Placido Domingo: AP reports 11 more women, just one named

Placido Domingo: AP reports 11 more women, just one named


norman lebrecht

September 05, 2019

The Associated Press has produced 11 more testimonies of sexual misconduct against the opera singer.

Angela Turner Wilson, a singer in Washington National Opera’s 1999 production of Jules Massenet’s Le Cid, claims he reached inside her robe and grabbed her breast. She was 28 at the time. ‘It hurt,’ she told AP. ‘It was not gentle. He groped me hard.’ She did not report the incident to the management, fearing it would damage her career.

The AP report is credited to Jocelyn Gecker and Jocelyn Novack. The other accusers remain anonymous.

A Domingo publicist, Nancy Seltzer, said: ‘The ongoing campaign by the AP to denigrate Placido Domingo is not only inaccurate but unethical. These new claims are riddled with inconsistencies and, as with the first story, in many ways, simply incorrect. ‘Due to an ongoing investigation, we will not comment on specifics, but we strongly dispute the misleading picture that the AP is attempting to paint of Mr. Domingo.’

Angela Turner Wilson is today Associate Professor of Professional Practice at Texas Christian University, a post she has held since 2010.


  • Mustafa Kandan says:

    Some of these allegations are shocking and, if true, not excusable from the standards of the time argument. The problem is that the complaints are only made long time after the incidents, making it very difficult to prove conclusively. The lessons to be learned from all this includes not only that we should be accountable in our actions, but ultimately we should take responsibility in protecting our rights in a timely manner when others violate our autonomy.

    • Karl says:

      IF true. How do you prove or disprove anything like this from 20 years ago? The lesson we learn is that we probably have to have security cameras recording everything now.

      • Emil says:

        Or, you know, you could just believe that 20 women are not all liars engaged in a massive conspiracy.

      • Sue Sonata Form says:

        Oh, that’s right; that’s what we need. More monitoring, more sanctions, more interventions, more nanny-state control. You’ve really got to give that finger-wagging real teeth.

        Are you going to be the controller of the security cameras? Listen to yourself!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • R. Brite says:

        The AP, like other outlets that have broken such stories, doesn’t just take them at face value. A whole reporting form has arisen in which such charges are as verified as possible. If they don’t pass the test, they are not published.

  • James says:

    A quick response to the trolls that haven’t even commented yet, but are sure to appear as they always do.

    We are now up to, I believe, 20 accusers, two of whom are not anonymous. They report much the same behavior, with varying levels of harassment. Also reported on are the efforts of staff to keep Domingo away from these women. There is no reason for any of these people to lie.

    It will be said here that these women only want to advance their career. Anonymously reporting this does nothing for anyone’s career, naturally. In fact, it is the fear of the loss of their careers that has kept
    these accusers anonymous. The two accusers who offered their names should be applauded for their bravery. They both are successful singers who cannot imagine that they will be rewarded with further career opportunities for their stories.

    His spokesperson does not even fully deny the allegations, which is remarkably telling.

    These women, all 20 of them, should be trusted. Is he the worst of the worst? No, there are many people in power who have behaved in a more violent or appalling way. With that said, Domingo should be ashamed of himself for his predatory behavior.

    • david hilton says:

      In every “he said/she said” dispute over whether a sexual offense occurred or not, the argument is trotted out that “there is no reason for any of these [accusers] to lie.” But there are reasons, many of them. Self-deception and memory conformity (particularly about events occurring decades ago) provide some of the very convincing “reasons for them to lie.” And that is entirely apart from the hundreds of well-documented cases of women intentionally bringing false charges. Over 200 women were prosecuted in the UK alone for bringing false rape allegations in the past decade, and more than 50 are still in prison today for this serious offense. Even though to many outside observers, “There is no reason for any of these people to lie.”

      • James says:

        Self-deception and memory conformity, if that indeed is the case for any accuser, is not a “lie.” It is a mistake.

        Percentages for intentionally false accusations fall roughly between 1-7%, depending on the study you look at. Are you suggesting that all 20 of these women are intentionally lying?

        How many unprosecuted sexual assaults have there been in the same decade in the UK? Far more than 200 I imagine.

        We can go around and around on statistics and cherrypick things that boost our own arguments, but the key point is that 20 women have now accused Domingo of inappropriate behavior and his spokesperson has barely denied it. In addition, this was a well known fact in the opera world. Domingo, by all accounts, is a warm and lovely man, who also behaves terribly around women. He is also one of the greatest singers in history. He is a man of contradictions. On this score, his behavior around women, he should be ashamed of himself.

