Mel B’s nanny’s lawsuit claims Mel seduced her when she was 18

Mel B and her family outside Trump SoHo New York Hotel
On Friday we reported that Mel B’s former nanny, a 25 year-old German national named Lorraine Gilles, was suing her for defamation. This was in response to Mel’s claims in legal documents that Lorraine had conspired with Mel’s abusive husband, Stephen Belafonte, to blackmail Mel over tapes of sexual encounters of Mel with her husband and other women. Mel obtained temporary restraining orders against both Stephen and Lorraine. She stated that Stephen had impregnated Lorraine in early 2014, that she had tried to fire Lorraine in 2015, and that Lorraine had mocked her. It all sounded like a typical abusive relationship where the husband tries to bring in another party to alienate his wife, it’s called triangulation and it’s a common abuser tactic. The way that Lorraine describes her relationship with Mel in her lawsuit paints an entirely different picture of Mel’s involvement though. Lorraine claims that she was Mel’s sexual partner first, when she was just 18. According to Lorraine she participated in group sex with Mel and her husband, only to be asked to come back and be a nanny to their children, during which time she continued a sexual relationship with both of them. Her pregnancy was from a boyfriend, not Stephen, according to Lorraine. I’m relying on secondary reports of the lawsuit as I can’t find the PDF online. E! Online seems to have the best overview:

Lorraine, a German national, says that weeks after she moved to Los Angeles, she met Mel and Stephen and visited them in their home, during which they “drank and eventually had consensual group sex” upon the singer’s request.

The court papers also state that the nanny claims that afterwards, Mel would contact her from time to time to “come over for drinks, sex and/or to help watch over her children” and that the two women “developed a friendship and sexual relationship with one another that was separate and apart” from the singer’s relationship with Stephen.

In her filing, Lorraine says that months later, she returned home to Germany and was then contacted by the couple and offered a formal job as a nanny. She accepted and her “sexual and employment relationship” with Mel “continued for approximately seven years.”

According to her lawsuit against Mel, Lorraine says she and Stephen also had sex, but only when the singer invited him to join them. She claims Mel would often film the encounters. Lorraine said she is “personally aware” of several “sex tapes” both Mel and Stephen had recorded that show all three of them “having consensual group sex.” She also said she witnessed the couple “bring different women into their home and engage in group sex” while she looked after their kids.

Lorraine also states in the lawsuit that in 2014, she got pregnant from a one-night stand with a man she met at a bar. She said she had not had sex with the couple in the months leading up to the pregnancy. She said she told Mel about it and that the singer helped her arrange an appointment for an abortion, “advanced the cash” for the procedure and booked a hotel for her to stay in so she could recover in private. She said after she had the abortion, the singer visited her at the hotel with the kids.

Lorraine said she later resumed her nanny job and relationship with Mel. In her lawsuit, the nanny also says that there is “no evidence” that she ever used Mel’s money without her knowledge or consent or that she “conspired” with Stephen “in any way for an illicit motive.” The papers also state that the nanny claims she “is not in possession of any of the alleged sex tapes or compromising materials” as Mel had described and that she was “actually uncomfortable with the making of the sex tapes” and does not want them made public.

In her filing, the nanny says she did open a storage locker at the couple’s request and that their CPA paid for it and that after she was fired in September 2016—four months before Mel said she and Stephen separated—she transferred it to Stephen’s name. The court papers also state that Lorraine was never fired before that date, but rather quit temporarily in late 2014.

In her lawsuit, it is stated that Lorraine believes Mel made her statements “with knowledge of their falsity or with reckless disregard of the truth” because she feared the nanny would testify during the couple’s divorce proceedings. She also says in the filing that two weeks before she filed the papers, Mel gave her a hand-written litter saying she was “grateful” for her services as a nanny.

[From E! Online]

Radar online has the more explicit details if you’re interested, including the statements from the lawsuit that “Brown seduced a naïve and curious 18-year-old foreign exchange student with alcohol, fame and casual sex,” and that Lorraine claims her relationship with Mel was ongoing and that she never had sex with Stephen when Mel wasn’t there.

