Aaron Hotchner: High and Tight

[FormerMod-a1]

The firing is cut and dry.  You get physical with someone at work and you get fired.  It's pretty simple, imo.  And I don't think anyone who has said TG deserved to be fired has said he's evil or irredeemable, just that the firing was just.

[autumnmountains]

5 hours ago, aquarian1 said:

The firing is cut and dry.  You get physical with someone at work and you get fired.  It's pretty simple, imo.  And I don't think anyone who has said TG deserved to be fired has said he's evil or irredeemable, just that the firing was just.

Exactly. I'm not one to make excuses for bad behavior anywhere, not saying any particular person here is, and to be honest, I don't care if someone has a mental disease, depression, anger issues, etc, you don't have to physically lash out. If can't control yourself, then you don't need to be around other people. 

I think, and this is pure speculation on my part, some of the defending of TG comes from the victim not being anyone's favorite of people. To paraphrase someone on this thread ( I'm on a mobile and it's wonky when trying to quote), what if he had attacked MGG, KV, AJ, any of the of the crew, other writers? What if the kids had been on set and it had been CO, MJ, or even PJ? I know some will say that's wild speculation on my part, and yes, it's speculation, but so is saying he has mental health issues that helped cause this. IF he does have those problems, one could argue that he could've lashed out at anyone at any time. 

Am I sad that's he's no longer on the show, yes, I did like Hotch, but but all in all, TG did this. Is he an evil person,no, but yes, he deserves to be fired. I'll miss Hotch and for that, I blame TG.

Edited August 15, 2016 by autumnmountains
Missing word

[Racbec]

This is my first post since all of this happened.  First I needed to process the events and then I was, frankly, put off by so many of the comments here.  No offense intended.  I'm also a little put off by seeing some of the strongest opinions coming from posters I've never seen on these threads before.  Welcome, I guess.  

I feel like I am in mourning, because this will so alter the show I have hung in with all these years.  As part of the grieving process, like many other posters, I am trying to understand what led to this and why it happened like it did.  It is very frustrating, however, to see so much speculation taken as fact in others' posts.  In my opinion, Thomas is a fantastic actor and Virgil is not a good writer or producer.  I don't see how I can have an opinion about what happened between them, other than it seems to be agreed that Thomas kicked Virgil.  

The articles published so far are full of speculation and spin.  Even when they do not expressly quote anonymous sources or reference one side or the other, remember that they are getting their info from very biased sources that have agendas here.  Take that article from, I think it was Variety. The reporter didn't go out and do a big investigation.  That negative info about Thomas was given to them by the network/producers.  The same can be said for the articles referring to people close to Thomas.  We all need to be better consumers of information.  (Sorry for the sermon.)

I will also note that Thomas was not an employee at will.  Most of us are employees at will and can be fired for any reason except those that are legally not allowed (like race or gender).  If I kicked a fellow employee, I would likely be fired.  However, none of us know the contents of Thomas' contract.  It is wise for him to talk to his lawyers to determine whether his termination was in compliance with his contract and applicable law.

I would like to hope that TPTB will handle Hotch's absence well, but that is unlikely.  I have continued to watch this show, through terrible writing and poor production choices, because of Reid, primarily, and also because of Hotch.  I am willing to wait and see how they proceed.  At this point, all I can say is that if JJ is promoted, I won't be able to stomach the show any more, not even for Reid. 

Sorry if this comes off as preachy.  Not my intention.

[normasm]

Racbec, your post is very well reasoned and not preachy at all. Thomas would be remiss if he didn't contact his lawyers for the very reason you pointed to.

[thewhiteowl]

We do have a fairly small group of regular posters but I would not discount anyone's opinion simply because they haven't been posting. This is a pretty significant event and has caused strong reactions. No one has to be a regular to be heard. That's cliquey, dickish and not civil. Please stop it. 

[Bookish Jen]

47 minutes ago, Racbec said:

This is my first post since all of this happened.  First I needed to process the events and then I was, frankly, put off by so many of the comments here.  No offense intended.  I'm also a little put off by seeing some of the strongest opinions coming from posters I've never seen on these threads before.  Welcome, I guess.  

I feel like I am in mourning, because this will so alter the show I have hung in with all these years.  As part of the grieving process, like many other posters, I am trying to understand what led to this and why it happened like it did.  It is very frustrating, however, to see so much speculation taken as fact in others' posts.  In my opinion, Thomas is a fantastic actor and Virgil is not a good writer or producer.  I don't see how I can have an opinion about what happened between them, other than it seems to be agreed that Thomas kicked Virgil.  