        • V.Lind says:

          False accusations usually come from a single source. (Karl alleges a group activity below, but also outlines a case of wrongdoing and retaliation, which is not at issue in most of the cases discussed here).

          When one person after another comes forward with similar stories and others comment on managerial blind eyes and senior staff warnings to young women, one after another in various places, you have to start to at least wonder.

          The refusal of some of the hardliners here to even consider that there might be some truth to these women’s stories, and the refusal to acknowledge even the possibility that Domingo is being accurately described, is simple hero-worship. At best. (There is also, around here a tendency to deny that these things happen, that it is all in women’s minds. I have no idea what that particular pathology is, but it’s not coming from people I would care to be alone with).

      • Karl says:

        Thank you Dave. You saved me the trouble. I’ve been falsely accused of harassing women at work – they were committing payroll fraud and I was trying to stop it so they retaliated. And I know several other men who have been falsely accused of domestic assault. And the 3 highly publicized rape cases in my state were all false accusations.

        • Laurence says:

          So the women accusing Domingo were trying to retaliate because they were involved in payroll fraud? Got it.

          • david hilton says:

            They might have been. Sounds completely implausible but who knows?
            You don’t, and I don’t. Karl’s point remains valid: the range of possible reasons why a woman would falsely charge a man with a sexual assault — almost always an offense that will have no proof except for the victim’s evidence, and thus cannot be defended against — those reasons are vast and incalculable. We cannot begin to know them all. I would never have imagined the payroll fraud scenario that Karl discusses. Yet it is entirely possible. And it provides another example of why the claim that these accusers “have no reason to lie” is not convincing at all.

            Just because you or I cannot imagine a reason they might have lied does not mean such a reason might not exist. I have no suspicion one way or the other.
            I simply want Mr Domingo to have the benefit of the doubt until something is actually, umm, proven (or admitted) here.

          • Karl says:

            Purposely missing the point or not enough coffee today?

        • SaskiaUnreserved says:

          How absolutely appalling. I hopebyou found justice

        • Jake says:

          Karl, you’ve mentioned this before. How awful to be falsely accused. Your numerous comments on these threads make it clear you were deeply affected by that injustice. I honestly feel sorry for you. You’re missing out on all of the women who aren’t “pathological liars” and “hysterical nuts.”

          • Karl says:

            I have been on both sides of this issue. When I reported payroll fraud no one took it seriously and investigated. That was frustrating, so I understand why metoo has occurred. But now this metoo has gone to far. Its good that allegations are being taken seriously and investigated, but you can’t take it so far as BELIEVING all allegations.

            The allegations against ME were taken seriously and I was suspended from my job – kicked out in the middle of the day right in front of the false accusers. My bosses seized my computer and had it examined. Someone told me that a rumor was going around that I got kicked out for having porn on my computer. After 6 months my program was shut down and I was laid off – along with one false accuser. The other kept her job because she also had duties outside my program. The union would not help me get the suspension taken off my record. I had to pay my lawyer $3000 to help me in appeals and I was able to get the suspension expunged.

          • Karl says:

            I want to add that even thought the suspension was expunged I still had a reprimand on my record for harassment.

    • Cassandra says:


      These “trolls”
      would that be anyone not entirely sharing your point of view?

      On the matter itself I’d have to get back. At the moment I’m too personally peeved that Massenet’s “le Cid” – my number one, desert island, any angle, favourite opera of all times – just got dragged into this.

      That 1999 anniversary (el Cid himself is said to have died in Valencia in 1099) production is gorgeous!

      • Cassandra says:

        Well, have done a lot of reading.

        Except for LA Times, with a little bit of investigation of their own, the AP material is reprinted all over, no questions asked.
        And it’s an absolute Domingo-bashing, chapter two.
        Even when he stays away he gets stick for not “acknowledging”.

        It’s all the manoeuvring and open secrets again.
        How could all this NOT end up in an open meeting – including Domingo – to clear the air, face to face, there and then?
        Why did they leave it so long?
        Now it’s just…sad.

        And the weirdest bit, towards the end of the text:

        ” A number of women who criticized Domingo’s behavior also expressed a lingering admiration for the star, calling him charismatic and generous”…etc.


    • Name says:

      Just providing my usual comment that unnamed is not equal to anonymous. Twenty accusers, two named publicly.

