November 9, 2025 • 31 mins
This has gotten ugly. Really ugly. Oscar nominee Jeremy Renner strongly denies accusations from Chinese filmmaker Yi Zhou. She claims he sent her unsolicited pornographic image, sexually assaulted her, and even threatened to call ICE on her. But Renner claims it was Zhou who pursued him and harassed him ... after he rejected her.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:02):
And evolks. Sit is Sunday, November ninth, and be straight
with you, Robot and I have had a very difficult
time in conversations today about this story and what to
make of it. Hollywood superstar Jeremy Renner has been accused
of some atrocious behavior and we're not exactly sure what
(00:23):
it is. Welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ. Rod.
You didn't know how we're going to start this, but
is that we see headlines, but then we read details
and we're trying to make sense of this story. But
some very serious allegations, including of a non consensual sexual encounter.
Speaker 2 (00:42):
And that's been a lot of our debate here. So
we've got a Now, I guess her birthday is today?
Speaker 1 (00:47):
You said, yes, yesterday?
Speaker 2 (00:49):
Eight year old yesterday. So thirty eight year old Asian
filmmaker who is claiming and the way she puts it
is that they had a non consensual sexual encounter that
turned consensual. And that's a confusing statement in and of itself.
Is she claiming that he raped her? Is she claiming
(01:10):
that he's sexually assaulted her? Is she stating something now
with the context of him not wanting a further relationship
with her, the regret she had, it's hard to know
where it all, where it falls. There's a big gray area.
Speaker 1 (01:25):
Okay, so we want to deal with let's get away
from interpretation or trying to understand what somebody might be
trying to say. We'll just tell you exactly what she
is saying. And the film director we're talking about here
is Yee Joe. She's not someone necessarily that's a household
name that you will know. She has very limited credits,
if you will, as a director, but she's putting together
a couple of films now, including one that Jeremy Rinner
(01:48):
voiced a character in that's an animated film, and then
another a documentary she's doing about Disney that he did
an interview for.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
So yes, yes, he was actually just he did a
kind of a quick interview, I believe, where he was
describing the accident, the life threatening accident he had in
twenty twenty three where he broke thirty eight bones in
a snowplowing accident. So yes, he lented his interview to
that and his voice to another project.
Speaker 1 (02:12):
Okay, so that's the extent of their relationship. And now
because of that introduction, if you will. She is alleging Robes,
and I want to make sure I get the facts right.
She's alleging that he wanted to call or threatened to
call Ice on her, threatened that their first encounter sexual
(02:32):
encounter was non consensual, that he had threatening behavior to
the point that she locked herself in a room and
was afraid to come out. This was at his home
to have that right after he had a bottle of
wine and was drunk that night. Am I missing something?
Speaker 2 (02:48):
And she also claims that he sent her sexually explicit photos,
so unwanted unsolicited sexually explicit photos over.
Speaker 1 (02:59):
To So to set that stage, I want to start.
We're gonna read through it, and she we should say Robes.
She has been for a week now sending almost or
posting non stop about this about him and making clear
she wants his career.
Speaker 2 (03:17):
Over because at the end, and there are several several
Instagram posts that she's put out there, but she has
a lot of hashtags and the first hashtag on all
of them is cancel Jeremy Runner. So she has a
specific goal in mind.
Speaker 1 (03:34):
Sure, So this is up. We're just setting the stage.
I'm reading verbatim one of her posts Robes as I
would say, maybe up to twenty, and they have long,
long messages attached to them. Some of them just say
cancel as the image or a couple of other ones.
I think one says domestic violence. Several of them say cancel. Actually,
(03:57):
but she has life in death.
Speaker 2 (03:59):
She she actually points to a girl who died by suicide.
She claims she died by suicide after attending a Jeffrey
Renner sorry Jeremy Renner orgy. She's making all of these
wild accusations, so.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
Let's just start. I'm just gonna read this as just
setting the stage. Quote. At the early stage of our exchanges,
I received unsolicited intimate photos and messages that were uninvited
and inappropriate. The first physical encounter was not consensual. I
asked for more time and gentleness, but my boundaries were
(04:36):
not respected. Later interactions became consensual, yet the earlier incident
remained deeply distressing. That's just what he said. She said.
People can come to whatever conclusion and try to interpret that.
But Robes, the first physical encounter was not consensual. Is
(04:57):
that anything short of a sexual assault?
Speaker 2 (04:59):
That seems like a crime. The way she worded it,
the way she phrased it that would be something that,
if it were true, would be a criminal act. Correct. Yes,
And it's interesting because you mentioned her Instagram some of
the other words that she used in some of her
posts love versus fling. She was very upset that his
(05:22):
side described it as a fleeing or as a one off,
where she in all of these posts talks about their
relationship as being a love relationship, something much more serious
than he's acknowledged it.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
Okay, and to that point did she not. I'm not
sure how recently this was, but she put out messages,
She put out Instagram posts not just suggesting but saying
that she was involved with Jeremy Renner.
Speaker 2 (05:53):
She believes, according to her Instagram post and certainly what
she has written, she believed and believes that they were
in a relationship and that is not what Jeremy Renner's
team is saying.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
So and reminder, if you all do not know Jeremy Renner, Yes,
Hawkeye from the Marvel franchise, but he is much more
than the Hawkeye from the Marvel franchise roads. Those are
enormous movies, so that makes him a worldwide superstar. But
this dude has some acting Chops credentials and bona fides
to his name.
Speaker 2 (06:25):
Absolutely. The hurt Locker heard of that. Yes, and he
was nominated for an Academy Award.
Speaker 1 (06:31):
For that the best Actor. That's not that's a big deal.
Speaker 2 (06:35):
It's a huge every time he is mentioned or introduced
in any room he is Academy Award nominated, Oscar nominated
actor Jeremy Renner the Town, Ben Affleck.
Speaker 1 (06:47):
Next year, Damon Very next year.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
Yes, these are huge movie franchises. He is a household
name and he certainly he's not just respected for being
some hunky leading man. He is absolutely given a lot
of bona fides for his acting Chops, and.
Speaker 1 (07:05):
We should mention it as well. The last several mission
Impossible movies with Tom Cruise, he was added to that franchise.
So we mentioned that to say, this is a ginormous
Hollywood superstar who is being accused robes of I hate
trying to interpret what somebody is saying, but when you
say that your physical encounter was not consensual, you are
(07:30):
saying that you were violated. You were saying that you
were raped, you were saying that you were sexually assaulted
in some way. That is criminal. And she is saying
this happened in recent.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Months in July is what she is saying. So according
to both of them, I believe she's acknowledged this as well.
Their first meeting where they actually met one on one.
She lives in la he lives in Reno, but they
had sex that night, So their first night that they
actually physically met, they actually had sex. Jeremy Renner's team
(08:01):
says it was consensual. She is now saying it was
not consensual.