Narcissists love to pit people against each other, and both Mel and Lorraine could be victims, even if Mel pursued Lorraine first. Mel ended up bruised, battered and psychologically abused and Stephen likely did the same to Lorraine, convincing her that Mel was the problem. In turn Mel and Lorraine ended up hating each other. I don’t know if Mel did the right thing by naming Lorraine, especially since she’s not a public person and this is such a high profile divorce. It’s possible that Mel’s declaration misrepresents what happened for her own ends, but that doesn’t mean that Mel isn’t a victim too. Mel felt wronged by Lorraine, who was also used as pawn by an abuser. Lorraine had an entirely different perspective on this situation because she got caught up in it too and was similarly being used and gaslighted by Stephen. I’m not saying Mel and/or Lorraine are innocent by any means, just that no one wins here.

Mel B pictured with the German nanny Lorraine Gilles on the vacation in July 2016 that is rumored to have caused the break up of her marriage to estranged husband Stephen Belfonte

Mel B pictured with the German nanny Lorraine Gilles on the vacation in July 2016 that is rumored to have caused the break up of her marriage to estranged husband Stephen Belfonte

Mel B Hits Up The ATM In West Hollywood

Bikini photos are from a vacation to Spain in July, 2016. Credit: Pacific Coast News. Airport photos are from September, 2015. Credit: WENN. Mel B is shown out in a white outfit on April 15, 2017. Credit: FameFlynet

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

75 Responses to “Mel B’s nanny’s lawsuit claims Mel seduced her when she was 18”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Sayrah says:

    Sheesh, what a mess.

  2. jinni says:

    This is makes Mel look predatory. The fact that she participated in luring a barely legal foreigner into her and her husband sorted world is messed up. Even if Mel was abused that does not excuse her and she should be held accountable just like her ex-husband. I don’t give women who are abused but allow or do nothing about their partners abusing their kids to get off easy in my opinion of them and since this woman was essentially a girl when adult Mel and her sick ex got to the nanny into their mess I see Mel in the same light. She could have done something but instead pulled another innocent person into that life which in someways negates my sympathy for Mel. Just like a person who was abused loses sympathy when they turn around and start abusing someone else. They are no longer a victim anymore when they start making victims of other people, imho.

    Mel would not be the first woman that willfully lured another woman into the web of a sick man. Pimps use this tactic all of the time by getting their bottom bitch to get new girls into the life.

    • Mike says:

      Thank you! I agree.

    • Nicole says:

      Agreed. And this is not uncommon for those sucked into an abusive pattern to lure someone else in. Folie a deux and all that.
      The issue I have with the nanny is the fact that she left the country without Mel’s consent and the authorities had to bring the kids back or force her back with them. That’s not “innocent” at all.

      What a mess.

    • idontknowyouyoudontknowme says:

      i do not agree with infantilizing 18 year olds.. I know in the US there is a higher focus on this due to the 21 year drinking limit, however it irks me to automatically assume anyone who becomes involved with a person younger than them is a predator who lured pure innocent souls to corrupt them.
      The nanny is personally saying everything was consensual, and I’m inclined to believe her the most out of all the parties.
      However this whole speculation about threeway and group sex setups just seems to be a distraction from the actual physical abuse, which should trump any other point in regards to the divorce case.

      • jinni says:

        I usually have no problem with seeing eighteen year olds as adults, but the creepiness of this situation is giving me pause.

      • Goldie says:

        “However this whole speculation about three-way and group sex set-ups just seems to be a distraction from the actual physical abuse, which should trump any other point in regards to the divorce case.”

        I agree with this, but Mel was the one who felt the need to publicly mention the nanny and her alleged affair with her husband in the divorce papers. She could have simply focused on the abuse that she suffered, but she chose to drag the nanny into her divorce. I’m not saying that the nanny is completely innocent, but I don’t think it was fair for Mel to villainize her. The nanny has a right to defend herself.

