywood and said they were worried that, if they were identified, their careers would be in jeopardy for speaking out against Schwarzenegger, the onetime bodybuilding champion and box-office star who is now the front-runner in the Oct. 7 gubernatorial recall election.
The other unnamed woman said she feared public ridicule and possible damage to her husband's business.
In the four cases in which the women would not let their names be published, friends or relatives said that the women had told them about the incidents long before Schwarzenegger's run for governor.
...
The earliest incident of the six described to The Times was said to have occurred in 1975 at Gold's Gym near Venice Beach. E. Laine Stockton, then newly married to professional bodybuilder Robby Robinson, said she had gone to the gym to watch her husband work out.
Stockton was 19 at the time. She said she was wearing slacks, tennis shoes and a loose-fitting T-shirt. She said she was not wearing a bra.
As she sat on an exercise bench, Stockton said, Schwarzenegger walked up behind her, reached under her T-shirt and touched her bare left breast.
"The gym is full of bodybuilders and Arnold comes and he gropes my breast — actually touches my breast with his left hand," she said.
Article comments
1 - Richard Bennett
I see Flemming is up to his old tricks, trying to do Gray Davis' dirty work for him. Most of these allegations are decades old, come from people with a grudge against Arnold, have no corroboration, and didn't lead to any sort of official complaint at the time.
This is nothing more than a last-minute hit piece from the Davis supporters at the LA Times, the same people, no doubt, who concocted a phony poll last week claiming the recall was neck-and-neck.
It's all a bunch of crap, and women are smart enough to know it. Despite Flemming's predictions, women didn't turn on Arnold after he whacked Arianna, they turned in his favor, and they'll see right through this tabloid crap.
Brian Flemming, have you no shame?
2 - Steve Rhodes
Actually, it is conservatives who thought Clinton was horrible and now are supporting Anrold who have no shame.
Arnold didn't criticize Republicans for going after Clinton out of the goodness of his heart.
And I hate to break it to you, but if Davis had been running the LA Times this and many more stories would have appeared earlier. And from their editorial Sunday, they don't exactly sound like Davis supporters.
Plus Kaus has been after them for weeks to run stories with dirt on Arnold (and helped bring the Oui interview to light).
Ofcourse there is more than enough reason to oppose Arnold based on his positions and lack of experience alone.
3 - Phillip Winn
I'll be surprised if Maria Shriver stays with Arnold after all of this becomes public knowledge. Then again, Hillary Clinton stayed with her man, and Kobe Bryant's wife stayed with hers. I guess the "till death do us part" of marriage vows still mean something to some people, even if the "faithful" part doesn't!
Richard (#1), I enjoy your blog and your contrarian views, but while I agree that Brian is playing the scripted role of hysterical attack dog, that doesn't answer the allegations. The question at hand is whether (1) they're true, (2) the abuse of power displayed in the incidents is indicative of a problem that will affect Arnold's term in office, and (3) whether his apparent uncontrolled horniness will affect any legistlative decisions he will make with regard to women. All three of these are debatable points, and it is amusing and sad that the allegations surfaced en masse five days before the election, and just before the weekend to boot, but they're still issues which must be addressed.
My guess is (1) yes, allowing for memory gaps and distortions and so on endemic in recalling events such as these years later, they did happen. The Shriver story actually sounds very weird, so I suspect the statement has been much warped over time, but the sentiment is probably still somewhat accurate. (2) On the one hand, Arnold wasn't in office at the time, and so he could argue that he'll be on better behavior now. On the other hand, if he gets away with it with no consequences, why should he change anything? That is, if they elect him knowing that he's a groper, why shouldn't he continue to grope? That would be his potential thinking, not mine. (3) Frankly, I doubt it. I know guys who would surely commit just such acts if they thought they could get away with it as Arnold obviously has, and yet some of the them will be the most passionate defenders of women, attackers of Kobe Bryant, and generally pro-women guys you'll ever meet. Horniness doesn't seem to translate in my experience into a lower view of women overall. Maybe it's different when someone actually acts on those impulses, but I don't know.
