From the minute skeevy sexual assault allegations against John Travolta hit the news cycle, people have been lamenting the new "creepy" factor they'd have to associate with whatever on-screen incarnation of Travolta they love most -- from Vinnie Barbarino to Danny Zuko, Tony Manero to Vincent Vega. In other words, it's really tough for us to see Travolta as a regular Joe. And that seems to be what has his first accuser a little nervous about his lawsuit.
"John Doe #1," as he's being called, released a statement to Radar Online. While it was definitely written in a bizarro way, he raises a very valid point about how Travolta's celebrity could affect a trial.
An excerpt reads:
I don't think anyone should form any opinion about Mr. Travolta, his family, his council, myself, John Doe #2, and our counsel. Instead, I would urge everyone to understand that guilt or innocence in our Justice System is decided by our court system. Too often these matters are decided by swaying public opinion through elements that would never be considered in an actual court case.
Elements like a media circus? Our fascination with Travolta's celebrity? Pfft ... But we never let Hollywood glitz blind us and derail justice, right? Ha!
As John Doe #1 puts it, it's almost as though we can't avoid "the circus that celebrity matters seem to spiral into" -- whether we're talking about Lindsay Lohan, O.J. Simpson, or now, John Travolta. Is it avoidable? I'm not sure, but I can certainly understand why the accuser in a high-profile celeb trial would hope we could all shelf our starstruck and/or scandal-hungry points of view, and stop jumping to conclusions so early on in the game. Let the court of law do its job to judge Travolta "with absolute fairness," something Doe says he believes our country "affords all citizens regardless of their wealth or station." Doesn't sound to me like he's asking for too much.
What do you make of John Doe #1's statement? Do you think he has a valid point?
Image via Ryan Pierse/Getty Images