      • Kloops says:

        When there’s an imbalance of power and and the one with the least power depends on the powerful for her livelihood it is inappropriate at bes and abusive at worst. I can believe Mel is both a victim and victimizer.

      • Artemis says:

        1) Mel knew how her husband was, to drag somebody in her marriage knowing full well the consequences, is messy. If Mel slept with her separately, she most certainly is at fault too as she could have told her to go and never return. Don’t sleep with nanny, nothing good comes from it and it shows at the very least unprofessional and immature behaviour. Or should only Ben Affleck by publicly embarrassed by stupid behaviour?
        2) Why not hire a professional nanny with years of experience? Oh right because then she/he wouldn’t sleep with the boss and ruining their career and reputation when they get dragged into a divorce. Or they would just walk away when they see the messiness coming. Professional nannies don’t need this crap. Only C-listers keep having these issues because they don’t have the money or brains to hire professionals. Lorraine wasn’t a nanny, they hired a barely legal, inexperienced hot girl. Whoever made the decision to propose the nanny job, it doesn’t matter, the intent was clearly there to treat her like a FWB with some nanny duties and whether or not she was naive or a wild girl ready for the ride, she was still an EMPLOYEE!
        3) The nanny was with them for years and went away seemingly without a noise, if Mel wants to drag her into the court papers, she has to be responsible for the dirt that comes out. The fact that Mel wrote her a nice message before this went public but then dragged her to the mud in the court papers is hella weird. How can the nanny do the right thing when she’s basically called a prostitute? The nanny has nothing to lose here so who knows what she says is true (or false?).

        Although if Mel provides evidence about the nanny taking the kids out of the country, it’s game over. Plus I’m still inclined to take Mel’s side more as the nanny first said it was all ‘lies’ and now it turns out she was indeed pregnant? And this is again a good lesson why you never sleep with people you pay to do work for you. Just don’t do it.

    • I would have liked to have detected a little more irony with your use of the term ‘bottom bitch’. I’m just sayin’

    • Snowflake says:

      I don’t see the nanny as being a victim. She willingly participated, prob in hopes of money and fame.

      • Ankhel says:

        Do you really believe that? It’s been many years now, and the girl has been perfectly discreet. Noone knew who Gilles was until Mel started talking badly of her.

      • How can a woman who willingly participates in a sexual relationship with a married couple be described as a “girl” and “discreet”?

      • Ankhel says:

        Wow. 18 is definitely a girl. And someone who has a lengthy sexual affair with a star, and doesn’t blab, is indeed discreet. I also think you confuse the term “discreet” with your idea of “immoral”.

      • Mar says:

        Yes but Mel B. Is making her out to be some crazy woman and I am not buying it. I would be pissed off too. The girl had nothing to do with her getting beaten. She didn’t need to drag the girl into it after being her lover since she was 18.

    • LAK says:

      I’m inclined to believe Mel B over the nanny because the nanny’s sister gave interviews immediately after Mel B’s accusations to deny every single one.

      According to the nanny’s sister, every single accusation eg the abortion, the sexual relationships with Stephen OR Mel B were all made up lies to smear her innocent sister who had only nannied for Mel B and no more.

      That sister insisted that she remains close to her ‘innocent’ sister and knew these things to be untrue.

      Yet here is the nanny suing Mel B and in the process confirming the sexual relationships AND the abortion. So which is it?

      • Luca76 says:

        Wasn’t the nanny also accused of taking the kids out of the country? That’s the big question for me that would really let me know what her intentions were.

      • Ankhel says:

        There’s no way Lorraine, or anyone that young, would’ve told their family the sordid details of their cool new job. Simply because their parents would’ve given them non stop grief, until they left that place. I guess she came clean, but not fast enough to stop her sister.

      • LAK says:

        Luca76: Yes. That was in Mel B’s documentation.

        Ankhel: sister insisted they were close. Going by their very different accounts of the situation, i say they are not. Otherwise nanny would have confided in her sister. And the different accounts add doubt to nanny’s version of events because it shows she can lie to those people close to her.