The articles published so far are full of speculation and spin.  Even when they do not expressly quote anonymous sources or reference one side or the other, remember that they are getting their info from very biased sources that have agendas here.  Take that article from, I think it was Variety. The reporter didn't go out and do a big investigation.  That negative info about Thomas was given to them by the network/producers.  The same can be said for the articles referring to people close to Thomas.  We all need to be better consumers of information.  (Sorry for the sermon.)

I will also note that Thomas was not an employee at will.  Most of us are employees at will and can be fired for any reason except those that are legally not allowed (like race or gender).  If I kicked a fellow employee, I would likely be fired.  However, none of us know the contents of Thomas' contract.  It is wise for him to talk to his lawyers to determine whether his termination was in compliance with his contract and applicable law.

I would like to hope that TPTB will handle Hotch's absence well, but that is unlikely.  I have continued to watch this show, through terrible writing and poor production choices, because of Reid, primarily, and also because of Hotch.  I am willing to wait and see how they proceed.  At this point, all I can say is that if JJ is promoted, I won't be able to stomach the show any more, not even for Reid. 

Sorry if this comes off as preachy.  Not my intention.

I'm trying to process this too. This CM development has weighed heavily on my mind when I have quite a few pressing issues to deal with, both professionally and personally. Plus, there is a lot of really scary things happening in here in Milwaukee that are playing heavy on my psyche.

I'm just going to sit back and let this story unfurl itself a bit more as days and weeks go by. There is always a story behind a story, and I'm going to keep that in mind, whether it comes to what is going on via CM and TG's firing, the unrest here in Milwaukee or and the stress I'm dealing concerning a new project I start with next week or some crazy-making stuff I'm dealing with at my church.

[Droogie]

21 hours ago, aquarian1 said:

The firing is cut and dry.  You get physical with someone at work and you get fired.  It's pretty simple, imo.  And I don't think anyone who has said TG deserved to be fired has said he's evil or irredeemable, just that the firing was just.

I suppose I don't agree that that always has to be the case.

...

Suffice it to say, if there are those of us who do not see this as "cut and dried," we are not wrong; we simply see it differently.

Edited August 16, 2016 by Droogie

[FormerMod-a1]

Every company I have ever worked for has a policy against violence in the workplace.  I bet if you had taken it up the chain, reported it, that person would be fired.  Or at least I would hope they would be.  That's what we mean, or at least what I mean, when I say it's cut and dry/black and white/whatever you want to call it, and that it was a "just" action to take.

[Droogie]

I understand what "cut and dried" means.  And I am well aware I could've gotten my coworker fired.  I elected not to do so.  Additionally, I think every institution has a policy against violence.  I can't imagine an organization that would sanction it.

1 minute ago, aquarian1 said:

Every company I have ever worked for has a policy against violence in the workplace.  I bet if you had taken it up the chain, reported it, that person would be fired.  Or at least I would hope they would be.  That's what we mean, or at least what I mean, when I say it's cut and dry/black and white/whatever you want to call it.  

[FormerMod-a1]

I did not say you didn't know what cut and try meant, I clarified why we're saying the firing was cut and dry.  And you just agreed with my point.

[Willowy]

Also, Thomas should be grateful he wasn't arrested. Virgil still may press charges, we don't know. But he did do the right thing in reporting it to HR, at which point it was out of his hands. 

[Droogie]

26 minutes ago, aquarian1 said:

I did not say you didn't know what cut and try meant, I clarified why we're saying the firing was cut and dry.  And you just agreed with my point.

OK.

:::bows out:::

[JMO]

I get your point, Droogie, and I suspect that there are a great many workplace incidents that are handled as you handled yours.  Unexpected kindness---maybe even undeserved kindness---goes a long way in changing behavior.

There are always choices.  VW and TG both made them.  VW wasn't wrong to choose to bring his case to HR,, but he wouldn't have been wrong to choose not to. He wouldn't be wrong to choose to bring it to the police, and he wouldn't be wrong to choose not to.  Without knowing the specifics, I can't even say that VW's choices were unkind.  Perhaps TG has been offered help, and declined.  Perhaps the incident playing out as it did will help him decide to avail himself of what he needs.  I can't know that any more than anyone else on this board, unless, perhaps we've got some CM staff among us.  