      • david hilton says:

        Yes, unnamed is not equal to anonymous. But the second AP story is profoundly different from the first because, with one exception, there is not even any reporting as to what, if anything, Mr Domingo is alleged to have done to these phantom women (or possibly men?). These ‘unnamed’ accusers are simply brought out to add to the headline number on the tally board counting allegations against Domingo without any appreciation for the fact that we still do not know what if anything these alleged accusers are actually accused the singer of having done. As for the one unnamed accuser’s complaint that we DO know about? She , a costume employee, alleges that she believed Mr Domingo was about to plant a ‘wet kiss’ on her lips, so she turned her head and he kissed her on the cheek. Oh my! Smelling salts, please. But seriously, that is the full substance of the account against Mr Domingo of this one ‘unnamed’ complainer. Yes, there is a further account of another backstage employee whose entire complaint is that she was Domingo “once backed her up against a wall, grasped her hand and whispered into her ear.” Can we at least speculate that it is possible that the remaining 9 alleged accusers that the AP cannot be bothered to report on may possibly have even less shocking stories of alleged harrassment?

    • Sue Sonata Form says:

      The definition of a troll: somebody who disagrees with the loony Left.

  • Emil says:

    Well, this didn’t hold up too well (except for point 5 – let there be no doubt about what Salzburg, Vienna, etc. were doing for the past few weeks):

    Good journalism takes time.

    • Anon says:

      This is not good journalism. This is the AP with a vendetta, steamrolling us with information they have sought out specifically for the purpose of bringing Domingo down. One article was sufficient.

      • Emil says:

        This is, on the contrary, the basics of journalism. One story may lead to many more, as this one did. People talk when something’s in the news.
        And fact-checking takes time. People here are clamoring as if the AP received a witness/victim account and published it the next day; the reason it took them three weeks to publish Story 2 is that there are, in fact, a ton of layers to go through before publication. That *is* good journalism.

  • Gustavo says:

    Placido in Wonderland:
    sexual activities, involving wet kisses, pats on the buttocks, etc.

    Denial Barenboim:
    violence, screaming and strangulation attempts.

    Who’s worse?

  • Dave says:

    I worked with Angela Turner Wilson during this period at NYCO as a colleague and am extremely distressed to hear of this. She was a kind and respected singer who was well liked. I absolutely believe her.

    • david hilton says:

      And if she hadn’t been kind and a respected singer who was well liked, then you would . . . not have believed her? I don’t follow the logic.

      • Laurence says:

        The logic was she wasn’t a pathological, hysterical, vindictive harpie as other commentators are quick to conclude.

        • M2N2K says:

          But that is not what “Dave” said. He said she was “kind, respected, well liked”. The problem is that all these adjectives can apply to an even greater degree to the accused (according to most people who know or knew him) and therefore, according to such suspicious logic, he should be believed and trusted even more than any of his accusers. The trouble is of course that he has not denied all of the accusations immediately, so the picture does not look good for him now.

    • Karl says:

      I don’t believe anyone. I’ve known too many pathological liars and hysterical nuts who can’t remember anything correctly. Today there are plenty of ways to prove things – security cameras are everywhere and touch DNA testing is very sophisticated.

      • Laurence says:

        So your defense of Domingo is that everybody lies? (Except you, of course, but just in case, let’s install another security camera on your premises.)

      • David says:

        I’ve known about 1000x more men harassing, groping and assaulting women than I ever have women making false accusations.

        You’re very bad at math and statistics, Karl. It’s like saying “I have food on my plate so I guess famine doesn’t exist.” People are afraid of shark attacks yet drive in cars nonchalantly. Which is more likely to kill them? The same sort of reasoning applies here. The statistics on false accusations are dwarfed by the tsunami of actual assaults and harassment that occurs daily, much of it unreported.

        • Karl says:

          It’s the opposite for me. In fact at my current workplace the worst incident of unsolicited physical contact was by a woman against a man. She was logging in a sample and he asked if that was for him and if he could see it. But when he approached she put her hip into him and pushed. It then became a case of horseplay with them both pushing each other. I just left the room quickly. Later I heard her telling someone how he would often come up to her and start pushing her around for no reason. Should I believe her? No. I don’t.

          And last year we had harassment training that was explicit in saying that any unsolicited physical contact was harassment. Since then I have had women touch me on the arm or shoulder at least 4 times. I never see a man do that to a woman at work and I would never do it.

  • Caravaggio says:

    Now we are up to 20, we see. Let’s sit back and wait for the other shoe to drop which cannot be a moment too soon. On a similar note, we can also sit back and wait for the next Standing O around the corner which will vindicate the patriarchal, machista, mano-a-mano man (he who walks on water, air and fire) in the eyes of cheerleaders and enablers of mysoginy, abuse and harrassment.

