Man convicted of groping Minnie Mouse

[KinPA]

Thanks for posting this Hercules10. There are still things coming out that my husband and I don't know about and I like to read the facts instead of the guesses. I didn't know she wasn't there on Tuesday and I heard a different story as to why he didn't testify. I think from now on my FIL better shake hands instead of hugging!!

 

[DarthKTrava]

In a situation with very little evidence, it does not look good that your FIL didn't get to state his side of the story. The lawyer wasn't thinking about the alleged victim and how it would appear to the jury and did your FIL a grave injustice.

I can't say if your FIL was guilty or innocent--but the lawyer screwed up big time.

Most defense lawyers won't let the defendant get up on the stand. Lots of times, it HURTS their case than if they don't speak at all.

 

[DarthKTrava]

No prior background is hard to show considering most incidents go unreported.

Just because it's not on his record, doesn't mean it never happened before.

Doesn't mean that we lynch him for things that were not reported.... IF there were any other incidents.... Could be accidental but hard to tell, based on WHERE his hand was.....

 

[DarthKTrava]

Never mind - not worth it...

Definitely not worth it.

 

[DarthKTrava]

But WDW needs to end this policy. If a WDW character feels endangered or abused, they need to be able to defend themselves immediately. Staying "in character" has to be secondary to their safety...

I totally agree. Or some way of signalling their handler that something is wrong... Also could be used if there's a health-related emergency too...

 

[MonkeyDishwasher]

However I also think Ms. McGoldrick needs to find another job since she's doesn't seem thick enough skinned for this job.

I must point out:

The Pennsylvania grandfather was visiting Walt Disney World with his family on June 7. Brittney McGoldrick, a nine-year Disney employee was on the job, dressed in her Minnie Mouse costume. McGoldrick posed with Moyer for a picture and said that he touched her breasts and rear-end.

Obviously she must have visited some more colorful Guests in those 9 years. I highly doubt that any Cast Member in her line of work hasn't taken some minor to fair amount of abuse. I would think that if she'd already stuck it out for 9 years there, she must have felt very strongly about this specific incident to have taken it so far as to go to court over it.

Judge Shoemaker said there is no way Moyer could have known whether the person inside the costume was a man or woman

(I would like to take this moment to point out that I am not condemning or excusing the case.)
This is not a defense nor an excuse. If the accused was touching a person inappropriately while they were under the impression that they were female due to their outward appearance in the moment in question, then they have groped a female in that moment. Had it been in actuality a male, that male still could have felt just as violated in that specific circumstance.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

"I am not guilty and I pray to Jehovah God that he has mercy on Ms. McGoldrick," Moyer said.

I have to say that this statement by the man really disturbs me.

My impression is that he is calling her a liar.

Regardless of HIS version of events (almost wrote "how he felt"--but didn't want to go there!)---she felt violated.

When someone feels violated--it doesn't matter what the opinions are of those who are not that person. Something the man did--disturbed that woman. For him to (IMHO) call her a liar for it--I find that really troublesome.

Again--just my opinion.

 

[diznygirl]

I definitely think there should be something done about this. Maybe even some kind of signal they can give their handlers. Something that people wouldn't notice as being "out of character".

The problem is that Disney needs more Greeters, and they need to be better trained. They need to be the first line of defense for the characters, rather than the line-leaders they have become.

Exactly, I brought up the case yesterday of the 4 male CM's accused of assualting a female CM. Even though the proof came out that they were innocent, they were probably dragged over the coals about it.

Actually if this type of thing is indeed as much of a problem that people are saying it is, I think its time to end the photo meets or a mandatory no contact rule/neutral zone for the safety of the workers and the guests.

Enough of these situations and that's exactly what Disney will do.


The most recent article sure makes it sound like he admits to doing "something" - but just meant to be funny, not inappropriate. Like it's "okay" to take a photo looking like you are groping Minnie Mouse.

Interesting statements by Judge in case.

As I read this he is not guilty of "groping" her just simple battery which means that Ms. McGoldrick felt reasonably threatened. Removing the sexual conotation, which seems to be what those here have latched onto, I can see how the jury agreed. However I also think Ms. McGoldrick needs to find another job since she's doesn't seem thick enough skinned for this job.

'Minnie Mouse' Groper Convicted Of Battery
A grandfather was convicted of battery Tuesday after being accused of inappropriately grabbing Minnie Mouse at Walt Disney World on June7. However, 60-year-old John Moyer wouldn't apologize for his actions.

"I'm sorry they came up with the wrong verdict," Moyer said.

John Moyer said he was having fun with Minnie Mouse and she took it the wrong way. But Disney didn't think so and they threw him out of the park indefinitely.

A jury didn't think so either when they convicted the 60-year-old man of battery.

The Pennsylvania grandfather is on probation. Moyer said he was just fooling around. John Moyer has to serve six months supervised probation, community service and write a letter of apology to the woman who wore the Minnie Mouse costume.

Moyer refused to testify during the trial, but when WFTV caught up with him after the verdict was read, he insisted he never groped the Walt Disney World character.