What I do know is that there was choice involved, on the part of both men.  Every day, all day long, we make choices.  I think we should make them out of kindness.  That has been my point throughout.  I have said all I have to say on that subject.  If there is something that is still not quite understandable, or if there is simply a determination not to understand, it will have to remain so.

The exchange about this topic has been enlightening in a great many ways.  I've always been happy in my profession, to work with the people I work with, with the common goal of helping people to reach their highest potential.  These past few days, I've been reminded of how lucky I am to be able to say that.  

[normasm]

38 minutes ago, JMO said:

I get your point, Droogie, and I suspect that there are a great many workplace incidents that are handled as you handled yours.  Unexpected kindness---maybe even undeserved kindness---goes a long way in changing behavior.

There are always choices.  VW and TG both made them.  VW wasn't wrong to choose to bring his case to HR,, but he wouldn't have been wrong to choose not to. He wouldn't be wrong to choose to bring it to the police, and he wouldn't be wrong to choose not to.  Without knowing the specifics, I can't even say that VW's choices were unkind.  Perhaps TG has been offered help, and declined.  Perhaps the incident playing out as it did will help him decide to avail himself of what he needs.  I can't know that any more than anyone else on this board, unless, perhaps we've got some CM staff among us.  

What I do know is that there was choice involved, on the part of both men.  Every day, all day long, we make choices.  I think we should make them out of kindness.  That has been my point throughout.  I have said all I have to say on that subject.  If there is something that is still not quite understandable, or if there is simply a determination not to understand, it will have to remain so.

The exchange about this topic has been enlightening in a great many ways.  I've always been happy in my profession, to work with the people I work with, with the common goal of helping people to reach their highest potential.  These past few days, I've been reminded of how lucky I am to be able to say that.  

Agree, especially the bolded part and italicized part. I've said all I can as well, and tried to make myself understood, but, I'm fine with leaving this particular subject until we know more.

[Willowy]

Just because people disagree with you, or take your meaning as they will doesn't mean there's a lack of understanding. It means they see what you've said, they hear you, and they disagree. It's not a deliberation, or a lack of brain function. Their opinion simply doesn't line up with yours. 

[normasm]

No, disagreeing is saying, "I disagree, and here is why." And then, when someone reads that and they understand, they say, "I get your point but I still think this." They don't keep telling you you are excusing something you're not, and they don't keep telling you you are saying something you're not. That is what is meant by a determination not to understand. It's the equivalent of holding one's hands over one's ears and going "blah, blah, blah." But, I am finished trying to get certain points that I and others have made across. Because I imagine some are holding their hands over their ears (eyes?) and going, "blah, blah, blah."

[smoker]

2 hours ago, Franky said:

Just because people disagree with you, or take your meaning as they will doesn't mean there's a lack of understanding. It means they see what you've said, they hear you, and they disagree. It's not a deliberation, or a lack of brain function. Their opinion simply doesn't line up with yours. 

yes, but you don't see many "I get it, but I disagree"

Since the news came out I have made a comment to share my opinion and another "two" to justify it because some comments I got back (and other members too) implied I don't care TG was violent because he is Hotch or because we don't know the other guy. And that's untrue, unpleasant and exhausting.

I would have fired him in 2010 because it looks like he attacked someone out of nowhere, but they didn't. However, I disagree with the way they're dealing with this situation now, at least the things have been disclosed.

And everything @normasm just said, sorry I can't quote properly right now.

Edited August 16, 2016 by smoker

[secnarf]

11 minutes ago, smoker said:

yes, but you don't see many "I get it, but I disagree"

Since the news came out I have made a comment to share my opinion and another "two" to justify it because some comments I got back (and other members too) implied I don't care TG was violent because he is Hotch or because we don't know the other guy. And that's untrue, unpleasant and exhausting.

I would have fired him in 2010 because it's been said he attack someone out of nowhere, but they didn't. However, I disagree with the way they're dealing with this situation now, at least the things have been disclosed.

That's too bad - imo, the world needs more "I get it, but I disagree BECAUSE...".

