On May the 19th 2013 Asia Argento was sexually assaulted by Jimmy Bennett. Bennett took a selfie after the assault. Over the intervening years Bennett sent nude images of himself including masturbation to Asia in a clear attempt to impose his sexual interest on her.
In 2018 Asia became a noted person in the #metoo movement. Bennett made demands for money on the basis he was underage at the time he assaulted her. Bennett claimed that Asia sexually assaulted him. Asia's partner of the time, Anthony Bourdain convinced Asia to let him pay off Bennett.
Then Anthony Bourdain took his own life and the protection he offered Asia was now a massive liability. The legal documents in question ended up in the hands of hostile interests who leaked the documents to the media.
This article focuses on Jimmy Bennett and it is my solidly held contention that Jimmy Bennett is a sexual predator who used his age to extort money from the woman he sexually assaulted.
Jimmy Bennett is what is known in the industry as a "donkey". A donkey is a child actor who fails to find success as an adult actor. Bennett had made a lot of money in his child acting career and now the money was gone. There was no future apparent in the industry for him and he was well addicted to the trappings that fame and money can bring.
The problem of course is that future fame and the money required were absent from Bennett's life. Bennett was evidently determined to rectify that situation at any price. As long as he thought someone else was paying it anyway.
Asia had the extreme misfortune of acting with Bennett in 2004 in a movie called "The heart is deceitful above all things." During that period Asia developed a maternal instinct for the lost little boy standing in the cut throat environment that is the acting industry.
Over the intervening years Bennett kept in contact with Asia and after numerous requests Asia finally agreed to meet up with him in the State of California. Asia saw Bennett as a son of sorts but what Asia was not aware of is that the lost little boy had grown into quite the specimen and was nothing like Asia believed him to be.
After the allegations surfaced Bennett faced accusers of his own who claimed he tried to get some of his underage female fans to send him nude pictures of themselves. Others claimed he would arrange one on one video chats with his female fans who would log in to find Bennett masturbating. Bennett himself was 15 years old when he was doing these things.
In 2015 an unnamed ex-girlfriend of Bennett filed a restraining order against him.
The underage ex-girlfriend claimed that Bennett stalked and threatened her
She claimed she was the victim of sexual offenses when she was 17 and he was 18
She claimed he manipulated her into sending naked images of herself
According to the records, the woman pressed charges against Bennett for unlawful sex with a minor, stalking, and child pornography on July 17, 2015.
Source Daily Mail (and a range of other media outlets)
So it is very evident that Jimmy Bennett was not some hapless waif who was denuded of his innocence by Asia Argento. In fact Bennett already has a seasoned track record of predatory behavior and exhibits all the traits of a serial sex offender.
Bennett Claims Version 1
"The document lays out Mr. Bennett’s account: Ms. Argento asked the family member to leave so she could be alone with the actor. She gave him alcohol to drink and showed him a series of notes she had written to him on hotel stationery. Then she kissed him, pushed him back on the bed, removed his pants and performed oral sex. She climbed on top of him and the two had intercourse, the document says. She then asked him to take a number of photos."
Source New York Times
There is no doubt in my mind that the purpose of Bennett's statement here was made for the purposes of extorting a financial gain out of Asia Argento and Anthony Bourdain. The purpose is very important when considering what Bennett is claiming.
Bennett has three options available to him when providing a false narrative to implement his extortion. He could claim he was groomed as a child but that would require evidence which is normally easily obtainable in grooming cases. No supporting evidence is available as no grooming every took place.
The most viable option would be to claim that he was seduced at the hotel room and regretted having gone there afterwards. But to make such a claim Bennett would have been put to the test over the details. What did she say? What did he say? The narrative requires significant detail and liars are not big on details.
Instead Bennett relied on a scenario where he was given alcohol and then sexually set upon essentially against his will. Oh really? Bennett was relying on the fact that he was "underage" as the basis of his extortion. The fact that he could make the claim regardless of the truth of the situation left Asia in a vulnerable position.