Speaker 1 (08:05):
But she is saying that a relationship continued. And we're
going to read some of her messages here that suggests
robes that she was in a loving or thought she
was in a loving relationship. She talks about how she
still loves him even.
Speaker 2 (08:20):
Which is bizarre. If you love someone and then the
first hashtag you have at the bottom of your Instagram
is cancel Jeremy Renner. This is a very bizarre case.
And I will say we'll get into the details of
what she put out on Instagram, but her defense and
her receipts, she keeps calling them of text messages on
(08:41):
WhatsApp that she's putting out there on her Instagram account.
First of all, can't be verified, obviously, but also have
certain very important things cut off, and she puts pictures
out there that show him bizarrely sitting on a couch
that makes it look like she's proving, see, I was
with him in real life, here I am with him,
Like she's almost wanting to prove to everyone that she
(09:02):
did physically know him and had him in close proximity
in a living room setting that somehow that proves what
she's saying.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
I mean, she's trying to make her case on social media,
which is not obviously anybody who suggests a good idea,
but she is continuing on and on. You all, We're
talking about almost volumes of texts of Instagram posts she's
putting out trying to make her case. We should robes
right now before we get into more of what she
put out on Instagram to say what he and his
(09:34):
lawyer they have absolutely responded and responded stroggly. The cease
and desist letters are flying back and forth between these folks,
But he and his lawyer are absolutely defending him in
the strongest of ways.
Speaker 2 (09:47):
Yes, he says that these are false, outrageous, and highly
defamatory statements. Here is what his attorney said. The true
facts are that Miss Joe has relentlessly and aggressively harassed
and pursued my client for months with no reciprocation on
my client's part other than a single brief encounter on
(10:07):
July twelfth, twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1 (10:10):
And we're bring that right. They're acknowledging, and they call it,
probably intentionally a brief encounter versus a sexual encounter. But
we're supposed to assume that that's what it was. Are
we reading this the same?
Speaker 2 (10:23):
That's exactly how I read it. And then they talk
about how she was sending him hundreds of messages, sexually
explicit messages expressing her love so from Joe to Renner.
They claim they have these, and they also said that
she aggressively pursued a sexual romantic sexting relationship and has
(10:47):
manufactured fake and outlandis claims to generate publicity for her projects.
I mentioned the hashtags. They all begin with cancel Jeremy Renner,
but they all include hashtag of the names of her
two projects that she'd like people to check out.
Speaker 1 (11:04):
What are we supposed to do with that?
Speaker 2 (11:05):
Though? It's a tough thing to do if you're And
then she also has hashtag survivor. So you're claiming and fine,
she's claiming that she was raped. Let's just be honest.
That is what she's claiming. She wants everyone to cancel
Jeremy Renner. She wants everyone to acknowledge her as a survivor.
And she's also then at the same time, in the
(11:26):
same breath, promoting her projects. That's tough.
Speaker 1 (11:29):
What's the I don't know what here's supposed to do?
I mean, she's can you do both? You know what
you can, You should be allowed to, but you have
to also understand the optics. That's fair. You could do
it and she could be sense.
Speaker 2 (11:43):
You can do whatever you'd like.
Speaker 1 (11:44):
You to understand.
Speaker 2 (11:45):
Take away, Yes, what they will based on their questioning motive.
They're questioning why. So there are a couple of questions
as to whether or not she felt who knows her
ego got bruise, she got rejected, it could or something
areas could have happened, like it's one or the other.
And also she's taking advantage potentially of a situation where
(12:07):
she's trying she claims to be transparent, set the record straight.
She says she doesn't want to cause any harm. She
said she doesn't want to vilify him. She wants to
be transparent, right, is that what the word she will use.
Speaker 1 (12:21):
She wants to be transparency. This is not retaliation.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
This retaliation that was the word I was sarching for.
She didn't want to be retaliatory, but she just wanted
to be transparent. That's fine. I just think it's definitely
a little bit difficult to swallow when you then are
also promoting projects.
Speaker 1 (12:36):
Okay, that's that's fair enough. I think yeah, if that's uh,
that doesn't have to be our opinion. That's fair to
acknowledge that. Of course, people going to look at that way,
and as we start sharing her messages here, it is
going to come up, and it does. She I think
every single message includes a mention, and it's not just
a mention of the movie, it's the actual tag to
(12:57):
the Yes.
Speaker 2 (12:57):
It's clearly she has the She has basically has the
Instagram handle for all of her projects, so that if
you're on her Instagram page and you're looking at her accusations,
within the accusations within the narrative, she does have links
to her project.
Speaker 1 (13:10):
Doesn't change her truth, does it not? It doesn't, it does.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
But it would allow or at least I'm sure some
folks it would.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
It's an easy opening to.
Speaker 2 (13:19):
Question the motivation.
Speaker 1 (13:20):
Easy.
Speaker 2 (13:20):
I also don't know. Here's what I don't know. She
has one point eight million followers on Instagram right now.
I don't know if that was the case before she
started making these accusations. Not sure, no idea what her
Instagram was beforehand. But she has a significant following.
Speaker 1 (13:37):
Yeah, she was. She's spen termed a what certainly a
filmmaker but before this and influencer I believe online as well.
So some of her we're going to hear. This kind
of sets the stage. This first one we're going to
read and again, folks, we are going to read just
verbatim what she wrote and what her words are. This one,
another one kind of sets the stage. Here you wanted
to end? Where is it you take this? Can you
(13:57):
take that first one? In ten thousand?
Speaker 2 (13:59):
Yes? G June twenty twenty five, out of the blue,
I received two photos of Jeremy Renner and then a
string of unwonted, unsolicited pornographic images of himself via DM
and WhatsApp. That was his introduction to me in the
same way, according to past media reports, I subsequently discovered
(14:19):
he shared with other women in the past as self
intro After having calls and text discussions, he allured me
and sold me that he is looking for a relation
and of course seduced flattered that he was a Hollywood
star fantasizing and loving me so much, I believed in
him the power of love and embarked on the most
(14:41):
difficult months plus two Oscar running projects. I kindly invited
him to be a part. Subsequently, I discovered to be
destroyed by a setup smear fans campaign against me and
our two projects. This is alarming to know on Hollywood
we can still act in such manner. I'm worried for
other women who will be victim and might have been
(15:04):
victim being used as a sexual object.
Speaker 1 (15:07):
Okay, every word of it's true. What if every word
are we supposed to How do we look at something
when somebody's saying they are a victim of a powerful man.
How are we supposed to look at that? How do
we scrutinize without then discouraging other women who are absolute
(15:28):
victims from coming forward?
Speaker 2 (15:30):
So I think this is a little bit different TJ.