Also fwiw, I have read that the 2010 incident came after TG was given unclear direction when driving a car quickly across a bridge and was upset over how dangerous it was. Again, I wasn't there, but I haven't heard anyone say that the attack in 2010 came out of nowhere. These things rarely do (going back to the point about looking at the causes and circumstances). Even if you look at the "agreed-upon" facts of this most recent incident, it wasn't out of nowhere - at the very least, everyone seems to disagree that there was an argument preceding the kick. Although neither event justifies the violence, it didn't come out of nowhere.

[smoker]

14 minutes ago, secnarf said:

That's too bad - imo, the world needs more "I get it, but I disagree BECAUSE...".

Also fwiw, I have read that the 2010 incident came after TG was given unclear direction when driving a car quickly across a bridge and was upset over how dangerous it was. Again, I wasn't there, but I haven't heard anyone say that the attack in 2010 came out of nowhere. These things rarely do (going back to the point about looking at the causes and circumstances). Even if you look at the "agreed-upon" facts of this most recent incident, it wasn't out of nowhere - at the very least, everyone seems to disagree that there was an argument preceding the kick. Although neither event justifies the violence, it didn't come out of nowhere.

I do apologize for that, but I didn't read anything explaining that situation clearly, but TG being upset. And I was using the "out of nowhere" only for the first incident :)

This time both sides were involved in the argument, or that's what I understood after reading the news.

Edited August 16, 2016 by smoker

[Willowy]

1 hour ago, normasm said:

No, disagreeing is saying, "I disagree, and here is why." And then, when someone reads that and they understand, they say, "I get your point but I still think this." They don't keep telling you you are excusing something you're not, and they don't keep telling you you are saying something you're not. That is what is meant by a determination not to understand. It's the equivalent of holding one's hands over one's ears and going "blah, blah, blah." But, I am finished trying to get certain points that I and others have made across. Because I imagine some are holding their hands over their ears (eyes?) and going, "blah, blah, blah."

I disagree and here's why: I think some people are tired of what - yes - they see as others trying to subtley couch their defense of what Thomas did in other terms. Because it's pretty well known that when someone says "BUT" in the middle of their statement, it negates nearly everything that came before. Those folks may be telling you in their own way that they disagree with what you're saying. Not everything has to be formatted or written out in just one way.

Also, it's possible that some people agree with what you are saying in part or to a certain extent, but not wholly, and are just not clarifying which parts are which. 

I've seen that everyone here are pretty nice people. I think maybe some have differing ways of communicating and that's okay. I don't think we need to stoop to patronizing. 

[normasm]

8 minutes ago, Franky said:

I don't think we need to stoop to patronizing. 

Here, we agree.

[LisainCali]

I'm kind of shocked at the firing of Thomas Gibson because, imho, who knew?  He seems so.....dull-ish.  Monotone delivery, but handsome, strong.  

Being a Hollywood-ish person, I can tell you that being fired, when you are the lead character on a successful franchise like CM, means he was really bad.  REALLY bad.  They aren't stupid.  They know he has a huge fan base.  That show supports a lot of people.  He's a fool!  Look at David Caruso, Kathryn Heigl, Isaiah Washington.  Egomaniacs who ruined their own careers by being notoriously difficult.  They MIGHT have a comeback,but they have lost a LOT of prime money-making years by being just awful....

i was so sad when Mandy Patinkin left, who is also known to be hard to work with. But his talent is so broad and deep that he will probably always be someone who can have a gig anytime, anywhere. Joe Mantegna was a PERFECT replacement as the kinder guy.

I feel confident that they will find a stoic, monotone actor to take TG's place......

[Willowy]

Hmm I wouldn't exactly call Hotch 'monotone'... he was more... controlled. Understated. He had a lot simmering beneath the surface and he was an incredibly dignified character. He was extremely capable and had a genuine love and affection for his team.

I'm with you regarding Thomas, though. Dumb move.

[Save Yourself]

14 hours ago, Racbec said:

 

14 hours ago, Racbec said:

I feel like I am in mourning, because this will so alter the show I have hung in with all these years.  As part of the grieving process, like many other posters, I am trying to understand what led to this and why it happened like it did.  It is very frustrating, however, to see so much speculation taken as fact in others' posts.  In my opinion, Thomas is a fantastic actor and Virgil is not a good writer or producer.  I don't see how I can have an opinion about what happened between them, other than it seems to be agreed that Thomas kicked Virgil.  