Breaking this down let us first consider what we are expected to believe. Apparently a female celebrity and sex symbol flew all the way to the one of the only jurisdictions in the world where it would be a crime, to ravish Jimmy Bennett.
She removed Bennett's..... chaperone like a seasoned predator, plied him with drink until he was rendered helpless and then had her wicked way while he lay there in a passive stupor unable to defend himself. Then after the heinous act she instructs him (his words) to take a selfie of them in bed together. Really?
We are then informed that Bennett felt ashamed and uncomfortable. Really? It is completely evident that Bennett can in no way describe the aftermath or issues that come with being sexually assaulted because he has not been sexually assaulted.
The whole narrative is clearly stolen from a cliche text book assault on a younger female by an older male. The shame mentioned is the cliche understanding of those who are not in the know. They hear about the "shame" that comes with sexual assault but unless they have been there they cannot describe what it is like.
The selfie is extremely important. Bennett was dependent on the selfie to carry out his extortion but how to explain its presence? It is a fact that the sexual aggressor was the person who wanted to take that selfie. That is where the smoking gun is found. Not the fact it shows them together in an obviously compromising position. Who wanted the selfie taken answers a lot of questions.
We can see Bennett's conundrum. He needs the selfie to extort Asia but he has to present a scenario where the fact he is the one clearly taking the picture does not expose the actual truth of the situation. The selfie he is using to extort Asia is in fact evidence of his crimes against her.
So we are presented with the stolen narrative that paints Asia as a person who lured Bennett to her hotel room then proceeded to sexually assault him and then told him to take a selfie of them both to document the deed. The whole scenario is beyond ridiculous.
However the threat to Asia and by virtue of that fact Anthony Bourdain was the threat of the allegation and the fact Bennett's narrative had holes big enough to drive a truck through was not an issue having regard for the purpose of what Bennett was doing.
Except of course when the legal documents got leaked and Bennett was all of a sudden required to defend his position. Undeterred at this stage Bennett evidently thought he could avoid scrutiny by claiming he was a #metoo and we must always believe the accuser.
Sadly for Bennett this idea that an accuser is beyond challenge is essentially a myth perpetuated by the rape machine when offenders claim they are the victim of witch hunts. Bennett was blissfully unaware that the truth, as is if often the case, is not reflected in the propaganda that tends to be spouted all over the place.
So Bennett came forward making vague references about his pain as he claimed his victim status and of course things did not go according to plan. Skepticism rabidly evolved into naked disbelief. Bennett decided to try and talk his way clear and went on television in Italy.
I have a full English transcript of the interview here. It makes interesting reading.
ATTORNEY SATTRO: Yeah, yeah. First of all, Asia has told three versions so far. She came out saying that she did not had sex, and then on the website TMZ she said there was the intercourse but then she didn’t feel well. And then Mark Haller claimed that my client had been the assaulter. So, actually, there are three versions so far. While my client described only one. Anyway, it has been established there was a sexual intercourse. In my preliminary notification, this has been recorded in the minutes.
Attorney Sattro presents an entirely false narrative. Asia did NOT say that she did not have sex with Bennett she stated she was never in a sexual relationship with Bennett. I will now submit the following definition of the words that Asia actually used.
sexual relationship - a relationship involving sexual intimacy relationship - a state of connectedness between people (especially an emotional connection); "he didn't want his wife to know of the relationship"
Now it is very evident that the recipient of a sexual assault on their person is not in a "sexual relationship" with their assailant. I am sure that Rose McGowan would not consider that she had been in a sexual relationship with Harvey Weinstein when she was assaulted sexually by him.
Asia was stating that no sexual event took place that she consented to. So the context here is that Asia did not consent.
Sattro then states Asia said there was intercourse and she did not feel well afterwards according to the leaked TMZ texts. Again this is a total lie.
Asia said: "The horny kid jumped me. I had sex with him." It felt weird. She then states that she was frozen and he was on top of her.
Again the context is that Asia did not consent. Exactly the same context as her statement that she had never been in a sexual relationship with Bennett. Sattro then states that Mark Haller is claiming Bennett was the assaulter.