    • Sheila Novitz says:

      misogyny. Important word. Should be spelt correctly. 🙂

      • Laurence says:

        Got it! Guys, let’s all add “misogyny” to our autocorrect! And wait and see how long it takes some of the usual suspects here tell us how to spell “misandry”!

  • mary says:

    Dante would have created a special circle of Hell for Domingo, Barenboim, Levine, Dutoit, where they all would be in a closed cave so that they can grab, grope, shake, scream, masturbate, stick their tongues into, each other for eternity.

    • Alviano says:

      Your list, Mary–Domingo, Barenboim, Levine, Dutoit–is interesting. Let’s see:

      Domingo is still singing; Barenboim is still screaming; Dutoit is still waving a stick, but Levine? Does he even dare go out in public, not to mention anywhere near a theater or conservatory? Was anyone in the music world ever so disgraced, even the Nazis in ’45?

      Who else seems to be getting it as bad as Levine? It’s not over, but maybe David Daniels. Are Levine and Daniels suffering more because:

      Their crimes are more serious? (if someone argues this I will not counter);
      Their accusers are male? (you don’t have to think hard to read through the lines on this site to see that some think all women accusing men are hysterical, delusional, or just plain opportunistic liars), or
      Because they are gay?

      • V.Lind says:

        Levine was on his way to court, and he settled. He was en route to court, the preferred destination of many of the deniers. And he settled…

      • Karl says:

        Levine would be conducting in Europe if he was well physically enough. The rape hysteria is not raging there.

  • Callas21 says:

    I think one of the main challenges for all sides is that the opera (and theater) business is so physical. During performances borders need to be crossed all the time. No mater who’s the boss, if you are on stage together you have to perform.
    So to reach the top, a young singer, if she’s not a complete turn off – will have to fight advances from extras, singers, managers, bosses, stage managers, directors constantly – unless they are gay.

    The problem is, that everybody is different. One young women likes to flirt, the other one does not. One has a great sense of humour and hits back, the next one is afraid.
    You have to be a strong minded, self confident woman to reach the top – in addition to having a great voice, of course.
    I believe part of the accusations (but not all of them, e.g. it sounds extremely bizarr to me that PD would offer a singer to make her breakfast). But there are always two sides of the same story. I also strongly believe that Placido Domingo is not a person who wants to harm any woman, on the contrary. I think he’d be much to proud to run after a girl who does not want him, although he probably enjoys the chase as long as he thinks he still stands a chance.

    But that is not a crime and I would far more prefer to work with a man who loves to flirt than with a man or woman who is constantly in a bad mood, putting people down, being arrogant etc.. and there are a lot of those at theaters who will never be accused simply because they are not important enough. …and completely different topic, but I still wonder: what would have happened if “The Devil Wears Prada” had been about a man and not about Anna Wintour?

    My former boss always said: “If you are being hit on an artist and you don’t want to go to bed with him, just look him in the face with a big smile and say: “Do you want to marry me?”

    That usually got the message across!

    • Dave says:

      Grotesque. You are part of the problem.

      • Callas21 says:

        Sorry, Dave, that is BS. I simply explain how I handled situations like this and that it is not always easy for young women in theatres.
        But I have never met any man who didn’t take no for an answer. And I made a career and live a happy life. I realize that it may be different and more difficult for other women – characters and cultures are different – but I see myself as equal to men, and in doing so I feel that I need to solve my problems.
        I don’t want to walk around scared and asking for help unless of course an attack gets dangerous.
        Allegations must be taken seriously but if women are generally portrayed as vulnerable and men as the evil part, how does this help gender equality?

        I do hope though , that PD did not destroy careers because a woman would not go to bed with him. Ironically I’ve heard more stories of singers NOT getting a job because they were recommended by him. Artistic administrators always thought the recommendation came because they maybe had an affair with him.

        I have found that one should always speak ones own mind. Then there won’t be any regrets after twenty or thirty years.

      • Charles says:

        I agree with you, Dave.

    • Karl says:

      “If you are being hit on an artist and you don’t want to go to bed with him, just look him in the face with a big smile and say: “Do you want to marry me?” Good one. I think women have to learn to be more assertive.

    • Laurence says:

      Ah, the excitement of the chase! So much better than those grumps who won’t even say hello when they pass you in the hall! These women don’t realize how lucky they were, and that groping a breast is a flattering way of flirting!

      • MarieTherese says:

        So Laurence, if I smiled at you in passing and grabbed your testicles, you’d be flattered because I was just “flirting”?!
        No wonder you don’t get it-you’re part of the problem you ignorant Neanderthal

        • RM says:

          Marie Therese: Laurence was being facetious. He’s on our side, unlike Karl, Sue Sonata Form, and Alan. Laurence was pointing out the ridiculous comment by Callas21. I’ve seen Laurence’s other comments. He gets it, so please don’t attack him.

