A sexual assault lawsuit against Vin Diesel reached a decisive courtroom end after a judge dismissed the remaining claims on a technicality. The ruling focused on jurisdiction rather than the substance of the allegations. It set the stage for continued legal debate as the plaintiff considers an appeal.
Vin Diesel wins against claims of sexual battery on technicality
A Los Angeles judge dismissed the remaining claims in Ms. Asta Jonasson’s sexual battery and retaliation lawsuit against Vin Diesel.
Judge Daniel M. Crowley ruled that “the alleged sexual assault took place in Atlanta, Georgia,” and that Jonasson’s claims “based on an alleged violation of a California statute… fails as a matter of law because California statutes… unless the Legislature expressly states otherwise in adopting the statute.” (via Deadline)
Jonasson’s lawyer, Matthew Hale, said, “The Court did not decide anything about the truth of Ms. Asta Jonasson’s allegations. The ruling was based on a legal technicality, with which we respectfully disagree. Ms. Jonasson intends to appeal.”
The judge stated that “Plaintiff’s causes of action impermissibly apply California law to extraterritorial conduct in the State of Georgia. California authorities make clear that California law cannot be applied to any of plaintiff’s claims.” Diesel’s lawyer Bryan Freedman said, “We are grateful that the court put an end to this meritless lawsuit. We are pleased that this matter has been resolved entirely.” (via Rolling Stone)
Jonasson filed her lawsuit in 2023, alleging an assault during Fast Five production in 2010. The complaint stated, “Ms. Jonasson struggled continually to break free of his grasp, while repeatedly saying no,” and that Diesel “abused his position of authority as her employer.” The suit alleged she was fired the next day: “Ms. Jonasson was fired for courageously resisting Vin Diesel’s sexual assault, Vin Diesel would be protected, and his sexual assault covered up.” Diesel’s lawyer responded at the time, “Vin Diesel categorically denies this claim in its entirety.”
Judge Crowley found the claims time-barred and not revivable under AB 2777, noting the law has no “affirmative indication” it applies outside California. Hale cited California ties, while Hardy called it “a purely out-of-state crime.”
Originally reported by Vritti Johar on ComingSoon.net.
