‘My publicist will want to cut this': Lea Michele shocks with reveal
Lea Michele has revealed a mortifying story about how her home turned into a 'Hollywood tragedy' tourist attraction after Cory Monteith died.
The US actress, 38, recently sat down with Jake Shane for an episode of his Therapuss podcast, where she opened up about the premature death of her then-boyfriend and Glee co-star in 2013.
Michele, who was at the peak of her fame playing Rachel Berry on the hit Fox series, was living in the heart of Los Angeles in West Hollywood when she would hear a bus tour guide pull up outside her house, talking in graphic detail about Monteith's death to a group of people alongside 'eerie' music.
'There was a tour bus that used to drive by my house … My publicist will probably want to cut this,' Michele began.
She continued, 'But it was the tour of people that have died. And after everything happened, this bus would come by, it was like the you know, 'Hollywood tragedy' tour bus.
'Here I was, 26 years old, and this tour bus would go back by my house. Every day I would hear these are the details and eerie music would be playing from the tour bus and there I was just at home.'
Michele paused, looking to the audio team in the room filming the interview.
'Everyone should see the shocked faces of everyone behind the camera,' she laughed.
Michele, who described the period of her life as 'so sad and so, so depressing', said the confronting intrusion eventually prompted her to relocate to the Pacific Palisades area higher up in the hills.
The performer, now a mother of two, began dating Monteith in February 2012, with the pair still together at the time of his death aged 31 in July 2013.
Asked whether the cast of Glee banded together in the wake of Monteith's passing, Michele simply responded, 'No.'
The Funny Girl star's reputation copped a beating in 2020 when her co-star Samantha Ware publicly accused Michele of making her life a 'living hell' when they worked together, as several other Glee stars coming forward with similar stories.
Michele didn't reference the backlash she faced, but did admit to struggling with heartbreak at the time.
'I think it [Monteith's death] really fractured so much,' she said.
'I mean, again, I can't speak for everyone. I think that maybe in some ways it did for certain people.
'For me, it was so hard. I just completely broke. I was in a really one-track mind of just doing my job.
'It was way too much to try to process at such a young age, but I'm very grateful for everyone there, whether or not they know it. I personally felt a lot of support.'
Michele is now married to businessman Zandy Reich, whom she married in 2019.
The couple share two children, a son born in August 2020, and a daughter born August last year.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

News.com.au
12 hours ago
- News.com.au
Brad Pitt's daughter Shiloh, 19, debuts new moniker after dropping famous dad's last name
Shiloh Jolie has entered a new era. The daughter of Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, 19, appeared at the launch of Isabel Marant's capsule collection with Net-A-Porter Thursday in Los Angeles — and she dropped a new moniker for the occasion. In a press release obtained by Page Six, Shiloh was credited as choreographer for an original dance number at the event — but she was listed as 'Shi Joli,' a moniker that pays homage to her famous mother while shortening her legal name. The dance featured dancers Tako Suzuki and Keoni Rose and was accompanied by singer Luella's performance of Naïve. The event, described as an 'intimate sunset dinner,' was held at Schindler's Oliver House in the Los Angeles enclave of Silver Lake. A-listers including Milla Jovovich, Alison brie, January Jones, Rachel Bilson, and more were in attendance at the soiree. Shiloh, who is frequently spotted heading to dance class in Los Angeles, famously requested to drop her father's last name on her 18th birthday in May 2024 — a change that was made official in August. After a judge signed off on the ruling, Shiloh Nouvel Jolie-Pitt legally became Shiloh Nouvel Jolie. She was said to have done the legwork on her own — without involving the Eternals actress. 'Shiloh hired her own lawyer and paid for it herself, so Angie doesn't know and can't speak for it,' a source told Entertainment Tonight at the time. In a July statement to Page Six, Shiloh's lawyer Peter Levine said in part that the teen made 'an independent and significant decision following painful events' in dropping 'Pitt' from her last name. Shiloh isn't the only of her famous siblings to have dropped the name following their parents' split and bitter divorce, which was finalised in December 2024 after an eight year battle. When Zahara Jolie-Pitt, 20, declared herself at Alpha Kappa Alpha's sorority induction ceremony at Spelman College in 2023, she shouted, 'Zahara Marley Jolie' in video of the event that circulated via social media. Amid the famous actors' custody dispute in 2021, a source claimed to Us Weekly that their oldest child, Maddox, 'doesn't use Pitt as his last name on documents that aren't legal and instead uses Jolie. Maddox wants to legally change his last name to Jolie, which Angelina has said she doesn't support.' Pitt, 61, and Jolie, 49, who wed in 2014, welcomed Shiloh on May 27, 2006, and her twin siblings Knox and Vivienne on July 12, 2008. Pitt officially adopted Jolie's adopted children Maddox, 23, and Zahara in 2005, and Pax, 21, in 2006. The F1 actor was said to have been 'aware and upset' when Shiloh legally dropped his last name. 'He's never felt more joy than when she was born,' an insider told People in June 2024. 'He always wanted a daughter.' 'The reminders that he's lost his children is, of course, not easy for Brad,' they continued. 'He loves his children and misses them. It's very sad.' In May, Pitt broke his silence on finalising the high-profile divorce from Angelina. When asked by GQ if he experienced 'relief,' he said, 'No, I don't think it was that major of a thing. Just something coming to fruition. Legally,' he told the outlet.