  • BastaCosi says:

    I’m sorry, but anyone who has EVER had his or her makeup done in an opera wig/makeup room (in dc or wherever) knows that’s some BS. There are a million people around right before a show and unless they all happened to leave (apparently at least one person on the record wasn’t there and doesn’t remember that happening) there’s no way anything of this sort could happen without 4 or 5 people seeing it. It’s not like this is some private space, people are prepping wigs, doing other cast members’ makeup, chatting, etc etc etc. domingo may be an over-eager creep, but I don’t believe her.

    • E says:

      Wrong. I’ve sung twice as a soloist at WNO, most recently last season. Both times my makeup was done in a small dressing room, not a central wig/makeup room. The only people in the room were myself and the makeup artist.

      • BastaCosi says:

        First, she said that was not the case – um, so read the article before commenting. Second, her alleged experience didn’t happen last year, so your experience of last season means little to nothing here. But thanks for chiming in?

  • George says:

    AP says, 11 women called them. But than the story is only about one more woman’s experience but not telling any details about the others. I find that a bit misleading because now everybody can just call AP and say “he tried to kiss me” as well and they can add the numbers.

    • Emil says:

      You think the AP doesn’t do any fact checking? Read the first article, they discuss part of their fact-checking there.

      • George says:

        Of course they do fact checking, I am not denying that. But what if one or more of the affairs were indeed consensual at the time as Domingo says he believes. “Giving excuses” is not the same as saying “no”.
        And what if not all of the descriptions given are accurate?
        What if a singer was simply not engaged anymore after some years, because there were new singers in the young artist program who got some of the roles? There could be so many reasons.
        I am not blaming any of the women, but Plácido Domingo deserves a fair chance to respond to the allegations and I sincerely hope he will get that chance.

      • Karl says:

        The serious charge of breast grabbing had no corroborator according to the story. Did she tell anyone else at the time? I see no evidence of that from the story they printed. And what is “sexually charged behavior”?

        • Cyril Blair says:

          She told her husband and her parents. They confirmed it to the reporter. She also kept a diary which she showed to the AP. Funny how you miss the parts of the article that won’t conform to what you want to believe.

      • David Hilton says:

        It’s not that the AP don’t do fact-checking, it’s that they don’t do reporting! Not in this story.
        For this article to say that there are 11 accusers out there and then to only give the slightest details on 3 of them (and that’s being generous), is irresponsible and no different than Sen. McCarthy’s infamous “I have a list of communists” routine. All we know is that an anonymous “costume employee” alleges that she believed Mr Domingo was about to plant a ‘wet kiss’ on her lips, so she turned her head and he kissed her on the cheek. and that another backstage employee says Domingo “once backed her up against a wall, grasped her hand and whispered into her ear.” Are we too assume that the remaining 8 alleged accusers have stories even more inconsequential than these?

    • sycorax says:

      You obviously have no idea how an agency like the AP (one of the world greatest and a very well renowned press agency) works.
      Of course you can call and say “he tried to kiss me”, but without offering more – like witnesses (as there were for the first nine women in the first article), other proof or at least a sworn statement (at least in Germany doing one wrongly can get you up to two years in jail) the AP won’t report about it.
      They actually can’t because they’re responsible. Mr Domingo could sue them and in court the AP would have to prove their accusations. And losing such a court case isn’t only costing money for lawyers and the “victim”, but – and that’s even worse for an agency like AP – gets damage on the AP’s credibility with its “customers” (the newspapers and magazines using AP material for their articles).
      Hence the AP has engaged not only a few lawyers, but so called “documentators” – historicans, scientists and other people who are competent in different fields and who do nothing else as fact checking.
      That means: The AP doesn’t publish one single line which isn’t checked – and sometimes it goes so far that the journalist who wrote a piece can only shake his head.
      My favourite number with the AP documentation (I wrote as a free lancer for the German branch of them from 1998-2003): I’d written a so called “feature” (80 lines of something “entertaining” for the Saturday issues) about the polar bears in the zoo of Stuttgart sweating because of 30° in their enclosure. Hence they got their fruits and stuff frozen.
      Two hours after delivering this article documentation called and said they’d checked it and now they would wonder: At this day it was only 27° in Stuttgart! So why would there be 30° in the bear’s enclosure and could I give them some proof for it? In the end I sent them a pic of the enclosure which showed that at leas thalf of it is in the sun during the greatest part of a day, hence it gets warmer there as at the weather station where the temperatur is taken in the shadow!”

