Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 1 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 1 of 15
`
`COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS
`
`1
`
`4/6/202 1
`
`ESSEX, ss.
`
`SUPERIOR COURT DEPARTMENT
`OF THE TRIAL COURT
`
`RECEIVED
`
`Civil Action No._
`
`)
`)
`
`;
`
`) )
`
`)
`)
`)
`)
`)
`
`) )
`
`) )
`
`JOHN B. WILSON, LESLIE WILSON, and
`
`JOHN B. WILSON, JR,
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`v.
`
`NETFLIX, INC., NETFLIX WORLDWIDE
`ENTERTAINMENT, LLC, 241C FILMS, LLC,
`LIBRARY FILMS LLC, JON KARMEN,
`and CHRIS SMITH,
`
`Defendants.
`
`COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND
`
`i. Introduction
`
`1.
`
`This is an action for defamation brought by Plaintiffs, who are members of the
`
`Wilson family. For the past two years, the Wilson family has endured the unfair prosecution of
`
`the father in their family, Plaintiff John B. Wilson (“Mr. Wilson”), in the so-called “Varsity
`
`Blues” case pending in federal court in Boston. Mr. Wilson has pled not guilty in that case. He
`
`did so because he is innocent. While awaiting his trial, which has been delayed more than two
`
`and half years after his initial hearing, the Wilson family has been subjected to multiple instances
`
`of unfair and inaccurate reporting about the case. In recent days, however, they have been forced
`
`to endure the ultimate destruction of their reputations in the eyes of more than 200 million global
`
`Netflix subscribers as the result of Netflix’s March 17, 2021 broadcast, and thereafter the
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 2 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 2 of 15
`
`continuous streaming, of the so-called ‘documentary’ titled Operation Varsity Blues: The
`
`College Admission Scandal.
`
`2.
`
`No individual, including a defendant awaiting trial in a criminal case, is required
`
`to sit by and permit the unlawful and unfair destruction of their reputation by a global media
`
`outlet. For this reason, prior to Defendant Netflix, Inc. (“Netflix”) and the other Defendants
`
`named herein airing their publication, the Wilson family literally warned them in writing of the
`
`specific, publicly available and fully exculpatory facts surrounding the charges against Mr.
`
`Wilson and made clear that Mr. Wilson and his children could not simply be grouped into a
`
`narrative about the many individuals who, unlike Mr. Wilson, have pled guilty to committing
`
`crimes. Among other things, the Wilsons made clear to Defendants that Mr. Wilson’s son was a
`
`real and talented water polo player who was part of the United States Olympic development
`
`program, that his daughters had 99th percentile test scores based on tests that they themselves
`
`took, and other publicly available exculpatory information, all of which the Wilsons provided to
`
`Defendants.
`
`3.
`
`The Wilsons fiirther supplied Defendants with the results of extensive polygraph
`
`testing conducted by highly respected and experienced professionals which Mr. Wilson
`
`unifome passed. Yet, Netflix and the other Defendants knowingly and recklessly ignored those
`
`facts and painted the Wilsons with the broadest and dirtiest brush possible. They included the
`
`Wilson family in the broad and sweeping allegations of misconduct made by the government
`
`against other “Varsity Blues” defendant parents who have admitted their guilt in court and who
`
`are not going to trial. This presentation is completely contrary to director Christopher Smith’s
`
`purported claim that he and the other filmmakers “were trying to paint a slightly more complex
`
`portrait of the whole landscape as opposed to painting it with one brush.” See
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 3 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 3 of 15
`
`https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/lori-loughlin-felicity-huffinan—fbi-transcripts-omitted-
`
`operation-varsity—blues-f11m-director—171730624.html. Indeed, Mr. Wilson is the only one of the
`
`“Varsity Blues” parent defendants featured in the ‘documentary’ who has not pleaded guilty. By
`
`deliberately blurring the lines between the parents featured in the ‘documentary,’ by deliberately
`
`ignoring publicly available information on the docket in Mr. Wilson’s criminal proceeding to
`
`which they were specifically directed and with which they were provided, and through
`
`defamatory suggestions of fact and innuendo of and concerning the entire Wilson family, the
`
`Defendants gave and continue to give viewers the false and defamatory impression that the
`
`Wilsons engaged in substantially similar conduct as the other parents and families included in the
`
`publication. The Wilson family members named herein seek monetary damages and other legal
`
`redress for the malicious and reckless destruction of their reputations caused by Defendants.
`
`
`ii. Parties
`
`4.