Fact of the matter is that is the truth. Asia did not consent. Therefore Bennett assaulted her. To argue any differently is at complete odds with the very definition of consent. So Asia did NOT in fact provide three different versions. The context remains consistent.
Asia Argento did NOT consent to sexual intercourse with Bennett, she was sexually assaulted by Bennett. Then Sattro goes on to say "anyway it has been established" that sex took place as if that is the only consideration.
The law does not apply because a woman cannot not be found guilty of her own rape under law. The law is so cut and dry for the most part because there has never been a case of an adult male being sexually assaulted by a teenage underage girl.
There are however numerous cases where adult women are raped by "underage" teenage males. Some women have even been murdered by this demographic. So essentially Sattro's "interpretation" in no way reflects the truth.
Bennett Claims Version 2
MASSIMO GILETTI: Attorney, I can understand that in California…we need to remind that you have to be 18 years old in California to have a sexual intercourse. So, yes I agree that this is illegal…but what I’m saying is that it is difficult to understand how a boy could only be subjected to a situation like this, without being part of it. This is my personal point of view. We’ve all been teenagers; we’ve all had affairs with older women, so I find it difficult to consider it a rape. Do you understand?
JIMMY BENNETT: I also wanna add that I had a longer history with Asia. I had a lot of trust in her. So for a situation like that I probably trusted her even more. And the power that she had over the situation, made me feel powerless in a way.
Hang on a minute. Bennett was claiming he was rendered helpless by alcohol and now its all about his so called movie role.
MASSIMO GILETTI: You’re telling me that while you were talking about the movie there was a sort of situation in which Asia was promising you to be part of the movie and you would say yes to be part of it…or I misunderstood?
JIMMY BENNETT: That’s how I feel, yeah.
First I note that Bennett sidesteps the line of inquiry. Bennett knows that people think he is full of shit. So Bennett tries to claim the Silence Breaker narrative. Evidently Bennett is claiming that he was getting the feeling he would only get the part if he said yes.
Now he is claiming he was caught up in a power dynamic whereas before he was claiming he was essentially subdued through alcohol and force. Note here how the context of those claims do not align.
JIMMY BENNETT: I don’t think it’s a favor at all. We saw many actresses who claimed against him. Asia’s movement is pointing against all people misusing their power, and I felt the same feeling. I think that Asia adopted the same attitude. And I don’t think this story is making any favor to Weinstein. My story is very personal and we’re unveiling Asia’s hypocrisy. Because I think Asia’s behavior matches exactly Weinstein’s one. Even Asia misused her power, she met me in a hotel, and she set up an appointment to show her power. I was 17 and…
Now we are expected to believe that Asia flew across the world to "show her power" over Jimmy Bennett.
MASSIMO GILETTI: So this is the news coming out from this interview. He says he was invited with the promise of making a movie…this is the different point coming out from this interview tonight. This is what I felt. He talks about a film, a promise…because Weinstein is a producer, a man with great power, while Asia has normal power. The comparison, Attorney, doesn’t fit in my opinion. But if he says so…I respect what he says.
Massimo Giletti instantly picks up on the fact Bennett is now singing a new song.
JIMMY BENNETT: Yeah, I think it’s a matter of power. You know, Weinstein had a big production company, but also Asia was in a powerful position. I couldn’t wait to take part in a movie with Asia. I love my job as an actor and I was ready to seize any kind of opportunity. Asia misused her power. There was no balance in the use of powers.
Bennett originally presented a narrative where he was plied with alcohol and forced into sexual intercourse. As I noted previously Bennett had created that narrative for the purposes of extortion and he did not anticipate he would face proper scrutiny.
Now that he was facing said scrutiny Bennett did what all liars do which is change the narrative in the form of another lie. First Bennett was the victim of a lust fueled sex offender and then he attempts to become a Silence Breaker by stealing that narrative.
What cannot be denied that Bennett has now presented two completely separate narratives to detail one alleged crime. Sattro claims that Asia presented three narratives but upon examination we can clearly say that Asia presented the same context throughout. The absolute consistency is found in the context that Asia did not consent.