      • Ankhel says:

        We ALL lie to our families. “I’ve never tried drugs”, “I got an a on the test”, “I’ve not had sex yet”, “I didn’t spend the money you lent me on this stupid thing”…

        That simply doesn’t mean someone would lie in a lawsuit too.

      • LAK says:

        We all lie to our families, but not where court documents are concerned.

        The fact id that the nanny is confirming Mel B’s story, but asking us to take a different view of events.

        Meanwhile her sister was very vehement about nanny’s innocence because that’s what deluded family members do.

        If she can lie to her family to this extent, about truly important things eg the fact that she was in a relationship with these people for 7yrs whilst leading them to believe she was a happily married woman, it’s equally likely that she can lie about her view of events. Btw, what does nanhy’s hubby have to say about all this?

        Mel B has no need to lie because all versions impact her negatively except the abuse portion. Nanny has everything to gain by lying.

        Ultimately, Stephen is the true devil in this soup, but i’m inclined to believe Mel B.

    • Otaku Fairy says:

      Yes, the sexual infantalization of young women needs to stop. If it’s not ok with subjects like abortion, birth control equal rights, being held legally accountable for one’s actions as an adult, or being held accountable when an adult from this age group says or does something inappropriate, then the same standard has to apply to sexual choices. 18-25-year-olds can and do eagerly pursue consensual casual sex. There’s no valid reason to try to spin what was clearly (by Lorraine’s account of things) an 18-25 -year-old adult experimenting sexually with ‘Mel B is a rapist/Lorraine is a victimized child’. If Justin Bieber and Harry Styles aren’t referred to as ‘victims’ being ‘lured by predators’ when they experiment sexually (Miranda Kerr), then neither are women who are around the same age as them. Concepts like ‘sexual exploitation’ should not be twisted to mean ‘any time a consenting adult who isn’t a man makes a choice about sexuality or her body that I don’t approve of or think she’s ready for yet’. And of course it’s always trendy to blame women for men abusing other women, but Mel B’s decision to have sex with Lorraine does not make her responsible for any abuse Lorraine has or hasn’t gotten from Stephen. If people can honestly sit up here and argue that a woman who was violently abused and threatened by this worthless, toxic piece of shit for years had a responsibility to leave, (an argument that’s problematic and obtuse all by itself) then why was it not also Lorraine’s responsibility to leave them? This is exactly the same as blaming people who are victims of sex crimes for other people being victimized by that same person because the first or second victim didn’t report it.

  3. MunichGirl says:

    Messy divorce, I feel sorry for the kids.

  4. Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

    I think this is going to get messier. Both women are victims of this scumbag but I’m not convinced the Nanny is completely innocent. She was given $300k as a one off payment, its a bit much for a bonus/severance so what was it for.

    There has been some very dodgy behaviour from everyone involved. No one is squeaky clean.

    • Snowflake says:

      I think Stephen is paying this nanny to make Mel look bad. Jmo

      • susiecue says:


      • Otaku Fairy says:

        It wouldn’t surprise me. It’s not that I think the nanny is making everything up, but this is clearly being spun to take the heat off of Stephen. People are already saying Lorraine’s story erases their sympathy for Mel without even realizing that that’s exactly what this new information is INTENDED to do.

      • Ankhel says:

        Mel has accused Lorraine of a multitude of sins and crimes. Lorraine is entitled to defend herself, whether she’s guilty or not.

      • sauvage says:

        @Ankhel: Lorraine is not entitled to lie. I am way more inclined to believe Mel’s account over what Belfonte’s other mind control victim says. This has smear campaign by an abuser all over it.

        Also, it simply would not have made sense for Mel to drag Lorraine into this if what the nanny says is true and Mel knew it would come out. I call Lies.

