On Thursday, Seattle’s openly gay mayor Ed Murray was sued by a 46-year-old man who accuses him of molesting him when he was 15.
According to The Seattle Times, the lawsuit was filed in King County Superior Court under “D.H.,” the man’s initials.
Related: CNN Anchor Don Lemon: I Was Molested By A Pedophile
He alleges Murray paid the crack-addicted teenager $10 and $20 after each occurrence.
How about we take this to the next level?
Our newsletter is like a refreshing cocktail (or mocktail) of LGBTQ+ entertainment and pop culture, served up with a side of eye-candy.
Now sober for over a year, “D.H.” tells The Seattle Times that he’s “been dealing with this for over 30 years.”
Now sober for the last year, he explains the lawsuit is part of a “healing process” after a lifetime of “the shame, the embarrassment, the guilt, the humiliation that I put myself through and that he put me through.”
Murray’s currently running for reelection.
Jeff Reading, Murray’s personal spokesman, released the following statement:
“These false accusations are intended to damage a prominent elected official who has been a defender of vulnerable populations for decades. It is not a coincidence that this shakedown effort comes within weeks of the campaign filing deadline. These unsubstantiated assertions, dating back three decades, are categorically false. Mayor Murray has never engaged in an inappropriate relationship with any minor. … Mayor Murray will vigorously fight these allegations in court.”
Bob Sulkin, Murray’s attorney, held a press conference to explain his side of the story, saying that “unfortunately, defending these types of lawsuits is now the cost of being a public figure.”
“The allegations are false. He has not engaged in any inappropriate conduct with a minor, and I don’t think it’s a coincidence that these allegations have occurred in the midst of a mayoral campaign… At the end of the day, we’re going to defend this lawsuit vigorously, the mayor is going to do his job for the city of Seattle, and this accuser is going to have to explain himself.”
According to The Seattle Times article, two other men accused Murray of sexual abuse a decade ago.
All three accusers have “substantial criminal records.”
h/t: Towleroad
Jonnybonny
Typical scumbag trying to make a quick buck off of a great man and wonderful public servant, of course feeding into the hysteria about gays being kiddie diddlers in the process.
Notright
Sounds like it
darren michaels
It is unfortunate that a considerable reality of public life and service is initial thought to being a target.
I have often thought of many really good people I know who would be amazing with all they have to offer, but it’s the abuse they wouldnt easily survive.
Most addicts looking for cash would not give lying about their age a second thought if it means facilitating a transaction. I’ve lived with an addict it’s a horrible life, but I know they will tell you anything they need to to get what they want. The addict in my life would blackout and not remember much of what he’s participated in, seems strange the accuser is able to recall his own age when it occured, who he met, what took place, as well as the exact dollar amount from 30 years ago. How might he be able to prove he’s not confusing what took place when he was 25 and thinking he was 15.?
ErikO
Ed Murrary is a sexual predator and sexually abuses young boys and teenagers.
CaliKyle
It should read, “all three accusers….,” instead of “abusers.”
GraciesDaddy
It’s been corrected, but WHATTA Freudian Slip!! 😉
natekerchel
It has become increasingly common for public figures to be accused of this type of crime and if you look at the details of the story of this man they don’t add up. Part of the problem comes from the definition of ‘rape’. This man claims he was paid from day one for sex but because he was 15 it is called rape. It appears also that a police investigation turned up nothing to substantiate the claims which had been made previously. Obviously I don’t know for sure what, if anything, happened between these two men. My instinct tells me that this story is not credible. More evidence is needed before we label someone as a child rapist.
Josh447
Ed’s age? I mean really.
Brian
He’s 61 now, so the math suggests… 30 then.
The Seattle Times claims he was in his twenties. (Late 20’s, I guess?)
ChrisK
“All three abusers have “substantial criminal records.”
I’d say that speaks enough.
Gates
There are many young crack addicted teens selling their bodies for drugs. I’m sure the mayor wasn’t the only one who paid him for sex and I’m sure he lied about his age. I am glad the kid is clean now, but don’t try to ruin someone’s life because you need someone to blame for your past problems.
Gates
Oh and BTW, a lot of politicians get caught with prostitutes and escorts, it’s a common occurrence.
Brian
Occasional $10 payments from a single customer doesn’t really suggest the same kind of escort business used by NY Governor Eliot Spitzer or others.
Regardless, he was a child. The alleged crime is not prostitution. It’s statutory rape. Your defense of that is beyond creepy!
