Smokey Robinson Files $500M Countersuit After Being Accused of Sexual Assault
Smokey Robinson and his wife, Frances Robinson, have filed a $500 million countersuit against the four women who sued him earlier this month accusing the music icon of sexual assault.
In the cross-complaint, filed on Wednesday by the Robinsons' attorney, Christopher Frost, and obtained by The Hollywood Reporter, Robinson accuses the Jane Does of of defamation, slander, intentional infliction of emotional distress, financial elder abuse and invasion of privacy, among other claims.
More from The Hollywood Reporter
Brian Avnet, Longtime Artist Manager and Music Executive, Dies at 82
Shaboozey Defends Megan Moroney Amid AMAs Backlash: "Let's Not Twist the Message"
Judge Quickly Rejects Mistrial Request at Sean "Diddy" Combs Trial
'The Robinsons did not abuse, harm, or take advantage of Plaintiffs; they treated Plaintiffs with the utmost kindness and generosity,' the suit said. 'Unfortunately, the depths of Plaintiffs' avarice and greed knows no bounds.'
The cross-complaint claims that the 'plaintiffs asked for and accepted help from the Robinsons, including several thousands of dollars, monetary support for members of at least one Plaintiff's family, clothes, dental surgery and even a car' over the years. But at the time when 'the Robinsons were being extraordinarily generous,' the suit said, 'plaintiffs were concocting an extortionate plan to take everything from the Robinsons and wrongfully destroy the Robinsons' well-built reputations.'
Robinson's suit come about three weeks after the four anonymous women, who worked for him as housekeepers, sued the famed Motown singer and record producer for sexual assault and rape allegations. In the complaint, the anonymous women accuse Robinson of raping them at several of his residences, most primarily at his home in Chatsworth, California. The listed causes of action include negligence, sexual battery, assault, false imprisonment and a hostile work environment, among other claims.
Frances was also named as a defendant in the suit, with the women claiming that she 'failed to take the appropriate corrective action to prevent Defendant Robinson's deviant misconduct.'
Robinson denied the allegations, calling them 'vile' and 'false,' with Frost previously saying, 'the evidence will show that this is simply an ugly method of trying to extract money from an 85-year-old American icon — $50 million dollars, to be exact.'
Robinson's cross-complaint calls the women's claims 'fabricated,' adding that the women 'paraded themselves in front of the media' at their May 6 press conference with help from their attorneys.
'When pre-litigation demands for $100 million or more did not work, Plaintiffs created a media circus and made a public spectacle of themselves,' the suit said.
Robinson's countersuit also accuses the women of hiding, concealing and destroying evidence 'exposing their illegal scheme.' In one example, the suit claims 'one Plaintiff took Ms. Robinson's cell phone and deleted all their text exchanges, photos and identifying information.'
In another instance, the suit claims Frances discovered several of her financial records (including bank statements) were missing and that 'at least one Plaintiff had access to and knew exactly where these records were kept.' The cross-complaint also states that another Plaintiff knew 'where the Robinsons' valuables were kept, including a hidden safe and gold Krugerrands,' and that it was later stolen. The Robinsons reported the theft to the police, according to the suit.
In a separate motion filed Wednesday, the Robinsons' attorney sought to dismiss the initial suit brought by the women.
THR has reached out to attorney John W. Harris, who represents the four women, for comment.
The Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department later announced that it had opened a criminal investigation into the sexual assault allegations against Robinson. Authorities said the investigation was in 'the early stages' at the time.
Best of The Hollywood Reporter
Most Anticipated Concert Tours of 2025: Beyoncé, Billie Eilish, Kendrick Lamar & SZA, Sabrina Carpenter and More
Hollywood's Most Notable Deaths of 2025
Hollywood's Highest-Profile Harris Endorsements: Taylor Swift, George Clooney, Bruce Springsteen and More
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US pushes security ally Australia to spend more on defence
By Kirsty Needham SYDNEY (Reuters) -U.S. Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth has asked security ally Australia to increase defence spending in a meeting with Defence Minister Richard Marles on Friday in Singapore. The defence chiefs also discussed the need to significantly lift U.S. submarine production rates to meet AUKUS targets. Australia is scheduled to pay the United States $2 billion by the end of 2025 to assist its submarine shipyards, in order to buy three Virginia-class submarines starting in 2032 -- its biggest ever defence project. The defence ministers meeting on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue, Asia's premier security forum, is only the second between the security allies since the Trump Administration took office. Hegseth had "respectfully" said Australia should increase defence spending, Marles said in an Australian Broadcasting Corporation television interview after the meeting. "Clearly we have increased defence spending significantly and that is acknowledged, but we want to be making sure we are calibrating our defence spending to the strategic moment that we need to meet," he said. "We are very much up for the conversation, and the American position has been clear," he added. Marles said they did not discuss a number, although a Pentagon official had previously said Australia should spend 3% of gross domestic product. Australia's Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, who was re-elected this month and is yet to meet U.S. President Donald Trump, did not raise defence spending in this year's national budget, saying his government had already announced a A$50 billion boost over a decade. Albanese said on Thursday defence spending would rise to 2.4%. "In a rational world defence spending is a function of strategic threat - there is definitely strategic threat in the world today and we are rational people," Marles said. The AUKUS submarine partnership and working together to provide stability in the Indo-Pacific were also discussed, Marles said. "AUKUS is happening and we talked about the need to maintain the momentum," he said. "We want to be seeing a significant increase in the production and sustainment rate, the availability of Virginia class submarines for the United States fleet." U.S. production of Virginia class attack submarines has fallen behind U.S. Navy targets, and concern has been raised in Washington over selling used submarines to Australia under AUKUS if this reduces the fleet size.