`
`Mr. Wilson is an individual and a resident of Lynnfield, Essex County,
`
`Massachusetts.
`
`5.
`
`Plaintiff Leslie Wilson (“Mrs. Wilson”) is an individual and a resident of
`
`Lynnfield, Essex County, Massachusetts. She is the wife of Mr. Wilson.
`
`6.
`
`Plaintiff John B. Wilson, Jr. (“Johnny Wilson”) is an individual and a resident of
`
`Los Angeles, California. He is the son of Mr. Wilson and Mrs. Wilson.
`
`7.
`
`Defendant Netflix is a media-services provider and production company that
`
`streams media content worldwide to its subscribers. Upon information and belief, it is a
`
`Delaware corporation with a principal place of business in the State of California.
`
`8.
`
`Defendant Netflix Worldwide Entertainment, LLC (“Netflix WE”) is, upon
`
`information and belief, a wholly owned subsidiary of Netflix. Upon further information and
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 4 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894—MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 4 of 15
`
`belief, Netflix WE owns the trademarks and copyrights for the ‘documentary’ at issue. Upon
`
`further information and belief, it is a Delaware limited liability company with a principal place of
`
`business in the State of California.
`
`9.
`
`Defendant 241C Films, LLC (“241C”) is a producer of the ‘documentary’ at
`
`issue. Upon information and belief, 241C is a California limited liability company with a
`
`principal place of business in the State of California.
`
`10.
`
`Defendant Library Films LLC (“Library Films”) is a producer of the
`
`‘documentary’ at issue. Upon information and belief, Library Films is a California limited
`
`liability company with a principal place of business in the State of California.
`
`11.
`
`Defendant Jon Karmen (“Karmen”) is an individual and, upon information and
`
`belief, a resident of the State of California. He is a principal of 241C and Library Films, and the
`
`credited producer of the ‘documentary’.
`
`12.
`
`Defendant Chris Smith (“Smith”) is an individual and, upon information and
`
`belief, a resident of the State of California. He is a principal of 241C and Library Films, and the
`
`credited director of the ‘documentary’.
`
`iii. Jurisdiction and Venue
`
`13.
`
`This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to G.L. c. 212, § 4.
`
`l4.
`
`Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to G.L. c. 223, § 1, as Mr. and Mrs. Wilson
`
`are residents of Essex County.
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 5 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 5 of 15
`
`iv. Background
`
`15.
`
`Mr. Wilson is a defendant in United States v. Colbum, 19-cr-10080, a criminal
`
`case pending in federal court in Boston which arises fiom the so—called “Varsity Blues”
`
`investigation. Other defendant parents caught up in the investigation include both famous
`
`Hollywood individuals as well as other parents.
`
`16.
`
`Unlike these and other high-profile defendant parents who have pleaded guilty,
`
`Mr. Wilson is innocent. He was deceived by the confessed felon behind the ‘Varsity Blues’
`
`scandal, the highly-skilled con artist Rick Singer (“Singer”), and is waiting for his day in court to
`
`prove his innocence.
`
`17.
`
`Mr. Wilson is a hardworking, generous person with no prior criminal record who
`
`is extremely supportive of his family and his children. Mr. Wilson and the Wilson family have a
`
`long record of community service, including Mr. Wilson’s fifteen-plus years of service as a
`
`board member of Cure Autism Now and Autism Speaks. During his lifetime, Mr. Wilson has
`
`donated millions of dollars to charitable organizations.
`
`18.
`
`Mr. Wilson did not seek out Singer. Instead, he was referred to Singer by a
`
`world-renowned financial advisory firm. This firm told Mr. Wilson that Singer was a highly
`
`reputable college admissions counselor used by many of their other clients and implied that his
`
`services were fully legitimate. Mr. Wilson was never given any reason to believe that Singer’s
`
`services, including his now infamous “side-door” program which he openly marketed to Mr.
`
`Wilson and countless other parents (including in a presentation at Starbucks’ corporate offices),
`
`was anything but legitimate.
`
`19.
`
`Lacking the type of evidence of fraud or other willfiil wrongdoing that the
`
`government has against many of the other parents, the govemment’s case against Mr. Wilson is
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 6 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 6 of 15
`
`made up of out-of-context email fragments and a series of deliberately ambiguous sound bites,
`
`scripted by government agents over several months of set up calls with Singer.
`
`20.
