Advice Goddess Blog
« Previous | Home | Next »

Anybody Can Get A Restraining Order!
John Cusack takes out a restraining order against a woman, and it sounds like he has very good reason:

The Serendipity star filed for a temporary restraining order Friday against a Los Angeles woman whom he claims has been showing "unusual interest" in him, according to court documents obtained Monday by E! Online.

Per the complaint, Emily Leatherman, a 32-year-old transient with no known address, is accused of "stalking, throwing long letters of interest over [his] fence in bags with rocks and screwdrivers inside, making unannounced visits to offices of people [he works] with in an attempt to meet with [him] and listing [his] address as her own during a recent address."

"Mail addressed to her has been arriving at my residence without my permission," Cusack stated. "I have never met this person." While the 39-year-old actor (who turns 40 on Wednesday) wrote that Leatherman has not committed or threatened any violence against him, she has, he said, caused emotional distress to him and vowed to hurt herself if he did not agree to meet with her.

Cusack requested that she be forced to stay at least 500 feet away from his home, workplace and car.

What were the reasons she gave for taking out a restraining order in return against Cusack? And what numbskull of a judge gave it to her? (Check out this video of her and see if you think she looks balanced and reasonable.)

This reminds me of the time a judge allowed some nutcase to take a restraining order out against David Letterman. This practice is frequently used to demonize men in custody cases. Enough is enough. Let's have some probable cause, shall we?

Hmmm, I have an idea. Let's sic her on the Scientologists!

Posted by aalkon at July 25, 2006 11:07 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:


By working in downtown Clearwater, have no idea how many Scientologists there are around here. Now they don't cause any real problems as it were however; a film maker was assaulted last week while filming them outside one of their main classrooms.

The story can be read here:

Posted by: Rob at July 25, 2006 5:45 AM

typo: ".....during a recent address" should be "during a recent arrest".

Posted by: Stu "El Inglés" Harris at July 25, 2006 6:48 AM

Not my typo! Maybe that's what it said in the complaint, and they printed it as-is.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at July 25, 2006 6:54 AM

> Now they don't cause any real problems...

1. Give them time.

2. They're tax-exempt, babe. They suck resources merely through the passage of time.

Posted by: Crid at July 25, 2006 9:33 AM


Posted by: Rob at July 25, 2006 9:39 AM

Amy, this woman IS a scientologist!

1. Quarrelsome / argumentative / legalistic
2. Normal presentation during shallow encounters
3. Lives in a fantasy
4. Pathetically needy

Posted by: Crid at July 25, 2006 10:26 AM

Yes,I lived in Clearwater inthe late 80s and the company I worked for was full of these wack-jobs. ( Scientologists), but according to this woman Tom Cruise's publicicst wanted to take her out to a show!

Posted by: mbruce at July 25, 2006 12:37 PM

Have you ever seen John Cusack in person? He's a total greaseball. I guess this stalker chick is really into popping zits. His slimy pizza face would keep her busy for hours.

Posted by: Lena at July 25, 2006 6:41 PM

Well, speak of the devil!

(via Fark)

PS- Lena, the beloved actor has always spoken highly of *your* complexion. Besides, Grosse Pointe Blank was a good movie.

Posted by: Crid at July 25, 2006 6:59 PM

Ahshit/same story/I feel bad.

Posted by: crid at July 25, 2006 7:02 PM

Nothing about stalkers surprises me anymore, since I heard that Bob Uecker was being stalked.

Seriously. Bob Uecker.

Posted by: Gary S. at July 25, 2006 8:04 PM

For anyone interested in the phenomenon of stalking, both celebrity and otherwise, pick up _The Gift of Fear_ by Gavin de Becker. I may not agree 100% with certain aspects of his personal philosophy, but in general he's got a lot to say about human behavior, stalking, etc. One interesting factoid? These stalking cases that we hear about are only the tip of the iceberg. Famous people generally have multiple stalkers. Only the most extreme make the news. (De Becker also mercilessly dissembles the many failures that led to the death of Rebecca Schaefer and the stabbing of Monica Seles, among other things.) Anyway, good book for those into celebrity stalking (as well as people who want to know if the last bad date is likely to turn into a stalker, etc.).

Posted by: marion at July 26, 2006 9:38 PM

An old girlfriend loved that book, and then the spouse of an associate who worked for him offered another perspective.

De Becker has these good traits: In later versions of the book (or the introduction of the next one, I forget) he acknowledged that the risks he describes needed to be measured against other risks (household accidents, cancer from smoking, etc). He implicitly conceded that his first editions pandered to people who weren't making the clearest possible judgments about the hazards in their lives.

And when he talked about feelings, they were always the consequence of perceptions and events: He does not advocate belief in magic.

The success of that book taught me that there are a great number of people out there who need to be taught about the boundaries of human nature in a straightforward way.

Welcome to the Alkon blog! Remember to vote Republican!

Posted by: Crid at July 27, 2006 4:26 PM

Leave a comment