So just by what she wrote, may I point out, yes,
that she claims to have gotten unwanted, unsolicited, sexually explicit
photos from Jeremy Renner.
Speaker 1 (15:45):
I know where you're going.
Speaker 2 (15:46):
She did not need to respond. She did not need
to reply, and she certainly did not need to then
ask him to be a part of her project.
Speaker 1 (15:54):
This is where I pumped her choices. Okay, choices, who
are pumped the brakes? A a n upcoming, a starving
artist who wants an opportunity to work with that guy?
What then that allure that draw? I'm saying someone will
point to that and say, hey, he drew her in.
He's a powerful man. We've seen this all before.
Speaker 2 (16:16):
But if he did what she said he did, and
he very well may have, she knew what she was
walking into. He didn't send her flattering text saying I
really liked your work or I saw what you did here.
I think you're an interesting person. Let's meet up. He's
if it's true, because we don't know that that he
(16:37):
sent her these, and he denies it, flatly denies sending
her sexually explicit photos. Absolutely, But if he did do that,
I would just say she's at the time, she was
thirty seven years old. What did she think she was
entering into. What kind of a professional relationship did she
(16:57):
think would be expected. I'm just saying we have to
at least acknowledge she's a grown ass woman. She's not
twenty one years old, she's not nineteen years old. And
if all of what she says is true, she chose
to engage with him, and she chose to invite him
to be a part of her projects.
Speaker 1 (17:14):
Okay, fine, fine to all of that. Now we get
to the next thing. Let's say she just made a
bad decision. Let's say, okay, he sent her these messages,
that's true, unsolicit pornographic images sent them, She got drawn in.
That still doesn't mean the non consensual encounter did not happen.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
So if it happened, look, I appreciate and I understand
that women feel concerned and upset and scared to say
and point to someone who is powerful. Going to police
isn't always an option. It doesn't feel like an option.
So I get that. I guess a lot of folks
would just question her choice to then continue in a
(18:00):
romantic relationship with him. If that's your first encounter, your
first physical encounter with somebody, after they've already sent you
sexually explicit emails, and then the first physical encounter you
have with them, you say that you were forced into
a sexual encounter that you did not consent to. Then
you're going to continue to converse with this person and
(18:23):
invite them to be a part of your projects and
then say you had consensual relationship with them afterwards. That's
just a tough thing for I think anyone to get
their head around.
Speaker 1 (18:35):
But now here we are Jeremy Rinner Oscar nominee has
been accused of sexually assaulting someone, yes.
Speaker 2 (18:44):
And threatening to call ice on them, and also sending
explicit photos. So it's a multitude of of harassment.
Speaker 1 (18:56):
Oh, I am glad you mentioned I Stay here, folks,
we're going to tell tell you about the ice threat,
the one that's making so many headlines out there. Exactly
what did he say? And actually why didn't she say
more about that particular incident. Also, folks, we're gonna go through.
We're gonna go through as quickly as we can. Some
(19:17):
of her other messages, we don't need to interpret them
for you. We're just gonna let you hear them for yourself.
All right, folks, woke back, We continue you here, Amy
and TJ with Jeremy Renner of the accusations coming at
(19:40):
him from a filmmaker a Yeezuo, a thirty eight year
old filmmaker working on a documentary and also an animated
show that he or movie that he was a part of,
now accusing him of a non consensual sexual encounter. And
she claimed ropes from her instan post, this was her boyfriend,
(20:02):
was it not?
Speaker 2 (20:03):
She definitely it seems from the posts from what she
had put up that she believed that she and Jeremy
Renner were in a romantic relationship.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
Now, a lot of the headlines robes, I think it
might have been you brought this story to my attention,
like you're not going to believe this, And I think
one of the big headlines was this, Yes, this Chinese
is her Chinese filmmaker, she's the Chinese. So one of
the things, one of the accusations, you're going to see
this in a lot of headlines, Jeremy Renner threatens to
(20:34):
call ice on Chinese filmmaker. That's I'm not sure if
that's true, because we see the post she makes robes, yes,
and she says something, but she excuse me, she didn't
say She shows but didn't show enough.
Speaker 2 (20:52):
So I'll actually tell you exactly what her and you
all can check it out for yourself and her Instagram page.
But she says, please see written rights. The denial is
bad conduct giving all the documents and communications produced. What
she produced is a It looks like a WhatsApp back
and forth, and it says Jeremy Renner. It shows her saying,
go to hell. All names are given. You are a pig.
(21:15):
You use all apps to send dick picks. No one
said anything so far. And then you see at the
very bottom, so this is supposedly from Jeremy Renner where
he writes immigration will be notified of your But then
it's cut off and clearly there is another sentence. You
can see the tops of the letters. But she chose
(21:36):
not to include the rest of what he responded to
her with, and yet made the claim that he threatened
to call Ice on her, so that one line immigration
will be notified of your But then she like, why
wouldn't she show the second line number one, number two?
We don't obviously have verification that this text exchange is real.
Speaker 1 (21:59):
That is such a you new folks are going to
run with that headline threatens to call ice at this
time and day, and all those headlines.
Speaker 2 (22:07):
It makes him look like a total asshole on top
of being potentially a sexual predator.
Speaker 1 (22:12):
And again, all of that stuff about him could be true,
but it's so difficult. Roads. We've talked about these so often.
When it comes to this, you can't you can't put
this genie back in that bottle. Once somebody has attached
to Jeremy Renner, he's a potential rapist, He's a potential
guy who is trying to get a woman deported. Those
are the headlines. How do you put that back in?
(22:35):
I don't know? And how do you have this discussion roads?
We talk about it all the time. There are real
victims out there who are not coming forward and they
watch a story like this, and what are they supposed
to do.
Speaker 2 (22:44):
It's frustrating because look, I it's tough. We don't know
what the truth is and that's the problem. But when
you do have questionable behavior, and we're going to read
a couple of these questionable posts that she made on
Instagram that that do leave you wondering what actually is
going on? And I think it's fair to question. I
(23:05):
think we yes, we want to believe women. Yes, we
want to believe their stories. I obviously want to be
we are on that page. And yet when you still
have to give, it's not fair to have Jeremy Renner
immediately assume to be the worst person, to assume that
he did these things, assume that he must be guilty,
even if he is a player, even if he is
(23:27):
a ladies man, whatever you want to assign to it.
It doesn't mean that he is a sexual predator.
Speaker 1 (23:33):
But if we assume he's not guilty, that means we
are assuming she's not telling the truth. And if you
do that, we have a problem. I don't know, Rodes.
We've talked about these planning and I don't know what
way to go and how to do it. But we'll
continue talking. Let's take and folks, we'll just go through
and we'll just give you verbatim the post that she read,
(23:55):
this first one here is from she thanks a reporter,
this was bizarre, but this is a tabloid reporter. But
she was speaking very highly and thanking these folks for
reporting her story.