The Age
14 hours ago
- The Age
The Murdochs are feuding but their empire is thriving
Nothing in Fox's television schedules last year was quite as exciting – or, at times, as profane – as the drama that played out in a closed probate court in Reno, Nevada. Rupert Murdoch, the 94-year-old founder and controlling shareholder of Fox Corporation and its sister company News Corp, was trying to change the terms of a family trust to block three of his children from inheriting control of the companies upon his death. The high-stakes legal manoeuvre was rejected. An appeal – and thus a new season of morbid entertainment for media watchers – is in the works. As the Murdochs continue their decades-long, multibillion-dollar family feud, the empire they are fighting over is flourishing. This is doubly surprising. For one thing, succession crises and legal uncertainty tend not to bolster investors' confidence in a company. What's more, the Murdoch firms are giants in linear television and print journalism, declining industries that markets have not been kind to. Why is a pair of legacy media companies controlled by a dysfunctional dynasty so popular with investors? Start with Fox, the larger of the two, with a market value of $US24 billion ($37 billion). Its business is concentrated in American broadcast and cable television, which in recent years have witnessed a bloodbath. As the Murdochs continue their decades-long, multibillion-dollar family feud, the empire they are fighting over is flourishing. Over the past decade-and-a-half, the share of homes with pay TV has fallen from nearly 90 per cent to barely 50 per cent as viewers have defected to streaming services such as Netflix. As for broadcast television, Americans today spend half as much time watching it as they do streaming, according to Nielsen, a data company. While other legacy media companies' values have stagnated or worse, Fox's has soared. The difference lies in its content mix. In 2019 Fox sold its general-entertainment assets to Disney for $US71 billion at what turned out to be the top of the market, deciding to focus on news and sport. It was the right call: streamers like Netflix have since grabbed the audience for general entertainment, while news and sport have mostly stayed on linear TV, and thus with Fox.

Sydney Morning Herald
14 hours ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
The Murdochs are feuding but their empire is thriving
Nothing in Fox's television schedules last year was quite as exciting – or, at times, as profane – as the drama that played out in a closed probate court in Reno, Nevada. Rupert Murdoch, the 94-year-old founder and controlling shareholder of Fox Corporation and its sister company News Corp, was trying to change the terms of a family trust to block three of his children from inheriting control of the companies upon his death. The high-stakes legal manoeuvre was rejected. An appeal – and thus a new season of morbid entertainment for media watchers – is in the works. As the Murdochs continue their decades-long, multibillion-dollar family feud, the empire they are fighting over is flourishing. This is doubly surprising. For one thing, succession crises and legal uncertainty tend not to bolster investors' confidence in a company. What's more, the Murdoch firms are giants in linear television and print journalism, declining industries that markets have not been kind to. Why is a pair of legacy media companies controlled by a dysfunctional dynasty so popular with investors? Start with Fox, the larger of the two, with a market value of $US24 billion ($37 billion). Its business is concentrated in American broadcast and cable television, which in recent years have witnessed a bloodbath. As the Murdochs continue their decades-long, multibillion-dollar family feud, the empire they are fighting over is flourishing. Over the past decade-and-a-half, the share of homes with pay TV has fallen from nearly 90 per cent to barely 50 per cent as viewers have defected to streaming services such as Netflix. As for broadcast television, Americans today spend half as much time watching it as they do streaming, according to Nielsen, a data company. While other legacy media companies' values have stagnated or worse, Fox's has soared. The difference lies in its content mix. In 2019 Fox sold its general-entertainment assets to Disney for $US71 billion at what turned out to be the top of the market, deciding to focus on news and sport. It was the right call: streamers like Netflix have since grabbed the audience for general entertainment, while news and sport have mostly stayed on linear TV, and thus with Fox.