`
`In contrast to many of the other defendants in the ‘Varsity Blues’ prosecution,
`
`many of whom have pleaded guilty, neither Mr. Wilson nor his children (or Mrs. Wilson for that
`
`matter) are accused of participating in any kind of standardized test cheating. All of the Wilson
`
`children worked hard, studied hard and took their own college admissions tests with each scoring
`
`in the top 90+ percentile, and the government has never alleged otherwise. Likewise, Mr.
`
`Wilson is not accused of “photoshopping” or staging photos for fake athletic profiles or making a
`
`payment to line the pockets of any athletic coach or other university employee in order to gain
`
`admission to a prestigious college or university.
`
`21.
`
`Rather, Mr. Wilson is accused of making payments which Singer and others
`
`assured him were legitimate donations, in order to assist with (but not guarantee) the admission
`
`of his very qualified children to their preferred universities. Employing a completely novel legal
`
`theory which stretches the definition of “bribery” beyond all recognition, the government has
`
`chosen to label these payments as “bribes.”
`
`22.
`
`Mr. Wilson is falsely accused of conspiring with Singer to “bribe” his son’s way
`
`into the University of Southern California (“USC”) as a water polo player in 2014. However, it
`
`is undisputed that Johnny Wilson was a star athlete, an invited member of the United States
`
`Olympic water polo development program, and that his grades and test scores were more than
`
`sufficient to gain admission to USC. He was a starter on multiple highly nationally ranked high
`
`school and club teams and was approached by more than one Division I college water polo and
`
`swimming teams to possibly join their programs. Johnny’s high school coach — himself an
`
`NCAA MVP and Olympic team alternate — was openly involved with the Wilson family and was
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 7 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 7 of 15
`
`in contact with the USC coaches about Johnny’s participation in USC water polo. Unlike most
`
`of the children of the other defendant parents in the investigation, Johnny was actually an athlete
`
`and ultimately became a member of the USC water polo team. Below is a photo published in the
`
`San Jose Mercury News of Johnny Wilson competing in the West Bay Area League swimming
`
`championships in 2013, in which he won first place in the butterfly:
`
`
`
`23. With respect to his two daughters, Mr. Wilson is accused of conspiring with
`
`Singer to gain their admission to Harvard and Stanford through the use of Singer’s “side door”
`
`program in 2018. But here again, it is undisputed that Singer continued to assure Wilson in
`
`2018, four years after Johnny’s admission to USC, that the “side door” program was fully
`
`legitimate and was widely accepted by multiple universities, with Singer having done over 700
`
`side doors in the previous year at schools across the country. Singer even told Mr. Wilson that
`
`he was personally arranging with the president of Harvard to do more side doors there. It is
`
`further undisputed that Singer told Wilson that the side door was available to non-athletes who
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 8 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 8 of 15
`
`were academically qualified and available to serve as a team assistant manager or in other team
`
`or academic department support roles. Wilson’s daughters were in fact academically qualified
`
`for admission to Harvard and Stanford, having legitimately achieved scores in the 99th percentile
`
`on their college entrance exams. One daughter achieved a perfect score on the ACT.
`
`24.
`
`Mr. Wilson’s donations in 2018 to Singer’s IRS-approved foundation were made
`
`when his daughters were just 16 years old and their college applications were not even due until
`
`the year 2020. As part of his cooperation with the government, Singer told Mr. Wilson that
`
`donations made years in advance could have more impact on tight university budgets. He also
`
`told Mr. Wilson that he could even change which schools he ultimately donated to through
`
`Singer’s foundation up until mid-2019.
`
`25.
`
`Nonetheless, the Wilsons have been unfairly branded as cheaters and criminals in
`
`the media, without regard to the true facts related to their family, and how diametrically opposed
`
`they are fiom, for example, other parents who had their children pose for staged athletic photos
`
`or who paid a Singer representative to take their children’s college entrance exams for them.
`
`26.
`
`Defendants have now materially focused to a world-wide audience the unfair
`
`branding of the Wilson family with their new ‘documentary’ first streamed on Netflix on March
`
`17, 2021. This production lumps the Wilson family in with other defendant parents, all of whom
`
`have already admitted to wrongdoing, and has the effect of making the Wilsons appear guilty
`
`simply by their association with Singer and, by extension, the other defendant parents that are
`
`now admitted felons. In fact, Mr. Wilson is the only parent featured in the documentary who has
`
`pleaded not guilty and is intending to go to trial to prove his innocence.