Speaker 2 (24:06):
Yes, and to be like really pointed this was a tabloid.
She says, thank you tabloid for letting me tell my story,
a story of survival against domestic aggression, porn abuse and
abuse of workplace and abuse as a woman. I'm sure
there will be many other stories who will come forward,
and I really invite the ones that have not spoken
(24:26):
to speak up. Our projects and all the people that
have worked really hard and that are a part of
the project will also survive the storm.
Speaker 1 (24:34):
This next one here, Robe is a this was You've
you and I probably talked about this exchange more than anyo.
Speaker 2 (24:41):
Yeah, because this one to me was eye opening and
it speaks to where her head was. And again, let's
just like reiterate. They met in July and both of
them have agreed they had a sexual encounter, and he
claims that was it. They met once again in August,
but nothing happened and physically between the two of them.
(25:01):
In fact, he claims he rejected her. So she says,
and she writes, I believed in a Disney fairy tale
when Jeremy Renner reached out to me and pursued me,
I thought, until recently love was pure and his accident
made him a new person. Therefore, and then she this
is when she chronicles of Disney and Stardust future movie.
(25:22):
Those are her two projects included him and the fairy
Tale I Believed In was interwoven in the two works.
Oh that seems I don't I don't want to put it.
It makes you question her story.
Speaker 1 (25:42):
Out of the blue, I received two photos of Jeremy
Renner and then a string of unwanted, unsolicited pornographic images
of him. I believed in a Disney fairy tale when
Jeremy Renner reached out to me and pursued me. She's
describing the exact same moment in two very different ways
(26:05):
by her own words. I am not I want to
give her every benefit of the doubt. I'm only reading
what she's saying.
Speaker 2 (26:13):
Rob So which one is true? And can they both
be true?
Speaker 1 (26:17):
He reached out to me messages previous you were saying
he was sending unsolicited, unwanted pornographic stuff. I don't she
those are her.
Speaker 2 (26:30):
Words, And then she's I thought until recently love was
pure and his accident made him a new person. So
she and also when she's describing, as we pointed out earlier,
she claims that she doesn't want to be retaliatory and
at the same time she wants to be transparent and
then she's like, cancel Jeremy Renner. None of that, all,
(26:54):
all of what she's saying. They don't jibe, they don't
work together, they're confusing.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
Let me use that for his own pleasure. I'm reading
something to Steve. This is the next one, you know'ta
skip that next. I'm gonna down to this one. When
I first received pornographic images, they were unwanted and unsolicited cyberflashing.
Then he talked me into a relationship with him, sold
me his love. However, the truth that is the most
(27:23):
devastating came out in the recent weeks when he set
up fan smear campaign started devastating our documentary at Chronicles
of Disney and Our Future or our first ever animated
feature at Stardust Future Movie, which will be released in
a few weeks. As a woman and as a filmmaker,
(27:44):
being in a relationship with someone with whom you also
have projects in the process of being released, I debated
for a long time how to present it, given the
difficulties I went through and the truth I discovered slowly
throughout the last few months and ropes. I can't remember
why I did it, but I underlined this next section.
Speaker 2 (28:02):
You did, she wrote, I thought it would be more
respectful for myself and for him to present it under
the denomination of love, rather than a new relationship or
a fleeing or whatever you want to call it. I
have always respected him and will continue to respect him,
but the love and the respect has not been reciprocated.
(28:25):
When the smear campaign started attacking us and continue to
attack us online, I thought the truth about him should
come out. And truth is a defense.
Speaker 1 (28:34):
I don't want to interpret. I'm gonna keep reading. My
intention is not retaliation, but transparency. I have worked tirelessly
to complete my two films Masters of Cinema, Chronicles of
Disney and Stardust Future, both of which honor the artisans
of Hollywood and the spirit of creative collaboration. I have
the right to protect my professional reputation, to set boundaries,
(28:55):
and to correct misinformation when selective reporting distorts the facts.
Speaker 2 (29:00):
He goes on to say, my team and I we
have all suffered, and our story is, in the end
a story of survivors. My truth led many women contact
me speaking about the same pain with him. I think
I have spoken a lot and provided all the receipts here.
I wish to reroute our com to two projects and
Oscar campaigns going forward, a last promotional nod.
Speaker 1 (29:27):
And why not. I mean, yes, it's gonna rar people
the wrong way. I am trying to and I and
even going throughout here, I was so careful and trying
to make sure of our tone. It feels rogues as
if you always defer, you have to. Women have not
been believed for so long was the case. So they're
(29:48):
being listened to and believed, so we have to. I
don't know what to do but start there with believing
every word out of her mouth. But if I do that,
good Christ, I am not leaving in a room for
Jeremy Renner to say anything.
Speaker 2 (30:06):
I think it will be very interesting to see. This
is obviously getting ugly. It's gotten ugly all weekend long,
and there will be more to come in the days
that follow, and we will be following this because look,
this is a tough spot. Yes, we want to believe
women one hundred percent, and for too long we haven't.
(30:27):
And yet at the same time, I think it's only
fair to not tell someone or assume that someone's guilty
before they've had a chance to prove otherwise. So look,
Jeremy Renner's team says they have hundreds of emails from
this woman where she was obsessed with him, harassing him,
professing her love to him, wanting to have sexual texting
(30:49):
back and forth. So look, I imagine that in his defense,
if that's there and they do have that in their possession,
they will be releasing that. She's been releasing what she
has on her Instagram. So I would think this is
going to get flushed out that if everything each is
saying is provable, Let's see all the receipts.
Speaker 1 (31:09):
And folks, if you all want to see ye Joe,
I think ye Joe is why I and then Joe
Zhou have that right, Okay, ye Joe is the name
if you want to check her out on Instagram. But
it's all there for you to see. We just want
to chime in and jump on this one, folks. We
will continue to follow this. There will be updates robes,
I believe, probably very very soon.
Speaker 2 (31:31):
Maybe even on Monday, maybe even tomorrow. Yes, And with
that everyone, thank you so much for listening to us.
I made me roboch alongside T. J. Holmes. We'll talk
to you soon.
And evolks. Sit is Sunday, November ninth, and be straight
with you, Robot and I have had a very difficult
time in conversations today about this story and what to
make of it. Hollywood superstar Jeremy Renner has been accused
of some atrocious behavior and we're not exactly sure what
(00:23):
it is. Welcome to this episode of Amy and TJ. Rod.
You didn't know how we're going to start this, but
is that we see headlines, but then we read details
and we're trying to make sense of this story. But
some very serious allegations, including of a non consensual sexual encounter.