  5. Maria F. says:

    for what it is worth, I actually know somebody who grew up in the same small German village as the nanny and due to my fascination with celebrity gossip had told me about his old school friend who was working as a nanny for Mel B. I was very curious how that girl had managed to get that position and also obtain a Visa for the US.
    This was about 4 years ago and the nanny always related the story to her friends as in her law suit. Her relationship was foremost with Mel B. and they did occassionally include the husband and all went on trips together… (insert my shocked face here). I of course stalked her instagram account and she seemed definitely more attached to Mel B., often including pics and sweet messages.
    So i do believe that the truth is probably somewhere in the middle. I do believe that the husband was abusive, but i also believe that Mel B undeservingly painted the nanny in the role of the villian. Maybe she was hurt because she did not take her side or something…

  6. detritus says:

    Well, that’s not good. I don’t know what to think.

    Stephen is a shitty abuser, that’s becoming clear, but what’s going on with these two. Someone is lying, and not little fibs, and I need more info to tell.

  7. Ronaldinhio says:

    I think the new version of the abortion story sounds made up. I firmly believe that it was his baby and that Mel paid for the abortion

    I do believe that Mel was abused throughout this relationship

    • Snowflake says:

      Yeah, pregnant from a one night stand, please. ..

      • Squiggisbig says:

        Totally agree. Why would Mel pay for the abortion otherwise?

      • Ankhel says:

        I googled “Mel B nanny” and looked at the pics. Gilles wasn’t “just” the nanny. From the photos of them together, happy and affectionate, it looks like they were friends and most likely girlfriends as well. They definitely hung out sans kids. I’m guessing Mel willingly paid many things for Lorraine, not just an abortion.

    • susiecue says:

      It’s a little too air tight, isn’t it?

  8. Tan says:

    This sounds messy

    But the nannys story also sounds a lot unreal.
    Maybe he nanny and the husband are in it together

  9. Jess says:

    Yeah I don’t know what to believe here, part of me thinks Stephen is behind this manipulating the nanny to lie. I’m sure the truth is somewhere in the middle of all this, good god what a freaking mess for those children.

    • Lucy says:

      I think he’s behind it too! This woman was 18 he definitely controlled and groomed her and now he’s got her doing his dirty work. I think she has a form of Stockholm syndrome.

      • winter says:

        But not all 18 are stupid and naive that don’t know when they do something wrong or criminal that would be a dangerous crazy assumption to make i don’t think it’s Stockholm syndrome either they all three were in a consenting relationship . Mel mistake was ever mentioning the nanny{ she is starting to look stupid in my eyes } because 99% someone get’s left out
        TMZ not disputing what her former nanny claimed in her defamation lawsuit against the singer — that Mel B, husband Stephen Belafonte and the then-nanny had 3-ways for 7 years … but Mel B says the 2 of them crossed the line.Mel B claims the deal was broken several years ago when Belafonte and Gilles had sex without her. According to Mel B sources, she claims sometimes they would have 3-ways, but other times Belafonte and Gilles would do it together without her knowledge.
        Our Mel B sources claim Belafonte convinced her to have 3-ways with numerous people over the 10-year marriage.
        In Gilles’ defamation lawsuit, she calls BS on Mel B’s claims that she had an affair with Belafonte, that he got her pregnant and that he convinced her to have an abortion. We’re told Mel B has doubled down and continues to insist Belafonte got Gilles pregnant.

    • Chaine says:

      I thought the nanny was married to someone else now? How is that Stockholm Syndrome?

  10. Izzy says:

    This nanny needs to STFU and I do not believe a word of this. The nanny is the one who unlawfully absconded with the kids out of the country and brought them back only when a court order compelled her to. That is not some innocent naif, that’s a co-conspirator to Mel’s abuser.

  11. Pumpkin Pie says:

    I don’t know all legal aspects relating to defamation, but from what I read Mel B filled a lawsuit which contained information her lawyer considered relevant to her case. Then media outlets such as TMZ published a bunch of stuff on the topic, I don’t know if Mel B’s legal team had anything to do it though. Why sue Mel B when she has the right to make a legal case? Why not keep such sensitive issues in the court until a party is proven guilty or not? Parties can make their arguments in the court and not in the media.

    • Izzy says:

      In California a third party in a lawsuit has the right to bring a defamation claim. So for example, when someone is named as a mistress or lover in a divorce proceeding, they have the right to sue if they are trying to refute the allegation.