Steve (#2), there has always been debate about the best time to leak dirty stories on political opponents. Too early and there is plenty of time for the candidate to smooth things over and voters to forget or quit caring. Too late and the candidate might have an insurmountable lead and "momentum". So the timing of this is right in line with a "last-minute" full-court press from the Davis camp, or other Schwarzeneger opponents, like Arian Huffington. Isn't this exactly why she dropped out, after all?
As Brian said, this is just the beginning of the avalanche. Will any of it matter? I doubt it, but maybe. I've thought Arnold would win the day he announced, and I've yet to see any reason to think otherwise.
Leaving aside the other merits and demerits of Arnold (since I no longer live in California), the best point you raise is the apparent hypocrisy of Clinton-hating Arnold defenders.
I completely agree. While I can take the other side to a point and I completely understand the position that the Clinton debacle wasn't just about sex, there is no question that many of the people who went after him did so while claiming that they were after him for lying and for personal reasons when really most of them just hated his politics.
Now along comes a candidate with many of the same personal problems, though possibly a bit more honest, and the hypocrisy of the Republican attack dogs is revealed. They should have just admitted at the time that they disliked the man for political reasons and were using his personal weaknesses to bring him down. The misguided attempt to pretend to be above the political fray has officially backfired now, as far as I'm concerned.
I didn't even say that impeaching Clinton was wrong, just that I wish people would have been more honest about their motivations.
4 - Chris Arabia
Here's my take on the Clinton aspect: I disagreed with the ruling that allowed the Jones case to go forward while he was in office. That stuff can wait.
But once it went forward, Clinton's lying under oath justified impeachment and removal, even though the China case was a better one for the GOP.
People on both sides were pretty brazenly political, and obviously the Dems did a MUCH better job of arguing what could have been a tough case. The GOP was fragmented and did a poor job of arguing their case.
In the end, Clinton's victory created W., so I'd say it was fairly pyhrric win (sp?) for all dems except WJC.
5 - Brian Flemming
Just updated the entry with an L.A. Weekly story.
I (sort of) know Karen Pomer, and I have no reason to disbelieve her. She is very well respected among her peers. As far as I know, she has zero history of being caught in lies, and she has been in the public eye for a while now.
Her story about Shriver didn't pop up recently. She mentioned it closer to when it happened as well (although she kept Shriver's identity a secret), and I don't know about any "morphing" of the story.
As a member/leader of CodePink, she is clearly partisan on this issue. However, that shouldn't impeach her. Karen is a feminist activist--she would never slander another woman (especially a journalist who helped her nonprofit rape-victim-recovery organization, Rainbow Sisters, gain major attention) to score a few temporary points. If she gets caught in a lie about Shriver, no journalist would want to go near her again. Karen's history indicates she's way too smart to take such a risk.
Even an analysis along the lines of self-interest would not indicate that Karen Pomer fabricated that story.
6 - Ralph Del Rio
It's an orchestrated attack by the LA Times and ABC. Everybody new it was coming. The guy spent half of his life with a fig leaf on and the other half as a mega superstar. Are we really surprized by this. By the way during the Clinton scandal what was the position of the LA Times and ABC?
7 - Steve Rhodes
Cokie broke the semen stained dress story on ABC. ABC really doesn't take an editorial position. They probably covered it a bit more than the other networks.
Believe me, this is not an orchestrated attack by ABC and the LA Times. The LA Times did it because Hollywood and California is their beat.
ABC actually held back the interviews on racism Drudge trumpeted finally airing it on Monday (I think - I didn't see it just a brief radio report) with very little impact.
I hate to break it to you, but despite the conspiracy theories, people don't sit around in newsrooms saying we are going to terminate Arnold.
Hell, I bet a lot of journalists would like Arnold to win because he'll be a major story to cover. If Davis pulls through, it will be rather anti-climatic.
8 - Grope Nato R
After all's said. Mr. groper is now Mr. CA.
9 - Rachel
There is no question that many of the people who went after him did so while claiming that they were after him for lying and for personal reasons when really most of them just hated his politics. Most of these allegations are decades old, come from people with a grudge against Arnold, have no corroboration.