Speaker 2 (00:42):
And that's been a lot of our debate here. So
we've got a Now, I guess her birthday is today?
Speaker 1 (00:47):
You said, yes, yesterday?
Speaker 2 (00:49):
Eight year old yesterday. So thirty eight year old Asian
filmmaker who is claiming and the way she puts it
is that they had a non consensual sexual encounter that
turned consensual. And that's a confusing statement in and of itself.
Is she claiming that he raped her? Is she claiming
(01:10):
that he's sexually assaulted her? Is she stating something now
with the context of him not wanting a further relationship
with her, the regret she had, it's hard to know
where it all, where it falls. There's a big gray area.
Speaker 1 (01:25):
Okay, so we want to deal with let's get away
from interpretation or trying to understand what somebody might be
trying to say. We'll just tell you exactly what she
is saying. And the film director we're talking about here
is Yee Joe. She's not someone necessarily that's a household
name that you will know. She has very limited credits,
if you will, as a director, but she's putting together
a couple of films now, including one that Jeremy Rinner
(01:48):
voiced a character in that's an animated film, and then
another a documentary she's doing about Disney that he did
an interview for.
Speaker 2 (01:54):
So yes, yes, he was actually just he did a
kind of a quick interview, I believe, where he was
describing the accident, the life threatening accident he had in
twenty twenty three where he broke thirty eight bones in
a snowplowing accident. So yes, he lented his interview to
that and his voice to another project.
Speaker 1 (02:12):
Okay, so that's the extent of their relationship. And now
because of that introduction, if you will. She is alleging Robes,
and I want to make sure I get the facts right.
She's alleging that he wanted to call or threatened to
call Ice on her, threatened that their first encounter sexual
(02:32):
encounter was non consensual, that he had threatening behavior to
the point that she locked herself in a room and
was afraid to come out. This was at his home
to have that right after he had a bottle of
wine and was drunk that night. Am I missing something?
Speaker 2 (02:48):
And she also claims that he sent her sexually explicit photos,
so unwanted unsolicited sexually explicit photos over.
Speaker 1 (02:59):
To So to set that stage, I want to start.
We're gonna read through it, and she we should say Robes.
She has been for a week now sending almost or
posting non stop about this about him and making clear
she wants his career.
Speaker 2 (03:17):
Over because at the end, and there are several several
Instagram posts that she's put out there, but she has
a lot of hashtags and the first hashtag on all
of them is cancel Jeremy Runner. So she has a
specific goal in mind.
Speaker 1 (03:34):
Sure, So this is up. We're just setting the stage.
I'm reading verbatim one of her posts Robes as I
would say, maybe up to twenty, and they have long,
long messages attached to them. Some of them just say
cancel as the image or a couple of other ones.
I think one says domestic violence. Several of them say cancel. Actually,
(03:57):
but she has life in death.
Speaker 2 (03:59):
She she actually points to a girl who died by suicide.
She claims she died by suicide after attending a Jeffrey
Renner sorry Jeremy Renner orgy. She's making all of these
wild accusations, so.
Speaker 1 (04:14):
Let's just start. I'm just gonna read this as just
setting the stage. Quote. At the early stage of our exchanges,
I received unsolicited intimate photos and messages that were uninvited
and inappropriate. The first physical encounter was not consensual. I
asked for more time and gentleness, but my boundaries were
(04:36):
not respected. Later interactions became consensual, yet the earlier incident
remained deeply distressing. That's just what he said. She said.
People can come to whatever conclusion and try to interpret that.
But Robes, the first physical encounter was not consensual. Is
(04:57):
that anything short of a sexual assault?
Speaker 2 (04:59):
That seems like a crime. The way she worded it,
the way she phrased it that would be something that,
if it were true, would be a criminal act. Correct. Yes,
And it's interesting because you mentioned her Instagram some of
the other words that she used in some of her
posts love versus fling. She was very upset that his
(05:22):
side described it as a fleeing or as a one off,
where she in all of these posts talks about their
relationship as being a love relationship, something much more serious
than he's acknowledged it.
Speaker 1 (05:39):
Okay, and to that point did she not. I'm not
sure how recently this was, but she put out messages,
She put out Instagram posts not just suggesting but saying
that she was involved with Jeremy Renner.
Speaker 2 (05:53):
She believes, according to her Instagram post and certainly what
she has written, she believed and believes that they were
in a relationship and that is not what Jeremy Renner's
team is saying.
Speaker 1 (06:07):
So and reminder, if you all do not know Jeremy Renner, Yes,
Hawkeye from the Marvel franchise, but he is much more
than the Hawkeye from the Marvel franchise roads. Those are
enormous movies, so that makes him a worldwide superstar. But
this dude has some acting Chops credentials and bona fides
to his name.
Speaker 2 (06:25):
Absolutely. The hurt Locker heard of that. Yes, and he
was nominated for an Academy Award.
Speaker 1 (06:31):
For that the best Actor. That's not that's a big deal.
Speaker 2 (06:35):
It's a huge every time he is mentioned or introduced
in any room he is Academy Award nominated, Oscar nominated
actor Jeremy Renner the Town, Ben Affleck.
Speaker 1 (06:47):
Next year, Damon Very next year.
Speaker 2 (06:48):
Yes, these are huge movie franchises. He is a household
name and he certainly he's not just respected for being
some hunky leading man. He is absolutely given a lot
of bona fides for his acting Chops, and.
Speaker 1 (07:05):
We should mention it as well. The last several mission
Impossible movies with Tom Cruise, he was added to that franchise.
So we mentioned that to say, this is a ginormous
Hollywood superstar who is being accused robes of I hate
trying to interpret what somebody is saying, but when you
say that your physical encounter was not consensual, you are
(07:30):
saying that you were violated. You were saying that you
were raped, you were saying that you were sexually assaulted
in some way. That is criminal. And she is saying
this happened in recent.
Speaker 2 (07:39):
Months in July is what she is saying. So according
to both of them, I believe she's acknowledged this as well.
Their first meeting where they actually met one on one.
She lives in la he lives in Reno, but they
had sex that night, So their first night that they
actually physically met, they actually had sex. Jeremy Renner's team
(08:01):
says it was consensual. She is now saying it was
not consensual.
Speaker 1 (08:05):
But she is saying that a relationship continued. And we're
going to read some of her messages here that suggests
robes that she was in a loving or thought she
was in a loving relationship. She talks about how she
still loves him even.
Speaker 2 (08:20):
Which is bizarre. If you love someone and then the
first hashtag you have at the bottom of your Instagram
is cancel Jeremy Renner. This is a very bizarre case.
And I will say we'll get into the details of
what she put out on Instagram, but her defense and
her receipts, she keeps calling them of text messages on
(08:41):
WhatsApp that she's putting out there on her Instagram account.