      • Anon says:

        sSycorax, WE ALL KNOW THIS, OK? Just because you and a couple of others in this thread have worked as journalists doesn’t mean the rest of us are ignorant.

        Interestingly, the 3 voices who keep harping on the AP’s ability to document and check facts – you and V. Lind (another journalist) and now Emil – are not even from the US! To you, perhaps, the AP is some international marvel because they check and document what they publish. Perhaps that is some major revelation in comparison to the press of your native countries. Those of us from the US are very familiar with the AP, its reputation and its credibility. No we are not journalists, but we understand this.

        The criticism of the 2 articles HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE AP’S ABILITY TO CHECK AND DOCUMENT FACTS!!!

        It’s a question of a poor judgement call, IMHO, a lack of perspective internationally, a failure to present a diversity of accusers (where are the European accusers?), and a general ignorance of the breadth of Domingo’s career and the international opera world, to name a few elements. It’s short sided, narrow visioned reporting. And right now it also looks like a vendetta. A well researched, well documented vendetta.

  • Jason S. says:

    I wonder how the Metropolitan Opera will respond to this news. Domingo is about to begin rehearsals the for Macbeth, which opens Sept. 25. Will they remove him from these performances?

  • Callas21 says:


    For centuries women have been “advised” to say “NO” at first, to see if a man is really interested and keeps asking them out and so that – God forbid – they do not seem easy.

    Now women need to say “YES” at the first date? Because otherwise they won’t be asked again. Too many men will be afraid of being accused of pestering?

    Maybe best to put in in writing as back in school:
    “Do you want to go out with me?”


    • David says:

      That is one of the stupidest things I’ve read in a while. We aren’t talking about normal dating practices, unless in your world grabbing a colleague’s breast uninvited is normal courtship. Or a married man hounding young artists up against walls and in elevators and calling them at all hours, while being essentially their boss.

      No man who is at all respectful has any issues here. Flirting is fine and still allowed. But I, for example, know that when I’m giving a masterclass, I *don’t hit on the students*, because I’m not a creep and that is inappropriate.

      See? Rules aren’t that hard.

      • J.c says:

        Then flirting is not allowed.

        And it isn’t — any more. Anything potentially suggestive now is considered (by many) to be harassment. That’s the problem.

  • I’ve read that Domingo’s wife gave up her career to support his. Look how he repaid her…

    We naturally have strong emotions about sexual abuse and rightly attach strong stigmas to such behavior. In cases where the behavior is short of criminal sanctions, it could help to describe it as unprofessional. Though euphemistic, it helps frees us from emotional reactions and allows to a bit more clarity of mind.

    Regardless of how one judges the morality of the behavior, few would deny that sexual harassment is deeply unprofessional. The sanctions that Domingo will likely face are due to what is apparently a long history of deeply unprofessional behavior. The behavior *might* not be criminal, but it illustrates a serve lack of professionalism that fully entitles administrators to conduct investigations and take appropriate actions. Especially in light of accusations by 20 women.

    • Bill says:

      I know nothing of their private life, or what “arrangements” they may have. But he certainly “repaid her” by providing an extravagant standard of living that she likely would not have acquired on her own. Some people may feel that is a reasonable tradeoff, and that’s their choice, which I will not judge. She would certainly not be the only spouse of a famous musician to have been in this spot. And I can think of a few world leaders whose spouses must have given this some thought!

  • Guest says:

    She said he touched her breasts hard. As far as I can see, she said nothing about what came before or that it was against her will. Only that it was not pleasant.

    • Karl says:

      She did, but it begs another question –
      Didn’t the makeup artist notice it?
      “But one evening before a performance, she said, she and Domingo were having their makeup done together when he rose from his chair, stood behind her and put his hands on her shoulders. As she looked at him in the mirror, he suddenly slipped his hands under her bra straps, she said, then reached down into her robe and grabbed her bare breast.”

  • Anon says:

    Look, this isn’t going to change things. The AP and journalist Jocelyn Gecker are just hitting us over the head with more of the same. The complaints are still mostly anonymous, appear to all be from US accusers and are made with no understanding of Domingo’s behavior or standing in other parts of the world.

    Jocelyn Gecker could bring forth 500 more women like this and it will not change the situation or the impact of her accusations. She’s completely missing the fact that Domingo apparently behaves badly in the US but not in Europe. For this reason, opera houses and the public in his native Spain and thruout Europe will consistantly support him.