JoeyRamone
Tired of the blame game. If true, politician should be held accountable, but this hustler messed up his own life. The shame is his and his family’s to own. (Oh, my ruined life–pleeze gurl.) Time to take responsibility and move on.
1EqualityUSA
Your Koch bros check will be in the mail by Monday.
crowebobby
“If” it happened, Ed was 30 at the time. Big deal!
ChrisK
The kid was 15 at the time and paid for sex. It certainly is a big deal.
mhoffman953
Lots of times these allegations are false, we see them all the time with celebrities and politicians BUT many times they turn out to be true too.
The part of the original story which stands out to me is that there is a case report from 1984 of the boy actually reporting the incident back then when it happened. Then the original article says, “The lawsuit gives details about Murray’s 1980s Capitol Hill apartment, accurately recalls Murray’s phone number from the time, and offers a description of his genitals.” Of those 3 details, 2 of them so far are accurate according to investigators.
ChrisK
Hmm…sounds like some hanky panky with the kid probably happened then.
Heywood Jablowme
“If you can remember the ’80s, you weren’t there.”
Notright
Okay so let me get this straight a crackhead that is most likely broke is saying he was paid for sex 20 years ago and is now suing to begin his ‘healing process’ yeah nothing suspicious about that
1EqualityUSA
Deep pocket money knows 2018 is important. Are they doing deep background checks of Democrats, their competition, to thin out the herd?
Mo Bro
Prostitutes can now sue their johns for “sexual abuse” from 30 years ago?
Sure is one fud-up world we live in.
DCguy
Politicians and Prostitutes seems to be a common theme.
fur_hunter
If this is a TRUE event, he should have known better, especially being in the public eye and pays the consequences. If it turns out NOT to be true, (I would like both parties to take lie detector tests), I would hope the guy sues the family for defamation of character, slander and ruins them financially.
DMRX
You think a long-time crack head has any money to sue for? And his family isn’t even involved in this. How could the mayor possibly sue them?
Also… He wasn’t an elected official when the supposed crime took place.
Also… (And how can you not possibly know this?)… Lie detector tests are not ANY kind of reliable evidence.
natekerchel
mhoffman- we agree again. The fact that reports were made at the time suggest that there is something more to the story, though is far from proof anything happened. The alleged ‘rape’ is something different. The use of the word rape is disturbing – even if we agree that anything happened in the first place. I am aware that most States use the word ‘rape’ in these circumstances. A 15 year old drug user gets on a bus, meets a stranger and agrees to have paid sex. When I think of rape that is not the scenario that comes to mind. If it happened at all it would be underage sex – which is a criminal act. The other aspect is that he lied about his age – there is not a great difference in looks between someone who is 15 years and 364 days and someone who is 16 or 17. So ‘rape’ seems to be an over-simplification. If you know someone is underage then you are of course guilty of a crime – in this case I am not convinced anything happened at all – or if it did that the man was aware of the true age of the boy. If he did know the age of the boy then he is guilty and should face his accuser in a proper court of law, not in a trial by media.
Billy Budd
Here in Brazil this would not happen. Our law allows sex between adults and minors who are over 14 years old. It doesn’t matter if it is a male or a female. As long as it is consensual, it is no big deal. Each country has different laws and different cultures.
Heywood Jablowme
Yeah yeah yeah, and that’s gross. Brazil is a country of perverts. You shouldn’t be so proud of that fact.
In Korea and Indonesia they eat dog meat. That’s gross too.
DMRX
I agree with Heywood that a fully-adult person having sex with a pubescent child is disgusting.
Yes, every country has a right to make their own laws, but that doesn’t mean that those laws aren’t morally reprehensible.
The fact remains that this (possibly) happened in the US where we take a pretty dim view of statutory rape.
And based on my previous research of Brazil and the way you have described it in this and previous posts (if you actually live there — You’ve said differently before), I remained committed to never giving them any of my tourism dollars.
DMRX
Yep… That’s an awesome country you live in:
https://www.queerty.com/banker-fired-right-sharing-engagement-photos-online-20170406
ErikO
That former mayor is disgusting.
DMRX
Based on what? The 30+ years old memory of a crack head who’s only been sober for a year?
Chris
This seems to be a political hit job because there would seem to be no way that this charge could be tried today. The laws have changed too much and, no matter what the alleger states, his memory of things from that long ago will not stand legal scrutiny.
So the real questions are whether there is any basis in fact for these charges; and if not (which many people seem to believe), who profits from them. To me, that would be the people who set this whole thing up.
Stilinski26
Was it really necessary to mention his sexual orientation in the headline? Its already bad enough homophobes associates us gays with pedophilia