First of all, can't be verified, obviously, but also have
certain very important things cut off, and she puts pictures
out there that show him bizarrely sitting on a couch
that makes it look like she's proving, see, I was
with him in real life, here I am with him,
Like she's almost wanting to prove to everyone that she
(09:02):
did physically know him and had him in close proximity
in a living room setting that somehow that proves what
she's saying.
Speaker 1 (09:11):
I mean, she's trying to make her case on social media,
which is not obviously anybody who suggests a good idea,
but she is continuing on and on. You all, We're
talking about almost volumes of texts of Instagram posts she's
putting out trying to make her case. We should robes
right now before we get into more of what she
put out on Instagram to say what he and his
(09:34):
lawyer they have absolutely responded and responded stroggly. The cease
and desist letters are flying back and forth between these folks,
But he and his lawyer are absolutely defending him in
the strongest of ways.
Speaker 2 (09:47):
Yes, he says that these are false, outrageous, and highly
defamatory statements. Here is what his attorney said. The true
facts are that Miss Joe has relentlessly and aggressively harassed
and pursued my client for months with no reciprocation on
my client's part other than a single brief encounter on
(10:07):
July twelfth, twenty twenty five.
Speaker 1 (10:10):
And we're bring that right. They're acknowledging, and they call it,
probably intentionally a brief encounter versus a sexual encounter. But
we're supposed to assume that that's what it was. Are
we reading this the same?
Speaker 2 (10:23):
That's exactly how I read it. And then they talk
about how she was sending him hundreds of messages, sexually
explicit messages expressing her love so from Joe to Renner.
They claim they have these, and they also said that
she aggressively pursued a sexual romantic sexting relationship and has
(10:47):
manufactured fake and outlandis claims to generate publicity for her projects.
I mentioned the hashtags. They all begin with cancel Jeremy Renner,
but they all include hashtag of the names of her
two projects that she'd like people to check out.
Speaker 1 (11:04):
What are we supposed to do with that?
Speaker 2 (11:05):
Though? It's a tough thing to do if you're And
then she also has hashtag survivor. So you're claiming and fine,
she's claiming that she was raped. Let's just be honest.
That is what she's claiming. She wants everyone to cancel
Jeremy Renner. She wants everyone to acknowledge her as a survivor.
And she's also then at the same time, in the
(11:26):
same breath, promoting her projects. That's tough.
Speaker 1 (11:29):
What's the I don't know what here's supposed to do?
I mean, she's can you do both? You know what
you can, You should be allowed to, but you have
to also understand the optics. That's fair. You could do
it and she could be sense.
Speaker 2 (11:43):
You can do whatever you'd like.
Speaker 1 (11:44):
You to understand.
Speaker 2 (11:45):
Take away, Yes, what they will based on their questioning motive.
They're questioning why. So there are a couple of questions
as to whether or not she felt who knows her
ego got bruise, she got rejected, it could or something
areas could have happened, like it's one or the other.
And also she's taking advantage potentially of a situation where
(12:07):
she's trying she claims to be transparent, set the record straight.
She says she doesn't want to cause any harm. She
said she doesn't want to vilify him. She wants to
be transparent, right, is that what the word she will use.
Speaker 1 (12:21):
She wants to be transparency. This is not retaliation.
Speaker 2 (12:23):
This retaliation that was the word I was sarching for.
She didn't want to be retaliatory, but she just wanted
to be transparent. That's fine. I just think it's definitely
a little bit difficult to swallow when you then are
also promoting projects.
Speaker 1 (12:36):
Okay, that's that's fair enough. I think yeah, if that's uh,
that doesn't have to be our opinion. That's fair to
acknowledge that. Of course, people going to look at that way,
and as we start sharing her messages here, it is
going to come up, and it does. She I think
every single message includes a mention, and it's not just
a mention of the movie, it's the actual tag to
(12:57):
the Yes.
Speaker 2 (12:57):
It's clearly she has the She has basically has the
Instagram handle for all of her projects, so that if
you're on her Instagram page and you're looking at her accusations,
within the accusations within the narrative, she does have links
to her project.
Speaker 1 (13:10):
Doesn't change her truth, does it not? It doesn't, it does.
Speaker 2 (13:13):
But it would allow or at least I'm sure some
folks it would.
Speaker 1 (13:17):
It's an easy opening to.
Speaker 2 (13:19):
Question the motivation.
Speaker 1 (13:20):
Easy.
Speaker 2 (13:20):
I also don't know. Here's what I don't know. She
has one point eight million followers on Instagram right now.
I don't know if that was the case before she
started making these accusations. Not sure, no idea what her
Instagram was beforehand. But she has a significant following.
Speaker 1 (13:37):
Yeah, she was. She's spen termed a what certainly a
filmmaker but before this and influencer I believe online as well.
So some of her we're going to hear. This kind
of sets the stage. This first one we're going to
read and again, folks, we are going to read just
verbatim what she wrote and what her words are. This one,
another one kind of sets the stage. Here you wanted
to end? Where is it you take this? Can you
(13:57):
take that first one? In ten thousand?
Speaker 2 (13:59):
Yes? G June twenty twenty five, out of the blue,
I received two photos of Jeremy Renner and then a
string of unwonted, unsolicited pornographic images of himself via DM
and WhatsApp. That was his introduction to me in the
same way, according to past media reports, I subsequently discovered
(14:19):
he shared with other women in the past as self
intro After having calls and text discussions, he allured me
and sold me that he is looking for a relation
and of course seduced flattered that he was a Hollywood
star fantasizing and loving me so much, I believed in
him the power of love and embarked on the most
(14:41):
difficult months plus two Oscar running projects. I kindly invited
him to be a part. Subsequently, I discovered to be
destroyed by a setup smear fans campaign against me and
our two projects. This is alarming to know on Hollywood
we can still act in such manner. I'm worried for
other women who will be victim and might have been
(15:04):
victim being used as a sexual object.
Speaker 1 (15:07):
Okay, every word of it's true. What if every word
are we supposed to How do we look at something
when somebody's saying they are a victim of a powerful man.
How are we supposed to look at that? How do
we scrutinize without then discouraging other women who are absolute
(15:28):
victims from coming forward?
Speaker 2 (15:30):
So I think this is a little bit different TJ.
So just by what she wrote, may I point out, yes,
that she claims to have gotten unwanted, unsolicited, sexually explicit
photos from Jeremy Renner.
Speaker 1 (15:45):
I know where you're going.
Speaker 2 (15:46):
She did not need to respond. She did not need
to reply, and she certainly did not need to then
ask him to be a part of her project.
Speaker 1 (15:54):
This is where I pumped her choices. Okay, choices, who
are pumped the brakes? A a n upcoming, a starving
artist who wants an opportunity to work with that guy?