    Domingo’s alleged behavior looks to me a lot like Brits who go on holiday in Spain and figure it’s a free pass to act like hooligans. When they’re outside of their own country they figure it doesn’t count somehow. Domingo apparently doesn’t do this in Europe. Or Europeans don’t find it objectionable.

    Jocelyn Gecker is starting to look like a stubborn, obstinate bitch with a vengeance. And the AP, with all of its journalistic integrity (this case has nothing to with their ability to fact check and legally defend claims. We all know they do, so everyone please stop harping on that.) is backing her. I’m sure the folks at AP didn’t like it at all that they were ignored in Europe.

    So now they figure if they bring forth more women, it will change things, now maybe no opera houses in Europe will hire him. It’s not going to work. The parties taking the hit of AP’s enthusiastic vengeance are US journalism and the Me Too movement. AP is making a mess of this.

    AP and the journalist responsible for this, Jocelyn Gecker, are starting to look like petulant, spoiled children. They want their way in this situation and are screaming and crying journalistically with this new set of accusations because they didn’t get what they wanted the 1st time.
    This is not the right strategy, in fact it’s absurd.

    Jocelyn Gecker and the AP have put the story out there. People and opera houses around the world may choose to believe or not believe it. Contrary to what they must think about themselves, just because you’re AP or writing for them doesn’t mean the whole world has to agree with you and act on what you’ve published.

    At this point, Jocelyn Gecker and the AP should just gracefully back off instead of pursuing the case with this ridiculous vengeance.

    • V.Lind says:

      You are being absurd. AP is not engaged in a vendetta, and neither is Ms. Gecker. Nor are they involved in trying to get Domingo’s career under their management. THEY ARE REPORTING, plain and simple.

      You have to get past this notion that they run these stories with a motive. Look at the last few days in the UK. I have read countless reports and countless comments in sources as diverse as The Guardian and The Spectator The latter, in particular, is populated by people who see to want to deny that the new PM lost a series of votes, because it does not meet their world view. I don’t care what one’s views on Brexit are: the PM had a very bad few days, and is now operating without a working majority or — given hos brother’s resignation — a less than complete set of Ministers.

      Of course these publications also carry editorials, in which views are offered. AP DOES NOT.

      Learn to understand the nature of reporting.

      • Anon says:

        One story was reporting. A second, following so closely and nearly identical in style and substance to the 1st, is a vendetta.

        Learn to see beyond the blinders which limit your opinions on journalism and the AP.

      • J.c says:

        AP is obviously engaged in chasing sensationalism, regardless of what’s what. Gimme a break.

    • Antonio says:

      I can’t believe this so-called Anon wrote: “Jocelyn Gecker is starting to look like a stubborn, obstinate bitch with a vengeance.”

      I was going to go through this comment pointing out all the inconsistencies and flawed arguments, but when I reached that sentence I realised it was not worth it. I don’t think it is worth discussing anything with a person that uses that kind of language.

      • Anon says:

        Antonio, you are correct. I think and write in 2 languages and in a moment of passion, my English failed me. I just couldn’t come up with a more polite term at that moment. I’ve seen far far worse in this threads, and if you read Slipped Disc enough, you have, too.

        As far as flawed arguments, this is my opinion. Just like everyone else here, I have a right to express it. Thank you for understanding this.

  • M McAlpine says:

    I have at least one opera production on DVD where a male singer fondles the breast of a female as part of the production. Is this what the lady was referring to or was PD doing something offstage he shouldn’t have been doing?

  • Cantantelirico says:

    Well, I thought this was a coaching.
    I was hoping to work on Butterfly
    Besame Mu…..
    Yes, well that’s very special but…
    Besame Mucho!!!!!
    Uber could you pick me up ASAP.

  • Antonio says:

    Why do we need to know who the accusers are? Would we have any special insight to know if they are being truthful just because we know their names?

    In countries like the UK, Canada and Spain, victims of any form of sexual abuse are protected by shield laws that prevent the media from publishing their name. In the United States some states or counties have similar protections, and even if they don’t, most media organizations have a policy of not identifying victims of sexual abuse unless they specifically ask to be identified.

    As it has been said before, the AP has the names of the accusers on file and has spoken to dozen of people who corroborated the allegations. The fact that they have not been named by the AP, as they wouldn’t be named by the media in some countries, does not mean they lack credibility.

    Right now, the only investigation into the Domingo case is a private one within LA Opera. The people conducting it have the full details of the accusers. If this case turns into a criminal investigation or a lawsuit, the courts will also have the details of the accusers, and Domingo’s lawyers will also have that information (if they don’t already have it). No one else needs to know who the accusers are.