  12. Keri says:

    This is disgusting, has anyone thought about the kids?

  13. Victoria says:

    She was old enough to leave her country for work, and was considered an adult by both German and American standards. There’s nothing predatory on Mel’s part, just three consenting adults.

    • winter says:

      Except she accused her of sleeping with her husband ruining her relationship when the reality is that they all three had a consenting relationship and it looks like she got jealous .

      • Victoria says:

        I’ve never had a threesome, but I imagine the other woman getting pregnant by my husband might be a deal breaker…

      • Erinn says:

        I mean, she could be lying about the joint relationship between all of them.

        OR, there could have been an agreement that both Mel and her husband needed to be involved in any ‘activities’, and maybe she started hooking up with just the husband. I don’t know what kind of limits/rules they supposedly had, but maybe she was fine with it if everyone was involved, and not fine with it when it was just done behind her back – I really don’t think that’s a huge stretch.

      • sauvage says:

        @ Erinn: I agree. There is a huge difference between consenting to threesomes involving another woman, and your husband sleeping with said woman without your knowledge and against your consent. That is called cheating.

    • Pumpkin Pie says:

      I don’t know if I am right but there might be a difference regarding legal age – 18yo in Germany and 21yo in the US? And the age of consent is 16 in both countries?

  14. Bumfry says:

    It doesn’t matter who shagged who! He hit her and controlled her- end of

  15. Manjit says:

    What training/qualifications did this woman have to become a live-in child-care provider? Celebrities seem to have more stringent criteria for choosing a gardener than they do a Nanny.

    • Pumpkin Pie says:

      You are making a good point. Institution wise, eg kindergartens, various certifications and approvals are required, including for staff. There is formal training for nannies and caretakers in some countries. But then private individuals may choose to hire whoever they want.
      I think it was convenient for them to have her around as a “nanny”.

  16. TheOtherSam says:

    Am going to get blowback, but need to chime in. Are we giving Belafonte too much credit here? As in, was he really that powerful and conniving to ‘gaslight’ not just one, but two women full time. It takes energy and cunning to perpetrate abuse of the levels described, for a lengthy period (10+ years). This guy doesn’t strike as the brightest bulb in the lamp. What about all the women over the years who willingly engaged in sex with them – were they also victims – ?

    There have been so many stories re Mel & Belafonte’s sexual escapades over the years, their taste for threesomes, the videotaping. They were literally infamous in certain Hollywood club circles for this. Mel B was known to be sexually aggressive and active in this scene; she was rumored to pursue and recruit partners. Was this all due to Belafonte’s manipulations?…all I’m saying is, if a woman has certain sexual tastes or fetishes, there should be no shame involved. If she had a non-professional intimate relationship with this nanny or others during an open marriage, and it was consensual then why drag this into the divorce drama? She’s got plenty of ammo on her ex and the funds to send him thoroughly packing without all the scurrilous details – some of which are bound to blow back on her.

    Make no mistake – the physical abuse is unforgivable, as well as potential financial shenanigans, and Mel is right to dump this loser. But the accusations of sexual manipulation ring a bit hollow imo, given all the talk about her heavy appetites over the years.

    • Not really though says:

      Your last sentence is what police investigators used to let my ex walk scot free. Never mind he was an abuser, a sophisticated manipulator and a rapist.
      But he didn’t seem one….
      NEVER, EVER underestimate an abuser. It is a huge mistake.

    • Otaku Fairy says:

      ” But the accusations of sexual manipulation ring a bit hollow imo, given all the talk about her heavy appetites over the years.” This is like 1700’s level of ignorance and victim-blaming. A person’s sexual appetite doesn’t equal permanent consent to anything with anyone anytime.

      • TheOtherSam says:

        ‘A person’s sexual appetite doesn’t equal permanent consent to anything with anyone anytime”. Of course not. But you’re making the assumption that Mel is a ‘victim’ in her sexual activities who didn’t give consent. I merely made the point/observation that I don’t currently believe that given what’s been out there for some time, before any of this current drama hit the press.