`
`27. Worse, Defendants ignored publicly available facts and documents that were
`
`readily accessible to them from court filings that make clear that Mr. Wilson is innocent and has
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 9 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 9 of 15
`
`been falsely accused and any suggestion that his children benefitted from any alleged
`
`wrongdoing and were not capable of gaining admission to college on their own is not true.
`
`28.
`
`Even a cursory viewing of the actual production makes clear that Defendants
`
`made no attempt to separate Mr. Wilson and his family out from the dozens of other defendant
`
`parents who pled guilty and were sentenced as part of the “Varsity Blues” prosecutions. Other
`
`than momentarily acknowledging at the end of this approximately IOU-minute piece that Mr.
`
`Wilson has pled not guilty, Defendants made no attempt to educate its worldwide viewers that,
`
`for example, Johnny was not a “fake athlete” or the academic gifts of each of the Wilson
`
`children.
`
`29.
`
`Instead, the ‘documentary’ contains reenactrnents of telephone calls between
`
`Singer and Mr. Wilson just as it does for calls Singer’s calls with other defendant parents that
`
`have pleaded guilty. Excerpts of calls with Mr. Wilson are taken out of context and spliced into
`
`sequences with excerpts of calls featuring other parents making genuinely incriminating
`
`statements. As a result, any reasonable viewer of the ‘documentary’ is rendered unable to
`
`distinguish between the various parent defendants and is left with the untrue perception of the
`
`Wilsons being just like the defendant parents who orchestrated through Singer standardized test
`
`cheating, staging or “photoshopping” photos of non-athlete children for fake athletic profiles,
`
`and paying bribes to college or university personnel in order to gain admission for their children.
`
`Indeed, in a highly and deliberately misleading fashion, the opening credits of the documentary
`
`feature audio of a call between Mr. Wilson and Singer while highly inflammatory images
`
`pertaining to other defendant parents — including a sequence clearly depicting the
`
`“photoshopping” of a photo of a water polo player — are displayed on the screen.
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 10 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 10 of 15
`
`30. Worse, prior to the publication of the ‘documentary’ last month, the Wilson
`
`family warned Defendants about lumping Mr. Wilson in with the other defendant parents in a
`
`letter dated March 5, 2021, which included publicly available supporting documentation for a
`
`number of exculpatory facts related to Mr. Wilson’s case (the “Wilson Letter”). A copy of the
`
`Wilson Letter with its enclosures is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
`
`31.
`
`First, the Wilson Letter put Defendants on notice of the following facts and
`
`provided documentary support for them:
`
`a. Mr. Wilson’s son was a highly competitive high school and club water polo
`player and was a member ofthe USC water polo team.
`
`b. Singer wrote in his own notes that Mr. Wilson’s payment to USC was a
`“donation to USC program for real polo player” and told the FBI that he
`had no recollection of Wilson knowing of any “inaccuracies in his son’s
`athletic profile.”
`
`0. Of the funds that Mr. Wilson intended to donate to USC in connection with
`
`his son’s admission, Singer stole $100,000 and $100,000 went to USC itself
`(not a coach or any other USC employee), with USC acknowledging the gift
`in an oflicial USC thank you letter.
`Indeed, Singer consistently told Mr.
`Wilson that all monies paid in connection with his “side door” program
`went to the schools.
`
`See Ex. 1 at p. 3 (citing and including exhibits to the Wilson Letter).
`
`32.
`
`The ‘documentary’ fails to even mention these material and exculpatory facts that
`
`show the Wilson family’s circumstances are entirely different. Instead, it insinuates throughout
`
`that the Wilsons are no different from any other family caught up in this scandal.
`
`33.
`
`Second, the Wilson Letter warned Defendants that the reenactment of any
`
`recorded calls between Singer and Mr. Wilson that did not include the following unrebutted facts
`
`available in the public record would necessarily be highly misleading to the audience and
`
`defamatory of the Wilson family, and not a fair and accurate report of the proceedings against
`
`Mr. Wilson:
`
`-10-
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 11 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 11 of 15
`
`a. When Singer and Mr. Wilson discussed possible donations to Harvard and
`Stanford in connection with Wilson’s daughters’ college admissions, Singer
`assured Wilson of the propriety of such donations, including by telling Mr.
`Wilson that he was “going to Harvard next Friday, because the president
`wants to do a deal with me, because he found out that I’ve already got four
`already in, without his help, so he’s like .
`.
`. ‘why would you go to somebody
`else if you could come to me?”’
`
`b. Singer promoted his “side door” as a fully legitimate option, including in a
`presentation to dozens of management employees at Starbucks’ offices.
`
`0.