    If there is no evidence of Domingo’s guilt, or if it is discovered that the accusers have lied, we will know in due course. Domingo will be vindicated and hopefully the accusers will be sued or even face charges [at least 200 women in the UK have been prosecuted for lying about being raped in the past decade].

    Yes, it sucks for Domingo, or any other person facing similar allegations, that he could be accused falsely, but that is the price of having laws that protect victims of sexual abuse. And considering that false accusations are only a small proportion of sexual abuse cases that go to court, these laws are very important.

    If you think this is unfair, if you feel so strongly about it, you might want to lobby for laws that also protect people accused of sexual abuse. Write to your MP or Congressman or whatever.

    For now, I am much more concerned with the victims of sexual abuse that never got real justice. People like Chanel Miller who saw her case turn into a joke, or all the women who have seen their abusers walk free. That travesty of justice offends me much more than a handful of men who have lost their presumption of innocence in the eyes of the public.

    • Anon says:

      Hmm, Antonio. “Yes, it sucks for Domingo”? “Suck” is more graphic language than “bitch” and yet you got on your high horse when I used it. Despite your poor word choice and your sanctimony, I will respond.

      I believe that the difference between “nameless” in this situation in the US and the other countries you’ve mentioned is that that in other countries sexual assault is generally reported to a law enforcement agency before the press reports on it. The victims’ names are known to law enforcement, and often to the judicial system as well as being shielded by the press.

      In the case of the AP, only the press knows their names. It puts a lot of blind trust in the power of the press. There is no involvement or knowledge by law enforcement or the judicial system. So “nameless” in the US press is not quite the same or as credible as the shielding of a victim’s name by the press which you’d find in other countries.

      • Antonio says:

        Anon, I suggest you get yourself an English dictionary.

        be very bad or unpleasant.
        “I love your country but your weather sucks”
        synonyms: be very bad, be awful, be terrible, be dreadful, be horrible, be very unpleasant, be abhorrent, be despicable, be contemptible, be vile, be foul.

    • Karl says:

      Do you realize that YOU will lose the presumption of innocence if you are charged? You’re not going to like that. Because once that is lost it will make it much easier to bring false charges and it will happen much more often.

      • Antonio says:

        I am not planning on sexually harassing or abusing anyone, Karl. But thanks for your concern. I do worry about you, though. I’ve been following your comments and you come off as pathologically misogynistic. Why are you so angry at women?

        • J.c says:

          This kind of suggestive personalization/namecalling is always the response whenever you try to inject some scrutiny into the situation.

          You never know either when something you do might be misinterpreted. Or, fabricated.

  • Marg says:

    Frankly, its not looking good.

  • George says:

    It’s probably not the place for some humour but I keep asking myself how many women, when reading the phrase “What woman would ever want him to grab their breast?” in yesterday’s AP article, shouted: “Me!” .

    • Emil says:

      In today’s lesson, George discovers “consent” and why it matters.

      • J.c. says:

        You don’t think some ever liked it? Or grabbed HIM?

        You obviously weren’t around in the 70s. An heretical opinion now, I know. But the times were much different than now. Lots of sexual aggressiveness everywhere, especially in the arts.

  • Olga says:

    So AP continues to dig deeper and deeper into a subject. But I can’t believe that all these accusers, named or anonymous, have been white angels during their years in opera world.
    As for AP investigators, I’m curious who will be their next target. Who will they choose among male singers or musicians? I guess someone as famous, talented and rich as Placido Domingo.

    • J.c says:

      I’m also curious whether other women have responded to him. If so, doesn’t that kind of put a wrinkle in all this outrage? I mean, then it isn’t always “unwelcome.”

  • Pam says:

    Flirting and harassing are not the same thing. Women know this. All these women making similar claims about Domingo and they all confused the issue? I don’t think so. And, what good does it do for them to come forward? Domingo is famous in our world, but not at the level that this is going to give them notoriety or their own TV show or something. I believe the women (unfortunately, because I have been a big Domingo fan for many years. I still love his voice, but am disappointed in the realization that he’s most likely a creep).

    I have known a few men who have been falsely accused (as far as they’ve told me) and they have these things in common: they were accused by 1 woman only, the woman at first pursued them, and/or was known to be mentally unstable, and they eventually were vindicated in some way.

    Women do not need to put up with predatory behavior in any workplace, even music. I did for years, and I did stand up for myself and rebuke the advances, but I was never physically assaulted in any way. If I had been (the breast-grabbing, for example), I might be speaking up now too. Yes – years later. Especially if others were coming forward. It’s not difficult to believe that women feel empowered to come out of the woodwork and accuse a famous person of harassment, once others have.