"What happened?" WFTV reporter Daralene Jones asked.

"We were having a fun time at Disney and she took it the wrong way. That's it," Moyer replied.

"He thought it was all in fun, but for Mrs. McGoldrick, it was sexual," said the prosecutor.

The Pennsylvania grandfather was visiting Walt Disney World with his family on June 7. Brittney McGoldrick, a nine-year Disney employee was on the job, dressed in her Minnie Mouse costume. McGoldrick posed with Moyer for a picture and said that he touched her breasts and rear-end.

McGoldrick continues to work for Disney. She wasn't in court for Tuesday's verdict and sentencing, but on Monday she nearly broke down in tears explaining how the incident happened. She says its part of the Disney integrity policy to stay quiet.

"I was doing everything I could to get his hands off my breasts," she described in court.

Moyer and his son told the judge he's a Godly man, with not even a parking ticket on his record. John Moyer also said that and he lost his wife last year to multiple sclerosis and doesn't even go on dates with his girlfriend without a third party.

"My father never approaches women badly. I know the verdict is guilty, but I still don't see that in my father," said Moyer's son Emory Moyer.

During the sentencing, Orange County Judge Wayne Shoemaker said he didn't consider the incident as sexual, but instead a lot of joking and horsing around that went too far.
"I am not guilty and I pray to Jehovah God that he has mercy on Ms. McGoldrick," Moyer said.

Judge Shoemaker said there is no way Moyer could have known whether the person inside the costume was a man or woman.

 

[Wishing on a star]

"I am not guilty and I pray to Jehovah God that he has mercy on Ms. McGoldrick," Moyer said.

Wow.... that is kind of disturbing.... It is not just that he is refuting or disagreeing with her claim... but he is invoking his Jehovah God, because clearly this poor woman is evil and deserves mercy from eternal punishment.

IMHO, just the phrase, "IT was all in fun", indicates very clearly that something ("IT") happened.

He is not even claiming that it didn't happen...
Just that he thinks the fact that he finds it 'humorous' should make it okay.

And, I won't even go there with the issues regarding his deceased wife and chaperoned dates with his new woman.

 

[OceanAnnie]

It's a strange case. Something does seem to be strangely amiss.

 

[Eeyores Butterfly]

Unbelievable!! I'm so sorry you had to endure that kind of treatment. Wow!

Really, 99% of the guests are wonderful. These specific incidents stick out in my mind because they were so rare- but they do happen and more often than we woud like.

I definitely think there should be something done about this. Maybe even some kind of signal they can give their handlers. Something that people wouldn't notice as being "out of character".

We have ways to alert the attendants that something is going on, but with the fast pace and crowds often the person is gone before they can be confronted. I do not agree that we should break character for this. Just speaking this openly about my job is difficult. Character integrity means the world to us and you would find that the majority of us are satisfied with the way things are.

What disturbs me is the quote that he was "fooling around, joking around" and she took it the wrong way. That to me sounds like he was doing something he should not have been doing. We do not know what your intentions are, we only know what your actions are. I'm sure the kid that punched me in the base of my school did not mean to hurt me and was just "fooling around", but guess what, it did hurt- a lot. I'm sure the drunk guest who was all over me at 9:00am was just "fooling around", but it still made me incredibly uncomfortable. The fact is, this man is an adult and while I love it when adults get caught up in the excitement of the characters, they are still old enough to know better. To know that there is somebody in there.

I also don't like that last quote by the judge. I'm sorry, I have worn that costume many times and it is actually quite easy to tell if it is a man or woman. Furthermore, many adults know that Minnie is almost always played by women due to the height. When I first worked there it amazed me the "common knowledge" about so many of the characters. So it is very possible that he could have known.

I was feeling sorry for him until I read that quote by him about fooling around, and now I no longer do. That to me says he knew he was doing something wrong. Maybe it went further than he meant it to, but he still should not have been doing it.

ETA: Going back to the "it was all in fun" quote, I actually had a guest hit me in the head (a father) and when the attendant told him to stop he said that exact same thing. He said he was just having fun. Her response was, "Well ________ doesn't think it's fun." Just having fun is no excuse to abuse another person. It does not make it feel any less violating or any less painful.

 

[Feralpeg]

At this point, I'm not sure it is doing any good to continue to go over this. We are not hearing from the parties involved. True, we heard from a relative of the accused. Not to be mean, but I don't call that an unbiased source. We have no one representing the view of the CM who was there or who has talked to her. To take the word of the relative without hearing from someone who has had contact with the CM involved seems unfair to me.

Right or wrong, I trust in our court system. It may have its faults, but he was tried before a jury who really didn't have any agenda for either party. If he had a bad lawyer, he should appeal. It happens.

IMHO, adults need to realize that personal space with others should always be respected. It doesn't matter whether the person is in a costume or not. In all the trips I've made to WDW (and I live next door), I have never put my arm around a character. They have put their arm around me. I know that will happen and I am okay with it or I wouldn't pose for a picture with them. Never, will I put my hand on a CM. I have way to much respect for them.