`
`In calls which were recorded without Singer’s knowledge and prior to his
`becoming a government cooperator, Singer described payments made as
`part of his “side door” program as legitimate donations to universities.
`Then, once he was cooperating, Singer, at the government’s direction,
`began subtly introducing purposefillly ambiguous language, including in
`calls with Mr. Wilson. This purposefully ambiguous language was intended
`to allow the government to insinuate that Mr. Wilson and other defendants
`understood payments were going to coaches’ personal accounts rather than
`to those coaches’ programs.
`
`(1. Singer’s own notes reflect that, during a “[l]oud and abrasive call with
`agents” early on in his cooperation, investigators instructed him to “bend
`the truth” and get “each person to agree to a lie[,]” by “continu[ing] to ask
`me to tell a fib and not restate what I told my clients as to where there [sic]
`money was going -to the program not the coach and that it was a donation
`and they want it to be a payment.”
`
`See Ex. 1 at pp. 3-4 (citing and including exhibits to the Wilson Letter).
`
`34.
`
`Further, the Wilson Letter explained that the Government’s manipulation of
`
`Singer’s post-cooperation recorded calls with Mr. Wilson was particularly egregious, evincing a
`
`deliberate effort to create highly misleading “sound bites” which it could later take out of context
`
`to create the false impression that Mr. Wilson agreed to make illicit payments to university
`
`officials. On a September 28, 2018 FaceTime call with the Wilson family to discuss the Wilson
`
`daughters’ college application process, which took place after Singer’s cooperation began,
`
`Singer made highly exculpatory statements that continued to reassure the Wilson family of the
`
`propriety of the side door program. Singer said that side door donations, like Mr. Wilson’s 2014
`
`contribution to USC’s water polo program, were a legitimate and prevalent aspect of college
`
`-11-
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 12 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 12 of 15
`
`admissions that allowed schools to fund their programs. Singer explained that schools and teams
`
`can admit non-athlete applicants with the necessary academic credentials, if those students
`
`worked as assistant managers or in other support roles. The Government made no record of this
`
`30+ minute FaceTime call, even though Singer made the call from an FBI office at a break
`
`during an interview conducted by half a dozen agents and “Varsity Blues” prosecutors. The
`
`Government has not disputed Mr. Wilson’s evidence concerning the FaceTime call, including his
`
`own sworn affidavit, or explained its failure to record the call other than to claim their agents
`
`were not present with Singer during the call. According to a public pleading, the “Government
`
`have taken steps to remove all traces of this call from text messages, reports, and notes[.]” See
`
`Ex. 1 at p. 4 (citing and including exhibits to the Wilson Letter).
`
`35.
`
`Additionally, the Wilson Letter warned that, beginning September 29, 2018, and
`
`continuing for weeks after the government’s “loud and abrasive” instructions to Singer to “bend
`
`the truth,” Singer began interj ecting false incriminating phrases during calls that the government
`
`did record. An October 15, 2018 call with Mr. Wilson included this exchange:
`
`. we get the girls in, it’s a done deal and
`.
`SINGER: So I know when .
`you’re gonna take care of your part of it, you’re gonna make the
`payments to the schools and the -- t0 the coaches. And that’s
`what I need .
`.
`. so I’m not worried about that.
`
`WILSON: Uh, uh, help me understand the logistics? I thought I make the
`payment to you and you made the payment to the school.
`
`SINGER: Correct. That’s correct.
`
`WILSON: Oh you said that I make the payments to the schools.
`
`Singer’s references to payments going “to the coaches” are misleading and paint a false picture
`
`given his earlier statements to Mr. Wilson that, as before, his payments would go to the
`
`university. That is precisely what the Government agents wanted when they told Singer to “bend
`
`the trut ” and get “each person to agree to a lie.” Of course, the distinction between a payment
`
`-12-
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 13 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 13 of 15
`
`to a coach’s personal account and a payment to a coach’s university program is critical where the
`
`latter is not a crime. Indeed, the court in another of the Varsity Blues prosecutions observed that
`
`a payment which is received by the university, as opposed to a coach personally, is “not a bribe,”
`
`and the Government’s prosecution based on payments to universities is “a case in search of a
`
`bribe or a kickback.” See Ex. 1 at p. 5 (citing and including exhibits to the Wilson Letter).
`
`36.
`
`The ‘documentary’ includes no less than nine (9) reenactrnents of calls between
`
`Singer and Mr. Wilson but fails to even mention these material and exculpatory facts.
`
`37.