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
'Irrelevant' ceasefire proposal may be exactly what Israel needs, military expert says
Lt. Col. (res.) Amit Yagur argued that so long as the Witkoff proposal doesn't interfere with the civilian campaign against Hamas, it may be worth accepting. The new Witkoff Proposal's "apparent irrelevance" may actually be the reason Israel should accept it, Lt. Col. (res.) Amit Yagur, former deputy head of the Palestinian Arena in the IDF Planning Directorate, suggested in an interview with Maariv on Friday. "Yesterday, we opened with headlines that the US and Hamas are close to agreeing on the Witkoff Framework, which includes a new proposal. Without delving into the specifics, it involves a ceasefire, the release of about half the hostages, the release of prisoners in exchange, and guarantees for continued negotiations,' Yagur said. 'However, a framework that was appropriate and useful a month or two ago, focused on the military-security aspect, now operates within a completely different strategic context in Gaza—a civilian one." 'The new food distribution mechanism that began operating this week in the Gaza Strip is a major strategic turning point. For the first time, it strips Hamas of its main elements of sovereignty and begins to liberate the population from its grip, while preparations are underway for the implementation of a voluntary emigration plan,' Yagur explained. 'This is a process which, if not stopped now, is irreversible—and it's putting Hamas under extreme pressure. The breach of Hamas flour warehouses by Gaza civilians, among other things, shows Hamas that even what remains of its military power is irrelevant here. The language has changed. This pressure may intensify to the point where Hamas will agree to release hostages just to halt the erosion—and ultimately even agree to exile its members and disarm,' Yagur continued. Despite appearances suggesting that the current situation demands rejection of the Witkoff Proposal, Yagur believed otherwise. 'At first glance, there are plenty of reasons to reject the Witkoff Framework, now that Hamas is with its back against the wall. Under the claim that we must 'finish the job' and dismantle Hamas—a goal we all share and want realized as soon as possible.' 'But,' he added, 'if we dig a little deeper, we find that Israel, despite numerous threats in recent months, has not yet carried out full-scale, irreversible military operations to conquer Gaza. This could be in order to enable the release of more hostages, or perhaps due to a lack of political will, inability to act without incurring heavy costs for the hostages and our forces, or due to American requests in the background.' 'Thus, the so-called 'completion of the mission' through total military effort has not occurred, despite our ability to do so long ago. It's an empty concept at this stage,' he explained. 'We need to look at the issue from a different angle—the strategic shift. The backbone of the campaign against Hamas today is mostly civilian (with military support). So, if the Witkoff Proposal primarily addresses the military-security dimension—an effort that has not significantly advanced on the ground—and does not interfere with the civilian campaign, then it actually serves three goals,' Yagur explained: Free additional hostages (since concessions like prisoner releases no longer impress the Gaza public and won't help Hamas maintain power). Temporarily relieve Israel of the need for ongoing military pressure that has not escalated, allowing focus on the more effective civilian campaign against Hamas, with the military dimension providing security backing. Align with US policy, particularly with Trump's vision of ending military conflicts in the Middle East to make room for regional rehabilitation and a new order. According to Yagur, any move that weakens the civilian mechanism is a strategic error: 'The continued need to provide security coverage for the civilian mechanism in the Gaza Strip and for border communities dictates a continued IDF presence in those areas. Israel must oppose any full withdrawal that could significantly harm the only mechanism currently dealing a severe blow to Hamas—the civilian one.' 'In light of the above,' Yagur argued, 'it's precisely the irrelevance of the Witkoff Proposal to the current context that may make it worth accepting. Hostages will be released alive, while the process of Hamas's civilian erosion will continue at an accelerated pace, and there will be no agreement to end the war.' The security dimension (which the Witkoff Proposal focuses on) would provide security backing and control, while the actual military campaign could be paused. After 60 days, Yagur promises, 'we'll be dealing with a different Hamas—one willing to make very significant concessions, even to the point of disarmament and exile.' However, Yagur emphasized one condition: 'The Witkoff Proposal will only be relevant if it does not halt the civilian process in Gaza. If, on the contrary, it calls for freezing the current aid mechanism, or seeks to revert to old frameworks like the UN or UNRWA and abandon the American-led system, then Israel must reject it outright, as that would not be the right format for dismantling Hamas via the civilian axis.'