The articles published so far are full of speculation and spin.  Even when they do not expressly quote anonymous sources or reference one side or the other, remember that they are getting their info from very biased sources that have agendas here.  Take that article from, I think it was Variety. The reporter didn't go out and do a big investigation.  That negative info about Thomas was given to them by the network/producers.  The same can be said for the articles referring to people close to Thomas.  We all need to be better consumers of information.  (Sorry for the sermon.)

I will also note that Thomas was not an employee at will.  Most of us are employees at will and can be fired for any reason except those that are legally not allowed (like race or gender).  If I kicked a fellow employee, I would likely be fired.  However, none of us know the contents of Thomas' contract.  It is wise for him to talk to his lawyers to determine whether his termination was in compliance with his contract and applicable law.

But aren't you speculating yourself by saying that the info has all been fed to the trades by the network/producers? That hasn't been stated.

There is no way he'd have an exclusion for violence in his contract.

 

14 hours ago, Racbec said:

12 hours ago, Droogie said:

I suppose I don't agree that that always has to be the case.

I was assaulted at work a few months ago, by a coworker.  Except for the very few people at work who saw or absolutely had to know, plus my family, I haven't discussed it with anyone.  My coworker wasn't fired or charged; that was my choice.  I did not instigate and in fact was just "there," in the wrong place at the right time (or vice-versa, I never know), I suppose.  

I would've been perfectly within my rights to press charges and see that she was fired.  Some of you will undoubtedly believe I was remiss in not doing so.  But I took a look at her life and extracted certain promises and put it behind me.  There is much more to this story but for brevity and privacy's sake, I will leave out any more details. 

Suffice it to say, if there are those of us who do not see this as "cut and dried," we are not wrong; we simply see it differently.

I'm amazed that your company has left themselves open to possible lawsuits or difficulties with this employee further down the track. It's really not up to the employee to decide the outcome in workplace misconduct and in the CM situation it's not exclusively about TG, the company need to ensure they are going to have a safe workplace, protect themselves from legal action and minimise their liability.

6 hours ago, LisainCali said:

I'm kind of shocked at the firing of Thomas Gibson because, imho, who knew?  He seems so.....dull-ish.  Monotone delivery, but handsome, strong.  

Being a Hollywood-ish person, I can tell you that being fired, when you are the lead character on a successful franchise like CM, means he was really bad.  REALLY bad.  They aren't stupid.  They know he has a huge fan base.  That show supports a lot of people.  He's a fool!  Look at David Caruso, Kathryn Heigl, Isaiah Washington.  Egomaniacs who ruined their own careers by being notoriously difficult.  They MIGHT have a comeback,but they have lost a LOT of prime money-making years by being just awful....

i was so sad when Mandy Patinkin left, who is also known to be hard to work with. But his talent is so broad and deep that he will probably always be someone who can have a gig anytime, anywhere. Joe Mantegna was a PERFECT replacement as the kinder guy.

I feel confident that they will find a stoic, monotone actor to take TG's place......

Exactly, the situation with TG must have been dire to go to the extreme of firing him, I'm sure the network would have been desperate to find some other resolution - even if the rumours are true that he is difficult to work with (I have no idea if that's the case but he wouldn't exactly be unique if it's factual!) studios will put up with a lot if the positives outweigh the negatives. TPTB know that this may result in the cancellation of the show so the decision wouldn't have been made lightly.

[Droogie]

57 minutes ago, Save Yourself said:

 

(The quote function didn't seem to work.)

As I said, I did not include all the details. 

I have said all I'm going to say here about the matter.

[ReidFan]

Everybody here must already know this......Thomas Gibson may have a contract, but contracts can be broken. And usually by either side. I cannot for a moment believe that his bosses (whether that's CBS, ABC Studios, Mark Gordon productions, whoever, they'd certainly all have it covered) would not have specifics in ANY of their talents' contacts that call for certain conditions to be upheld:  among them things like keeping a clean public image since they represent the network/company/whoever; arrangements/agreements re publicity and public appearances; gag orders or other directives in the events of incidents; standard behaviours (alcohol, drug use, violent behaviour, unauthorised onset visitors etc) and although the talent may or may not fall under the union's jurisdictions, the work place most certainly would and they'd be required to uphold any of that as well, covering health and safety, hours of work etc. 

[Fitz]

Thomas Gibson is back on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ImThomasGibson

"The support you show means the world to me and my family. This is not an ending, but a beginning as well. Thank you all." 