`
`Finally, the Wilson Letter put Defendants on notice that, in order to establish the
`
`truth and to protect his children fiom false claims, Mr. Wilson had taken the extraordinary step
`
`of submitting to a two-day polygraph examination, which he passed uniformly. Since the trial of
`
`his case has already been delayed over two and a half years, Mr. Wilson took this step to clear
`
`his family’s name should anything happen to him before he can be exonerated at trial. The
`
`polygraph examination was conducted by Kendall W. Shull, former Chief and Program Manager
`
`of the FBI’s Investigation Polygraph Unit, and the results were independently reviewed by
`
`Donald J. Krapohl, a former polygraph manager and examiner at the CIA. The results indicate
`
`that Mr. Wilson was being truthful in response to all of the many questions asked including,
`
`without limitation, whether Mr. Wilson ever knowingly bribed or directed anyone else to bribe a
`
`college official, whether he was aware of any fabrications in his son’s athletic profile, and
`
`whether he knew Singer’s college application process was illegal. See Ex. 1 at pp. 5-7.
`
`38.
`
`The ‘documentary’ contains no reference to Mr. Wilson’s polygraph test.
`
`39.
`
`There is nothing fair or accurate about how the Wilsons are portrayed in the
`
`‘documentary’ now streaming on Netflix. Defendants did not heed the Wilson family’s warning
`
`and made no effort in the ‘documentary’ to distinguish the Wilson family circumstances from the
`
`-13-
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 14 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894—MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 14 of 15
`
`scores of defendant parents who pled guilty to such crimes. Nor did Defendants exercise the
`
`option available to them to delay the release of ‘documentary’ in order to edit the ‘documentary’
`
`to include the facts necessary to fairly and accurately report on the nature of the Wilson Family’s
`
`involvement with Singer.
`
`40.
`
`Instead, Defendants merely provided the Wilson family with a terse and
`
`dismissive response to the Wilson Letter on the day before the ‘documentary’ was first streamed
`
`to a worldwide audience that continues to sit at home and watch television while they wait for a
`
`return to normal life. A copy of Defendants’ response is attached hereto as Exhibit 2.
`
`41.
`
`The publication of this ‘documentary’ has already had a profound effect on the
`
`Wilson family and has caused irreparable damage to their reputation in the community.
`
`Count I — Defamation
`
`42.
`
`Plaintiffs repeat and re-allege the allegations set forth above.
`
`43.
`
`Each member of the Wilson family is a private citizen.
`
`44.
`
`Through their streaming of the ‘documentary’ on Netflix, Defendants have
`
`published statements of and concerning the Wilson family, and each individual member thereof,
`
`that they knew to be false, recklessly disregarded their falsity, or should have known to be false
`
`in the exercise of reasonable care. These statements are defamatory.
`
`45.
`
`Defendants held the Wilson up to public scorn and ridicule and destroyed their
`
`good name and reputation. A reasonable viewer of the ‘documentary’ would be led to believe
`
`that the Wilsons are no different from other families caught up in the “Varsity Blues”
`
`investigation and that their children pretended to be athletes and cheated on standardized tests in
`
`order to gain admission to prestigious colleges and universities.
`
`-14-
`
`

`

`Case 1:21-cv-10894-MLW Document 1-1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 15 of 15
`Case 1:21-cv-10894—MLW Document 1—1 Filed 05/28/21 Page 15 of 15
`
`46.
`
`As a result of this defamation, Plaintiffs have suffered, and continue to suffer,
`
`substantial harm and damages. They are entitled to public apologies and retractions and the
`
`award of significant monetary damages.
`
`WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs respectfillly requests that this Court grant them the following
`
`relief on this Complaint and Jury Demand:
`
`(i) find in favor of Plaintiffs and against Defendants;
`
`(ii) order public apologies and retractions;
`
`(iii) award Plaintiffs monetary damages; and
`
`(iv) grant such other and further relief as this Court deems equitable and just.
`
`MM
`
`Pursuant to Rule 38(b) of the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs
`
`hereby demand a jury on all claims and issues so triable.
`
`THE WILSON FAMILY,
`
`By their attorneys,
`
`/s/ Howard M Cooger
`Howard M. Cooper (BBO #543842)
`hcooper@toddweld.com
`Christian G. Kiely (BBO #684308)
`ckie1y@toddweld.com
`Todd & Weld LLP
`
`One Federal Street, 27th Floor
`
`Boston, MA 02110
`(617) 720-2626
`
`April 6, 2021
`
`-15-
`
`