What then that allure that draw? I'm saying someone will
point to that and say, hey, he drew her in.
He's a powerful man. We've seen this all before.
Speaker 2 (16:16):
But if he did what she said he did, and
he very well may have, she knew what she was
walking into. He didn't send her flattering text saying I
really liked your work or I saw what you did here.
I think you're an interesting person. Let's meet up. He's
if it's true, because we don't know that that he
(16:37):
sent her these, and he denies it, flatly denies sending
her sexually explicit photos. Absolutely, But if he did do that,
I would just say she's at the time, she was
thirty seven years old. What did she think she was
entering into. What kind of a professional relationship did she
(16:57):
think would be expected. I'm just saying we have to
at least acknowledge she's a grown ass woman. She's not
twenty one years old, she's not nineteen years old. And
if all of what she says is true, she chose
to engage with him, and she chose to invite him
to be a part of her projects.
Speaker 1 (17:14):
Okay, fine, fine to all of that. Now we get
to the next thing. Let's say she just made a
bad decision. Let's say, okay, he sent her these messages,
that's true, unsolicit pornographic images sent them, She got drawn in.
That still doesn't mean the non consensual encounter did not happen.
Speaker 2 (17:39):
So if it happened, look, I appreciate and I understand
that women feel concerned and upset and scared to say
and point to someone who is powerful. Going to police
isn't always an option. It doesn't feel like an option.
So I get that. I guess a lot of folks
would just question her choice to then continue in a
(18:00):
romantic relationship with him. If that's your first encounter, your
first physical encounter with somebody, after they've already sent you
sexually explicit emails, and then the first physical encounter you
have with them, you say that you were forced into
a sexual encounter that you did not consent to. Then
you're going to continue to converse with this person and
(18:23):
invite them to be a part of your projects and
then say you had consensual relationship with them afterwards. That's
just a tough thing for I think anyone to get
their head around.
Speaker 1 (18:35):
But now here we are Jeremy Rinner Oscar nominee has
been accused of sexually assaulting someone, yes.
Speaker 2 (18:44):
And threatening to call ice on them, and also sending
explicit photos. So it's a multitude of of harassment.
Speaker 1 (18:56):
Oh, I am glad you mentioned I Stay here, folks,
we're going to tell tell you about the ice threat,
the one that's making so many headlines out there. Exactly
what did he say? And actually why didn't she say
more about that particular incident. Also, folks, we're gonna go through.
We're gonna go through as quickly as we can. Some
(19:17):
of her other messages, we don't need to interpret them
for you. We're just gonna let you hear them for yourself.
All right, folks, woke back, We continue you here, Amy
and TJ with Jeremy Renner of the accusations coming at
(19:40):
him from a filmmaker a Yeezuo, a thirty eight year
old filmmaker working on a documentary and also an animated
show that he or movie that he was a part of,
now accusing him of a non consensual sexual encounter. And
she claimed ropes from her instan post, this was her boyfriend,
(20:02):
was it not?
Speaker 2 (20:03):
She definitely it seems from the posts from what she
had put up that she believed that she and Jeremy
Renner were in a romantic relationship.
Speaker 1 (20:14):
Now, a lot of the headlines robes, I think it
might have been you brought this story to my attention,
like you're not going to believe this, And I think
one of the big headlines was this, Yes, this Chinese
is her Chinese filmmaker, she's the Chinese. So one of
the things, one of the accusations, you're going to see
this in a lot of headlines, Jeremy Renner threatens to
(20:34):
call ice on Chinese filmmaker. That's I'm not sure if
that's true, because we see the post she makes robes, yes,
and she says something, but she excuse me, she didn't
say She shows but didn't show enough.
Speaker 2 (20:52):
So I'll actually tell you exactly what her and you
all can check it out for yourself and her Instagram page.
But she says, please see written rights. The denial is
bad conduct giving all the documents and communications produced. What
she produced is a It looks like a WhatsApp back
and forth, and it says Jeremy Renner. It shows her saying,
go to hell. All names are given. You are a pig.
(21:15):
You use all apps to send dick picks. No one
said anything so far. And then you see at the
very bottom, so this is supposedly from Jeremy Renner where
he writes immigration will be notified of your But then
it's cut off and clearly there is another sentence. You
can see the tops of the letters. But she chose
(21:36):
not to include the rest of what he responded to
her with, and yet made the claim that he threatened
to call Ice on her, so that one line immigration
will be notified of your But then she like, why
wouldn't she show the second line number one, number two?
We don't obviously have verification that this text exchange is real.
Speaker 1 (21:59):
That is such a you new folks are going to
run with that headline threatens to call ice at this
time and day, and all those headlines.
Speaker 2 (22:07):
It makes him look like a total asshole on top
of being potentially a sexual predator.
Speaker 1 (22:12):
And again, all of that stuff about him could be true,
but it's so difficult. Roads. We've talked about these so often.
When it comes to this, you can't you can't put
this genie back in that bottle. Once somebody has attached
to Jeremy Renner, he's a potential rapist, He's a potential
guy who is trying to get a woman deported. Those
are the headlines. How do you put that back in?
(22:35):
I don't know? And how do you have this discussion roads?
We talk about it all the time. There are real
victims out there who are not coming forward and they
watch a story like this, and what are they supposed
to do.
Speaker 2 (22:44):
It's frustrating because look, I it's tough. We don't know
what the truth is and that's the problem. But when
you do have questionable behavior, and we're going to read
a couple of these questionable posts that she made on
Instagram that that do leave you wondering what actually is
going on? And I think it's fair to question. I
(23:05):
think we yes, we want to believe women. Yes, we
want to believe their stories. I obviously want to be
we are on that page. And yet when you still
have to give, it's not fair to have Jeremy Renner
immediately assume to be the worst person, to assume that
he did these things, assume that he must be guilty,
even if he is a player, even if he is
(23:27):
a ladies man, whatever you want to assign to it.
It doesn't mean that he is a sexual predator.
Speaker 1 (23:33):
But if we assume he's not guilty, that means we
are assuming she's not telling the truth. And if you
do that, we have a problem. I don't know, Rodes.
We've talked about these planning and I don't know what
way to go and how to do it. But we'll
continue talking. Let's take and folks, we'll just go through
and we'll just give you verbatim the post that she read,
(23:55):
this first one here is from she thanks a reporter,
this was bizarre, but this is a tabloid reporter. But
she was speaking very highly and thanking these folks for
reporting her story.
Speaker 2 (24:06):
Yes, and to be like really pointed this was a tabloid.
She says, thank you tabloid for letting me tell my story,
a story of survival against domestic aggression, porn abuse and
abuse of workplace and abuse as a woman. I'm sure
there will be many other stories who will come forward,
and I really invite the ones that have not spoken
(24:26):
to speak up. Our projects and all the people that
have worked really hard and that are a part of
the project will also survive the storm.