"I'm here on #Twitter so we can stay connected in the days to come, and talk directly with each other." 

"I wish I could thank each of you for your friendship & support. I love "Criminal Minds," & I'm disappointed by what's happened"

[smoker]

I don't know if that's a wise move. My best wishes anyway.

[Bookish Jen]

23 hours ago, smoker said:

I don't know if that's a wise move. My best wishes anyway.

Though it is nice to get a shout out and a thanks for the support that doesn't excuse him from his bad behavior. TG deserved to be punished. I wish him well and I wish him peace. But please get some help and take responsibility for your reprehensible actions, TG.

Speaking of "kickgate" and TG's past behavior since 2010-getting violent with another person on the CM set, the DUI, the catfish incident, the breakdown of his marriage, his troubled relationship with Shemar, has TG always had a reputation for being difficult, violent or just an all-around jerk or is this a recent thing in the past several years? I don't recall hearing about him acting out-of-sorts on the sets of Chicago Hope or Dharma and Greg.

As for CM's explanation of no more Hotch? Well, in the hands of EM and co., I don't think it will be done favorably or very well.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Bookish Jen

[smoker]

3 minutes ago, Bookish Jen said:

Though it is nice to get a shout out and a thanks for the support that doesn't excuse him from his bad behavior. TG deserved to be punished. I wish him well and a I wish him peace. But please get some help and take responsibility for your reprehensible actions, TG.

Speaking of "kickgate" and TG's past behavior since 2010-getting violent with another person on the CM set, the DUI, the catfish incident, the breakdown of his marriage, his troubled relationship with Shemar, has TG always had a reputation for being difficult, violent or just an all-around jerk or is this a recent thing in the past several years? I don't recall hearing about him acting out-of-sorts on the sets of Chicago Hope or Dharma and Greg.

As for CM's explanation of no more Hotch? Well, in the hands of EM and co., I don't think it will be done favorably or very well.

I haven't read anything previous to 2010, his behavior probably was escalating, we'll never know, I guess.
Agree about Hotch's future.

[WendyCR72]

Thomas Gibson actually started out as a soap actor. He was on the same soap that launched Meg Ryan, Julianne Moore, and Marissa Tomei, As The World Turns. He also was on Another World for a time, as well. However, I don't recall hearing anything about his being difficult then. But soap press is much more "niche", so even if he was, it likely wouldn't get much notice.

Maybe it was a matter of clashing personalities on this show alone. (As I also don't know how he acted on the set of Dharma and Greg.)

[millennium]

On 8/15/2016 at 8:15 AM, aquarian1 said:

The firing is cut and dry.  You get physical with someone at work and you get fired.  It's pretty simple, imo.  And I don't think anyone who has said TG deserved to be fired has said he's evil or irredeemable, just that the firing was just.

I don't agree with the firing.   I'm a believer in second, even third chances.   More good can come from apologies and the parties working it out maturely to come to a better mutual understanding of each other.   Firing only solidifies whatever resentments and animosities were present in the first place.   It does nothing to defuse them.

The firing of Thomas Gibson not only hurts him, it hurts his whole family, whose members are innocent in this.  Beyond that, it hurts the Criminal Minds show and all the people who work on it.   Their jobs all just became less secure and potentially endangered as the show begins what is probably a death spiral.   How does that help anyone? 

Wouldn't it have been better to put Gibson and Miller in a room and have them privately work out their problems with a counselor and/or mediator?   Instead, they fire Gibson in a public spectacle, turning off longtime viewers (whom I think are the only ones watching Criminal Minds anymore --  I quit after Emily Prentiss was written off) and guaranteeing a drop in the ratings.

IMO, the firing of Gibson seems like a self-congratulatory spasm of political correctness on the part of the network rather than an attempt to truly solve the problem. 

[Willowy]

This incident wasn't a one-off, millenium. He had been given many chances to correct his behavior. He made the choice, here. Nobody's more culpable for putting the show (or the people you mentioned) in danger than TG himself. 

[Mysteyman]

32 minutes ago, WendyCR72 said:

Thomas Gibson actually started out as a soap actor. He was on the same soap that launched Meg Ryan, Julianne Moore, and Marissa Tomei, As The World Turns. He also was on Another World for a time, as well. However, I don't recall hearing anything about his being difficult then. But soap press is much more "niche", so even if he was, it likely would get much notice.