 

[Hercules10]

Judge and jury did not find him guilty of anything lewd, inappropriate or sexual. He was found guilty of battery which basically means he scared the hell out of the girl. The question is did he do so by grabbing for her goodies or did he try to give her a overzealous hug and she freaked out?.

 

[OceanAnnie]

Judge and jury did not find him guilty of anything lewd, inappropriate or sexual. He was found guilty of battery which basically means he scared the hell out of the girl. The question is did he do so by grabbing for her goodies or did he try to give her a overzealous hug and she freaked out?.

Isn't battery = to inappropriateness?

 

[Vallie]

Im amazed by some responses to this case!

As a young woman, if I was in that costume and some man intentionally or unintentionally grabbed the area where that man grabbed i would NOT think its okay, a "joke" or anything other then inappropriate.

I understand as adults we sometimes get caught up in the moment and forget there are actual real people in those characters but there are, and Ive had friends who've done the College Program playing those characters and I dont think its okay for some man to come get his jollys by putting his hands where he did.

I dont think my boyfriend or grandfather would pose this way with an obviously female character. And maybe you can make excuses for his hand was just in the wrong place bla bla bla... okay... what about the fact that he also touched her behind? Was that an "accident" too?

The man said that she took it the wrong way, which means something DID happen. this woman has been an employee for NINE years! She obviously felt pretty strongly about this in order for her to go through this.

I understand that this is someones grandfather and father and whatever but you know what? if my grandpa went to disney and was touching Minnie where that man was and in that pose Id really wonder about him too.

Those poor people have to put up with so much stuff in that costume, heat, cranky children, low pay etc. they shouldnt have to be dealing with men trying to be funny by touching thier goods too.

Just my two cents!

 

[diznygirl]

Judge and jury did not find him guilty of anything lewd, inappropriate or sexual. He was found guilty of battery which basically means he scared the hell out of the girl. The question is did he do so by grabbing for her goodies or did he try to give her a overzealous hug and she freaked out?.

I think after 9 years as a character she knows the difference between an inappropriate touch and an overzealous hug. Characters get overzealous hugs all day, every day.

 

[Vallie]

I think after 9 years as a character she knows the difference between an inappropriate touch and an overzealous hug. Characters get overzealous hugs all day, every day.

agreed!

 

[Hercules10]

I think after 9 years as a character she knows the difference between an inappropriate touch and an overzealous hug. Characters get overzealous hugs all day, every day.

Said she was an employee for 9 years. Not sure if all 9 years was as a character. And if she did then I do feel for her in that respect.

Isn't battery = to inappropriateness?

It basically is "putting your hands unwantedly on someone". A shove, slap on the back, punch and yes cheap feel can be considered battery. However the judge saw nothing sexual intended and he heard more testimony then anyone here.

 

[Wishing on a star]

Sorry Hercules, but if his hand(s) were where they obviously were, then, that is sexual.

The judge may have made that comment,
But, that doesn't mean I have to agree with it.
It does not prove that there was no intent for sexual contact.

I am wondering if there is the possibility that there is a higher degree of proof and intent required to prove a true sexual assault, so the Judge went with battery in order to make sure to establish a conviction and sentence. One that would hold up under appeal.

In other words, the guy may well 'walk' if true sexual battery is not proven... so go for 'battery'. Then, at least you've got him convicted.

Kind of like "You'd better have a locked tight case to prove premeditated first degree murder", (you have to prove both premeditation and intent, which is difficult) so go for 2nd, or manslaughter to make sure you at least get a conviction that will hold up if appealed.

I hope everyone here understands what I am saying.

 

[Geoff_M]

In that costume, the character's "chest" is your chest and it is very obvious whether or not you have something up there to grope. Any guest looking at it can see that right away.

However, guests don't have the inside scoop on costume design. I can honestly say that I've never had any idea about whether the CM inside a non-face character is a male or a female... I've also assumed it can be either. I'm also surprised that Disney would rely on the physical dimensions of a CM to dictate the external "outline" of one of the non-face characters. I mean, It's obvious that the material of Minnie's "body" (and others) doesn't just hang loose around the CM's body, so there appears to be some sort of padding or internal "frame" there.

Here's an interesting scenario... for those that think it's a slam-dunk: If it had been a male CM inside Minnie, should the guy have been arrested?

As a young woman, if I was in that costume and some man intentionally or unintentionally grabbed the area where that man grabbed i would NOT think its okay, a "joke" or anything other then inappropriate.

However, I think the core issue isn't whether the action was "inappropriate"... the real question is was it criminal???

As for what happened... I don't see how anyone can get a clear picture what on what's been reported in the news or here. There's little evidence that the guy was trying to "cop a feel" from Minnie, and the Judge in the case seems to agree from what he said after hearing the testimonies and seeing the evidence that none of us have. The guy also wasn't charged with a sexual offensive either. He was charged with "misdemeanor battery", basically that's the same as punching someone. The guy doesn't have the MO as some sort of "trouble maker" like the father and son team that tried to "unmask" Pooh a couple years back. I think at best it was a complete misunderstanding, and at worst was "boorish" horsing around.