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
‘Anthony from Staten Island' said he developed a chat tool for Meta. His entire identity was fake.
A provider of identity verification and fraud tools was recently targeted by what appear to be multiple North Korean IT workers managing dozens of personas. The stream of resumes to Socure for software development positions all boasted experience at brand-name tech firms like Amazon, Google, and Netflix. Turns out they were all fake. 'Anthony from Staten Island' had a polished set of credentials and claimed he previously worked at Meta Platforms. During a Zoom interview for a senior software engineer job, the supposed New Yorker was charming and articulate as he talked about creating a key chat application at the $1.6 trillion social media giant. For the first 20 minutes, everything went smoothly. Anthony smiled, engaged naturally, and delivered polished responses to questions. Then, it all changed. 'What was most striking was he was really affable,' recalled Rivka Little, Socure's chief growth officer. 'You can 100% see why people would become a victim to this.' When the interview advanced to more complex two-part questions that required further explanation, Anthony lost his place. He seemed more stilted and less certain, Little told Fortune. Socure believes Anthony was a North Korean IT worker, part of a sophisticated and insidious criminal organization that consists of trained technologists from the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK). The DPRK IT workers use American identities, real or fabricated, and apply for remote jobs in IT at American and European companies. The scheme has been a massive runaway success. Hundreds of Fortune 500 companies have unwittingly hired thousands of IT workers from the DPRK, and the IT crew sends its salaries to authoritarian leader Kim Jong Un. Kim uses the money to fund the country's weapons of mass destruction program. The scheme generates between $200 million to $600 million a year, according to UN estimates, and the DPRK IT workers collaborate with highly skilled operatives responsible for stealing billions in crypto heists. The scheme is so pervasive that some tech founders have resorted to asking potential job candidates to insult Kim before progressing to a formal interview. DPRK IT workers are constantly surveilled and insulting the supreme leader of the regime would lead to severe punishment. The threat is scaling rapidly. This year, Kim doubled the earning quotas required of the worker delegations and launched a new artificial intelligence unit called Research Center 227 to support the country's cyber crime initiatives, according to research from security firm DTEX. Socure is publicizing its experience with Anthony to alert other companies to new warning signs and also to avoid the pitfalls of overly restrictive hiring practices that might make it harder for legitimate job seekers. The challenge is the fraudulent candidates are skilled and some are very charming, Little explained. 'Anyone can fall for these interviews—he did really well for a long period of time,' said Little. Some of the indicators that companies are relying on won't work in the long term, she warned. For instance, Anthony gave a surname that sounded Italian and he claimed to hail from Staten Island. During his interview however, he had an accent that didn't align with his origin story. 'People come in all kinds of packages,' she noted. Superficial nuances shouldn't be used to eliminate candidates. And while the DPRK IT workers tend to use stereotypical Western names, if they tweaked their scheme slightly and used names that correlated with their accents, those signs would disappear. More telling, she said, were the inconsistencies in Anthony's digital footprint. Many of the fabricated resumes sent to Socure in recent months had big marquee names that made them stand out. Google, Meta, Amazon, and Netflix were often included and the job applicants claimed to have been responsible for the most innovative and interesting products at those companies. A quick check with certain internal staff who worked at Meta during the time Anthony claimed to be there revealed no one knew him. Another flag was the immaturity of Anthony's digital identity. His email address and phone number had been connected to his name for only a matter of weeks. Usually, people have phone numbers and email addresses linked to them going back years, she noted. And despite a LinkedIn profile matching his work history and displaying the bright green 'Open to work' banner, Anthony didn't have much going on with connections, posts, or likes on the platform. It was unusual for someone with an extensive tech background. However, the last thing a company should do is to create more friction and drama that would make it more difficult for legitimate job candidates, she said. Plus, while the North Korean IT worker scam creates risk to hiring companies, there are plenty of reverse schemes that target job seekers. A woman contacted Socure and told the company she had been interviewed for a job by a fake HR person and scammed out of thousands of dollars after providing her name, ID, and bank account details thinking she had been hired. It creates the need for a delicate balance, said Little. Companies need to protect themselves from fraudulent hires, but can't create so much friction that legitimate candidates find it too difficult to apply for a job. Little suggested that companies integrate passive ID verification into their HR platforms to check identity in the background without requiring upfront ID from candidates. Careful interview techniques that probe for scripted responses or the use of AI in the midst of conversation plus digital footprint clues can also help reveal fraudulent job seekers. 'I've almost never seen such an intersection of fraud, money laundering, and sanctions violations,' said Little. 'It's a perfect storm.' This story was originally featured on