Maybe it was a matter of clashing personalities on this show alone. (As I also don't know how he acted on the set of Dharma and Greg.)

Fan of ATWT right here!

I remember Meg being on the show when I was watching it.

TG might have joined the cast after I  sopped watching.

2 minutes ago, Franky said:

This incident wasn't a one-off, millenium. He had been given many chances to correct his behavior. He made the choice, here. Nobody's more culpable for putting the show (or the people you mentioned) in danger than TG himself. 

I am in total agreement  with this quote.

[WendyCR72]

8 minutes ago, Mysteyman said:

Fan of ATWT right here!

I remember Meg being on the show when I was watching it.

TG might have joined the cast after I  sopped watching.

Per Google, he played Derek Mason from 1988-89 and his character was involved with Lily. He was on Another World as a recast of a role there in the early '90s.

Someone posts episodes of ATWT on YT. I guess this is among the episodes his character was in:

[Danielg342]

4 minutes ago, Franky said:

This incident wasn't a one-off, millenium. He had been given many chances to correct his behavior. He made the choice, here. Nobody's more culpable for putting the show (or the people you mentioned) in danger than TG himself. 

I'm going to add that I'm sure there are people on the set who are thankful he's gone. Since Gibson's first (known) incident involved another producer, I'm sure there were others Gibson didn't get along with. Perhaps many of those people didn't report Gibson to the higher-ups because they were afraid that they'd be seen as "nobodies" and that the studio would side with Gibson, he being the star and all. No doubt Gibson would remind people of that.

I will also say that sometimes there just aren't enough times one can say "sorry" or pledge "to do better" before it becomes apparent that they'll never change, and that cutting them loose is for the better. I'm sure that Gibson is a well-meaning guy and I believe whatever causes him to be "difficult" comes from him trying to overcompensate for some weakness or deep insecurity he feels, but that still doesn't change the fact that he has, over and over again, acted in ways that is counter to what would produce a happy and harmonious work environment. Truth is, whatever is troubling Gibson isn't going to be resolved in a week or a month- it's going to take years, if it ever resolves, with Gibson needing some deep soul-searching to rectify what's ailing him in his life.

So the way I see it is that CM had no choice.

[LonelyTown]

Not a regular poster (I admittedly still have trouble getting used to this site! I belonged to another site for a long time) but I had to come see what people think of the recent events. Like a PP said, it's astonishing what lengths people will go to in defending a celebrity's bad behavior. Who they are on TV is different from who they are as a person, and sometimes it's disappointing to find that out. I don't believe either party is innocent here, and while I feel awful if someone is going through a depression or other life event, I don't believe it excuses them being violent or physical with others. He did a bad thing and I don't see a defense that excuses it. 

Its like the Johnny Depp thing. Neither part is innocent there but he still seems like a disgusting violent angry drunk. It's sad that he's seeming to fall into an addiction and that his mother died but also, it doesn't excuse his behavior either. 

I will still watch because I've watched it all so far, and the only exit that has ever made me sad was Patinkin, so I'll stick it out, but I agree it seems like this will probably be the last season. 

[ForeverAlone]

A couple of years ago in 2014, Thomas's former manager sued him for unpaid commissions. In the lawsuit he made a whole host of allegations, some of them vague and some of them based on public events we already knew about. But what is fascinating is that there is some definite similarities between those allegations and some of the stuff said in media reports in the wake of Thomas's firing. It would suggest that there is an element of truth to those allegations. Whether or not they rise to anything fireable is more debatable, but it does support the notion that Thomas was difficult to work with at times. Granted, many people are difficult to work with occasionally, but this could amount to a pattern of behavior, with this incident being the final straw. 

[smoker]

That was a soapy soap!

[Lebanna]

http://deadline.com/2016/08/thomas-gibson-criminal-minds-lawsuit-legal-challenges-abc-studios-1201804999/

Reasons why a lawsuit might not work out for Gibson and some more info on Williams. I agree that it'll probably just settle.

[smoker]

I read that before, I like to think he is trying to get as much as he can of this situation on terms of keeping his rights over reruns and maybe get his salary for the season, because as much I think VW's behavior should be revisited and I disagree about the way the dismissal was executed, I don't think TG could prove the kick was an accident (even if it was).

Edited August 17, 2016 by smoker

[Danielg342]

I just watched that soap as well...wow. So many "excuse me" phone calls. So many overdramatic actors. So much dialogue. So little action.