Weight of Evidence
An irony here that simply begs to be mentioned is that the Silence Breakers are often accused of being failed actors who are using sexual abuse allegations falsely to gain acting work and money. What is it that we see before us here?
Bennett has form when it comes to harassing and abusing women as the restraining order clearly shows. Bennett shows no sign of the secondary damage that is always present after a sexual assault. He sought no therapy. Nor did he raise an issue until Asia was mentioned in the #metoo movement and was partnered with Anthony Bourdain.
His first narrative is simply designed to extort and then when facing unexpected challenge he switches to claiming the Silence Breaker narrative.
In his own words he states he was given alcohol and then sexually set upon. His next narrative was that he felt compelled into the act because he felt he had to do it to get an acting role. What we see here is that it is Bennett who has presented multiple versions.
The selfie he took for a trophy is compelling evidence against Bennett. It is ridiculous in the extreme to accept that Asia wanted Bennett to take that picture. The picture was taken by Bennett with his own hand on his own phone. These are indisputable facts. These facts allow the safe conclusion that the picture was taken by Bennett for his own purposes.
As I stated earlier, whoever wanted that photo taken wanted the sex to take place. The photo clearly shows who took the shot, it was on his phone and it clearly shows he is no way traumatized. Bennett changed his version of events and failed to provide the one person who could count as a witness.
Asia was in therapy scant weeks after the assault and Asia's version of events and all her statements all point firmly to what actually matters here. Asia Argento did not consent to Jimmy Bennett.
Asia was one of the few people who apparently cared about Jimmy Bennett. She treated him like a son. She put aside time in her busy life to meet Bennett and tried to make him feel special by talking him up on SM.
Unbeknownst to Asia, Bennett was not the little boy she knew but a sexually aggressive teenager who was already acting sexually inappropriately if not criminally. Bennett arrived at the hotel with absolutely no intention of bringing a third party to the room.
Asia was the person who consumed the alcohol and thus compromised. During a display of affection Asia was suddenly jumped by Bennett. Asia was suddenly in a position where a person she trusted and saw as a son was now forcing her to have sex.
In the state of confusion and shock that followed Asia froze which is a survival response and by the time she could get her head around what was happening it was over. A jump and hump. While Asia was dealing with this sudden new reality Bennett took a selfie to prove to his friends he "scored" an Italian movie actress sex symbol.
Then, because Bennett is after all a donkey, he did not get any work as an actor. Bennett kept trying to sexually impose himself on Asia by sending her wholly unwanted naked pictures of himself including him masturbating. That behavior fits neatly with the complaints various young women made about Bennett online.
Asia received press coverage for her activism in the #metoo movement and Bennett saw an opportunity to gain financial advantage.
Jimmy Bennett sexually assaulted Asia and then extorted her by threatening to label her as the offender in the crime HE committed. He then went on to label her as being the same as the other assailant who assaulted Asia on record, Harvey Weinstein.
Bennett falsely labeled himself as being #metoo in an effort to avoid scrutiny. Essentially the movement and it all it stands for was shamelessly exploited by a sexual offender for his own purposes. Bennett saw his opportunity and targeted Asia financially.
It takes a special kind of evil to be able to do what Bennett has done. To sexually assault a woman who cared about him and extort her over her own violation is a trick I believe even Weinstein has not managed.
It is very clear that the evidence all points to Bennett as the offender. Bennett was sexually harassing Asia for years after he assaulted her. What "victim" in the circumstances he describes sends nudes of themselves to their assailant. Bennett felt "uncomfortable and ashamed".
We are expected to believe that the rational response to that shame and discomfort would be to send ones rapist nudes with ones hand firmly on ones genitals gratifying oneself.
Bennett changes his story to completely different scenarios. His history before and after the assault shows a grim propensity for pushing his sexual demands on unwilling girls and women. Finally the selfie was taken by Bennett on his own phone with his own hand according to his own will.
The evidence points to Bennett's guilt in its entirety. Bennett is a predator and sexual offender who has brought total devastation to the life of a woman who cared about him. This is who the movement spurned an innocent woman for.
Shame.