        We’re also not living in the 1700s where a woman’s desires or sexual behaviors shame her, or that it should be automatically assumed it’s her male partner forcing and controlling these activities since god forbid a woman might enjoy and initiate them.

        This is classic she said/he said/she said (since now the nanny/mistress-to-both weighs in) in a bitter and potentially costly celeb split. So as far as the sexual content of this story goes, I’ll reserve judgement until more details emerge. And I’m certain there’s more coming.

      • Otaku Fairy says:

        Your assumption that she’s not a victim is based on nothing other than her sexual appetite, though. One doesn’t have to be a heterosexual virgin in order to be coerced and sexually blackmailed by an abuser. And while false abuse allegations obviously exist, statistically, that’s not how it usually turns out. Based on this own man’s history of abuse towards humans and animals, as well as an attitude he’s expressed about women and sex, it makes more sense to believe that he’s guilty of what he’s accused of than to assume she’s making it up out of shame. Acknowledging that isn’t the same as saying Mel B can’t have ever had any consensual threesomes or hookups at any point.

    • sauvage says:

      @TheOtherSam: If you want to understand how these people work and how it is possible to control one or more persons in this way, I highly recommend you read Steve Hassan’s classic on the topic of mind control: “Combating Cult Mind Control”. I keep recommending the book on this site, because for some reason, this is not common knowledge. I really hope you read the book. It is eye-opening.

      The scary thing about undue influence is that it can happen to everybody and anybody. All it takes is one person or persons ruthless enough to want to control you by all means. This applies to religious cults, economic cults, therapy cults and political cults, as well as abusive relationships of all sorts. Some families are built on the very fabric of mind control.

      People who are quite literally scared out of their minds can’t think clearly, which makes it very, very difficult to break free and seek help. We also know how that often ends for women trying to break free from an abusive partner: in freaking death.

      Please educate yourself. Comments like yours make it so, so much harder for survivors of mind control. Just believe us. We come from all walks of life. We’ve made it through hell, we are ready to tell our tale, and what we often get is: “How could you be so stupid/weak? Nobody could be that powerful in their influence over you!”

      Yes, they could. Just take out common decency, and morals, and care.

  17. kerfuffles says:

    The nanny is not disputing that Mel’s husband was physically abusive to her, was she? There are multiple witnesses to Mel being battered and bruised. This changes nothing in my estimation.

    As far as the nanny sleeping with Mel — she was 18. She was an adult. It’s all a little lurid and ethically there may be some issues. But to call that “abuse” and refer to the nanny as a “victim” because she had a consensual sexual relationship with Mel and her husband seems unfounded and OTT.

    • Ankhel says:

      Who’s saying the nanny was abused, victimized, or whatever? Lorraine doesn’t, she says Mel seduced her first, and that the sex was consensual. Some people here think a middle aged, rich and famous woman bedding a teenage employee is skeevy, but noone has cried rape or anything.

      • Otaku Fairy says:

        Lorraine’s age, gender (“She’s a girl!”), and status as a foreigner were used to imply an inability to give enthusiastic consent (despite her own words and actions saying otherwise.) The employee part was a little side-eye-worthy , but the sexual relationship started before she was employed.

      • Jellybean says:

        I would say that a sexual relationship between an 18 year old and someone much older is sleevy, just not illegal. We are not speculating here, all parties have made statements under oath that confirm some pretty nauseating behaviour and, to be honest,
        I have no time for any of them.

    • anon says:

      The power and age difference matter more over an 18 yr. old compared to a 28 yr. old. 18 is young and the brain is still not fully developed. It was abuse, pure and simple.

      • LaBlah says:

        Probably shouldn’t let them marry, vote, drive or serve in wars where they can kill for boosted billionaire profits then.

    • sauvage says:

      This is all just noise to distract from Mel’s allegations. Threesomes with a consenting legal adult (which she was at eighteen) don’t require any involvement by the courts. Meaning that this is all smoke and mirrors. She does not mention taking the children out of the country, does she?