Bryan Singer's Lawyer Slams Sex Allegations in Detailed Response: We Have Proof My Client Was Not in Hawaii (Exclusive)

Bryan Singer's Lawyer Slams Sex Allegations in Detailed Response: We Have Proof My Client Was Not in Hawaii (Exclusive)

Bryan Singer attends the premiere of 'Jack The Giant Slayer' on February 26, 2013 in Hollywood (Getty Images)

Marty Singer says accuser's attorney, Jeff Herman, has demonstrated “reckless and outrageous conduct”

“X-Men” director Bryan Singer‘s attorney is firing back at claims that his client molested Michael Egan in Hawaii nearly 15 years ago, which were alleged in a lawsuit filed in federal court last week.

Hollywood veteran lawyer Marty Singer provided TheWrap with the following detailed response to Egan attorney Jeff Herman's suggestion Monday that Singer was trying to intimidate him and his client with a defamation countersuit, as well as details on why Singer claims Egan's allegations were “fabricated.”

Also read: Bryan Singer Accuser Names 3 More Alleged Hollywood Sex Abusers in New Lawsuits (Updated)

Read Singer's full response to the lawsuit's claims:

I have represented Bryan Singer for 15 years. I knew that Bryan was shooting a movie out of the country during the period of time alleged in Michael Egan's complaint. Within 48 hours of learning of the lawsuit, we received documentary evidence from Bryan's business manager confirming that Bryan was not in Hawaii as alleged. I based my statement that Egan's claims were “fabricated” on concrete evidence and an investigation of the claims.

Mr. Herman, on the other hand, conducted no investigation before filing this lawsuit (or presumably before filing the three new lawsuits today). His conduct was reckless and irresponsible for the following reasons:

  • There is clear, documentary evidence demonstrating Bryan's whereabouts that contradicts the allegations in Egan's lawsuit. Bryan was not in Hawaii during the time period alleged. Mr. Herman never contacted us prior to racing to the courthouse to file these lawsuits before the statute of limitations expires on Thursday. Had he reached out to us first, we would have been able to provide him with the exculpatory evidence we have. Responsible lawyers typically send demand letters before filing lawsuits. If Mr. Herman were a responsible lawyer, he would not have filed anything before conducting a proper investigation and learning all the facts.
  • Bryan was not even mentioned in the FBI investigator's affidavit that surfaced in the media today. If Egan reported his claims to the FBI, as he stated at the press conference, he certainly didn't mention Bryan as one of the individuals allegedly involved.
  • 14 years ago, Egan, though his mother acting as his guardian, filed a nearly identical lawsuit against several individuals and a corporation. He did not name Bryan as a defendant in that action, or even mention his name in the lawsuit. Similarly, in that prior lawsuit Egan didn't refer to any of the alleged incidents that supposedly took place in Hawaii. Mr. Herman knew that Egan filed that lawsuit in 2000. That should have been the first red flag that Egan's claims were not true.
  • It's been 5 or 6 days since Mr. Herman filed this lawsuit, and he still hasn't served us with a copy of the complaint. Clearly, Mr. Herman doesn't want to litigate this case. He just wants to host press conferences and issue press releases for the media. This is nothing more than an effort to ruin Bryan's career and reputation, which he has worked so hard to establish.
  • It's clear that Mr. Herman is just using these lawsuits as an opportunity to promote himself and his law firm. Indeed, Mr. Herman's reputation for honesty as an attorney leaves a lot to be desired. He was suspended from practicing law in Florida for a year and a half for failing to disclose a conflict of interest, acquiring a financial interest adverse to a client, and for violating the Rules of Professional Conduct by engaging in misconduct involving fraud, deceit and misrepresentation.

While Egan's claims are entirely without merit, we are not attacking him personally. However, we are being critical of Mr. Herman, who, for all the foregoing reasons has not acted responsibly. As a result of his reckless and outrageous conduct, we do intend to seek sanctions and file affirmative claims against him and his law firm.”