Speaker 1 (24:34):
This next one here, Robe is a this was You've
you and I probably talked about this exchange more than anyo.
Speaker 2 (24:41):
Yeah, because this one to me was eye opening and
it speaks to where her head was. And again, let's
just like reiterate. They met in July and both of
them have agreed they had a sexual encounter, and he
claims that was it. They met once again in August,
but nothing happened and physically between the two of them.
(25:01):
In fact, he claims he rejected her. So she says,
and she writes, I believed in a Disney fairy tale
when Jeremy Renner reached out to me and pursued me,
I thought, until recently love was pure and his accident
made him a new person. Therefore, and then she this
is when she chronicles of Disney and Stardust future movie.
(25:22):
Those are her two projects included him and the fairy
Tale I Believed In was interwoven in the two works.
Oh that seems I don't I don't want to put it.
It makes you question her story.
Speaker 1 (25:42):
Out of the blue, I received two photos of Jeremy
Renner and then a string of unwanted, unsolicited pornographic images
of him. I believed in a Disney fairy tale when
Jeremy Renner reached out to me and pursued me. She's
describing the exact same moment in two very different ways
(26:05):
by her own words. I am not I want to
give her every benefit of the doubt. I'm only reading
what she's saying.
Speaker 2 (26:13):
Rob So which one is true? And can they both
be true?
Speaker 1 (26:17):
He reached out to me messages previous you were saying
he was sending unsolicited, unwanted pornographic stuff. I don't she
those are her.
Speaker 2 (26:30):
Words, And then she's I thought until recently love was
pure and his accident made him a new person. So
she and also when she's describing, as we pointed out earlier,
she claims that she doesn't want to be retaliatory and
at the same time she wants to be transparent and
then she's like, cancel Jeremy Renner. None of that, all,
(26:54):
all of what she's saying. They don't jibe, they don't
work together, they're confusing.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
Let me use that for his own pleasure. I'm reading
something to Steve. This is the next one, you know'ta
skip that next. I'm gonna down to this one. When
I first received pornographic images, they were unwanted and unsolicited cyberflashing.
Then he talked me into a relationship with him, sold
me his love. However, the truth that is the most
(27:23):
devastating came out in the recent weeks when he set
up fan smear campaign started devastating our documentary at Chronicles
of Disney and Our Future or our first ever animated
feature at Stardust Future Movie, which will be released in
a few weeks. As a woman and as a filmmaker,
(27:44):
being in a relationship with someone with whom you also
have projects in the process of being released, I debated
for a long time how to present it, given the
difficulties I went through and the truth I discovered slowly
throughout the last few months and ropes. I can't remember
why I did it, but I underlined this next section.
Speaker 2 (28:02):
You did, she wrote, I thought it would be more
respectful for myself and for him to present it under
the denomination of love, rather than a new relationship or
a fleeing or whatever you want to call it. I
have always respected him and will continue to respect him,
but the love and the respect has not been reciprocated.
(28:25):
When the smear campaign started attacking us and continue to
attack us online, I thought the truth about him should
come out. And truth is a defense.
Speaker 1 (28:34):
I don't want to interpret. I'm gonna keep reading. My
intention is not retaliation, but transparency. I have worked tirelessly
to complete my two films Masters of Cinema, Chronicles of
Disney and Stardust Future, both of which honor the artisans
of Hollywood and the spirit of creative collaboration. I have
the right to protect my professional reputation, to set boundaries,
(28:55):
and to correct misinformation when selective reporting distorts the facts.
Speaker 2 (29:00):
He goes on to say, my team and I we
have all suffered, and our story is, in the end
a story of survivors. My truth led many women contact
me speaking about the same pain with him. I think
I have spoken a lot and provided all the receipts here.
I wish to reroute our com to two projects and
Oscar campaigns going forward, a last promotional nod.
Speaker 1 (29:27):
And why not. I mean, yes, it's gonna rar people
the wrong way. I am trying to and I and
even going throughout here, I was so careful and trying
to make sure of our tone. It feels rogues as
if you always defer, you have to. Women have not
been believed for so long was the case. So they're
(29:48):
being listened to and believed, so we have to. I
don't know what to do but start there with believing
every word out of her mouth. But if I do that,
good Christ, I am not leaving in a room for
Jeremy Renner to say anything.
Speaker 2 (30:06):
I think it will be very interesting to see. This
is obviously getting ugly. It's gotten ugly all weekend long,
and there will be more to come in the days
that follow, and we will be following this because look,
this is a tough spot. Yes, we want to believe
women one hundred percent, and for too long we haven't.
(30:27):
And yet at the same time, I think it's only
fair to not tell someone or assume that someone's guilty
before they've had a chance to prove otherwise. So look,
Jeremy Renner's team says they have hundreds of emails from
this woman where she was obsessed with him, harassing him,
professing her love to him, wanting to have sexual texting
(30:49):
back and forth. So look, I imagine that in his defense,
if that's there and they do have that in their possession,
they will be releasing that. She's been releasing what she
has on her Instagram. So I would think this is
going to get flushed out that if everything each is
saying is provable, Let's see all the receipts.
Speaker 1 (31:09):
And folks, if you all want to see ye Joe,
I think ye Joe is why I and then Joe
Zhou have that right, Okay, ye Joe is the name
if you want to check her out on Instagram. But
it's all there for you to see. We just want
to chime in and jump on this one, folks. We
will continue to follow this. There will be updates robes,
I believe, probably very very soon.
Speaker 2 (31:31):
Maybe even on Monday, maybe even tomorrow. Yes, And with
that everyone, thank you so much for listening to us.
I made me roboch alongside T. J. Holmes. We'll talk
to you soon.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Medal of Honor: Stories of Courage
Rewarded for bravery that goes above and beyond the call of duty, the Medal of Honor is the United States’ top military decoration. The stories we tell are about the heroes who have distinguished themselves by acts of heroism and courage that have saved lives. From Judith Resnik, the second woman in space, to Daniel Daly, one of only 19 people to have received the Medal of Honor twice, these are stories about those who have done the improbable and unexpected, who have sacrificed something in the name of something much bigger than themselves. Every Wednesday on Medal of Honor, uncover what their experiences tell us about the nature of sacrifice, why people put their lives in danger for others, and what happens after you’ve become a hero. Special thanks to series creator Dan McGinn, to the Congressional Medal of Honor Society and Adam Plumpton. Medal of Honor begins on May 28. Subscribe to Pushkin+ to hear ad-free episodes one week early. Find Pushkin+ on the Medal of Honor show page in Apple or at Pushkin.fm. Subscribe on Apple: apple.co/pushkin Subscribe on Pushkin: pushkin.fm/plus
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com