Main menu

Pages

Michael Bay denies killing pigeon in '6 Underground' set in Italy

featured image

Michael Bay is fighting a widely reported report that said he was accused in Italy of killing a pigeon during production of the 2019 Netflix movie “6 Underground”.

The filmmaker called the report “false, reckless and defamatory” and says he has never been accused of killing an animal.

In legal office, obtained by VarietyBay’s attorney is demanding a retraction or correction from TheWrap, after the Hollywood trade publication published a report last week about the pigeon incident.

The filmmaker’s attorney, Mathew Rosengart, says TheWrap’s story states that Bay was accused or “accused” of “killing a pigeon” in connection with the film he directed. “These statements are simply wrong; they are also harmful,” writes Rosengart.

TheWrap reported that the filmmaker was facing charges in Italy related to the murder of a pigeon on the Rome set of the Netflix film, despite having made several attempts to clear the case with Italian authorities. The report quoted a production source who said a carrier pigeon was supposedly killed by a puppet during a take, and since Bay was the director, he was blamed. (Pigeons are a protected species in Italy, and the country has a national law that makes it illegal to injure, kill, or capture any wild bird.)

Bay told TheWrap he would not go into detail as the matter is an ongoing court case, but said he declined the option of accepting a small fine with Italian authorities, stating: “I would not plead guilty to having harmed an animal. . ”

Bay vehemently denied the allegations. “I am a well-known animal lover and a leading animal activist,” Bay previously said in a statement to TheWrap. “No animals involved in the production were injured or harmed. Or any other production I’ve worked on over the past 30 years.”

Now, in a legal letter, Bay’s attorney writes that the filmmaker “has never been accused, let alone ‘accused’ of ‘killing’ an animal.” Rosengart writes that, prior to publishing the story, TheWrap became aware of “video evidence refuting these allegations and demonstrating that at no point was any animal harmed, let alone ‘killed’.”

TheWrap could not be reached for comment because a phone number for its media inquiries had a full mailbox that was not currently accepting messages.

Bay’s lawyer says the only “charge” in Italy “concerns whether, in his capacity as director of the film, Mr. .” Bay’s lawyer says the prosecution is being “vigorously defended”.

Read the legal letter sent by Michael Bay’s lawyer, Mathew Rosengart, here:

I’m a Michael Bay litigation attorney and I’m writing about you and Curlthe false, reckless and defamatory headline and the story claiming that Michael Bay was accused or “accused” of “killing a pigeon” in connection with a film he directed. These claims are simply wrong; they are also harmful.

As you know, Mr. Bay has never been accused, let alone “accused”, of “killing” an animal. In fact, prior to publication, you were informed of the existence of video evidence refuting these allegations and demonstrating that at no time was any animal harmed, let alone “killed”. Furthermore, as you also know (but have not published), the only “accusation” at issue in Italy concerns whether, in his capacity as director of the film, Mr. hiring capacity) responsible for handling the animals on set. This charge is being vigorously defended – and, indeed, Mr. Bay feels this so strongly that, to his credit, he has refused to settle the case, even for the nominal fine that was proposed by the authorities to settle it.

What makes your story even more egregious is that you were expressly informed and therefore you knew, that the headline was false because Mr. Bay did not “kill” an animal and he was not accused of doing so. You also evidently failed to properly investigate the matter by obtaining the actual charge or interviewing authorities or others who could have provided the facts. Instead, you continued with your story, with a false and misleading “clickbait” headline, demonstrating real malice and reckless disregard for the truth.

His story is particularly damaging and malicious because, contrary to its implications, Michael Bay is an animal rights activist; he loves animals passionately, as his background shows. As a result of his history, however, his name is now associated with “killing” or “murdering” an animal, connoting intention. He is therefore being unfairly maligned and attacked. In fact, there are now countless articles and countless social media images associating Mr. Bay to “murder” or “murder”, which spread throughout the world.

Your story is therefore extremely damaging to Mr. Bay personally and professionally (he has publicly discussed his love for animals and his desire to make a film about saving African elephants, another fact you were aware of but ignored) and tarnished his reputation as someone who supports animals fiercely, financially. and otherwise causing him extreme distress. All of this exposes you and The Wrap to significant monetary damages. See, for example, Ringler Associates Inc. v. Maryland Cas. Co., 80 cal. App. 4th 1165, 1181 (2000); see also Milkovich v. Lorain Journal Co.497 US 1, 19 (1990); White v. Fraternal Order of the Police909 F.2d 512, 518 (DC Cir. 1990). Kapellas v. kofman, 1 Ca1.3d 20, 33, 81 Cal.Rptr. 360 (1969) (the defendant is responsible “for what is implied as well as for what is explicitly stated”).

In view of the foregoing and other facts and evidence, on behalf of Mr. Bay, we demand an immediate retraction or story correction from him.

Comments