Either soap operas are just not for me or that was a poorly written episode.

As for Thomas Gibson...well, he was a bit overdramatic to start but he mellowed down.

Gotta say I did dig seeing Larry Bryggman, Tamara Tunie and Ming-Na Wen, the latter two "before they were famous". In fact, I recognized quite a few people...once I have time I should Google them all.

[millennium]

1 hour ago, Franky said:

This incident wasn't a one-off, millenium. He had been given many chances to correct his behavior. He made the choice, here. Nobody's more culpable for putting the show (or the people you mentioned) in danger than TG himself. 

It's a creative field, you're dealing with creative personalities.   Not the most level-headed bunch, speaking as one myself.   Shit happens.   Get over it, get back to work.   That's how I see it anyway. 

[Danielg342]

Perhaps we differ on what qualifies as "shit happens" but someone kicking me isn't something I'd ever let go.

[autumnmountains]

34 minutes ago, Danielg342 said:

Perhaps we differ on what qualifies as "shit happens" but someone kicking me isn't something I'd ever let go.

Exactly. It's assault and should not be tolerated.

[Mysteyman]

The sad thing for me about all this is that  I always had this feeling that CM  did not have a happy set.

I do not know why just a feeling.

Hopefully, there will be less tension on the set  now that TG is gone.

Edited August 18, 2016 by Mysteyman

[millennium]

While elsewhere Jared Leto is celebrated for sending anal beads and used condoms to his co-workers.

[zannej]

7 hours ago, millennium said:

I don't agree with the firing.   I'm a believer in second, even third chances.   More good can come from apologies and the parties working it out maturely to come to a better mutual understanding of each other.   Firing only solidifies whatever resentments and animosities were present in the first place.   It does nothing to defuse them.

The firing of Thomas Gibson not only hurts him, it hurts his whole family, whose members are innocent in this.  Beyond that, it hurts the Criminal Minds show and all the people who work on it.   Their jobs all just became less secure and potentially endangered as the show begins what is probably a death spiral.   How does that help anyone? 

Wouldn't it have been better to put Gibson and Miller in a room and have them privately work out their problems with a counselor and/or mediator?   Instead, they fire Gibson in a public spectacle, turning off longtime viewers (whom I think are the only ones watching Criminal Minds anymore --  I quit after Emily Prentiss was written off) and guaranteeing a drop in the ratings.

IMO, the firing of Gibson seems like a self-congratulatory spasm of political correctness on the part of the network rather than an attempt to truly solve the problem. 

It sounds like this *was* a second chance. Or that maybe he had more than one second chance. He only had 8 hours of anger management before and I doubt it accomplished much of anything.

You talk about his family and such, but what about the other workers and their families? What if this was seen as an escalation of problematic behavior and they were concerned that the next step could be even more violence?

Just forget that this is TG we're talking about. Imagine this was any other workplace and a co-worker was getting increasingly erratic? What seems to be described is classic behavior of someone prior to going postal and killing people. I'm not saying it was going to escalate to that, but the higher ups couldn't be sure of that. They could not legally allow their employees to be exposed to danger and if someone was assaulting people. They have to protect those people. Failure to do so leaves them liable for future altercations, and they could have one hell of a lawsuit on their hands.

We don't even know if Thomas ever apologized, although I hope that he did. But, apologies don't undo what was done. A person can be sorry that they did something but still have to deal with the consequences. It doesn't matter if a verbal argument is heated or not, it does not justify physical violence.

1 hour ago, millennium said:

While elsewhere Jared Leto is celebrated for sending anal beads and used condoms to his co-workers.

I don't know if "celebrated" is the word. I had not heard about any of that. Sounds gross, but it does not equate physical violence. They can choose to not open packages from him.

I still respect TG's acting and as a human being. I recognize that he's not perfect. Same with Virgil. I don't wish either of them ill. At first I thought that maybe Virgil had instigated, but the more I hear I realize that it is likely that TG was either just having a bad day or just a bad moment and snapped. It can happen, but unfortunately, the employers have to cover their asses to make sure it doesn't happen again.

[millennium]

1 hour ago, zannej said:

They have to protect those people. Failure to do so leaves them liable for future altercations, and they could have one hell of a lawsuit on their hands.

I think you put your finger on the crux of the whole matter.   Fear of litigation trumps all other considerations nowadays.

[yuruhee]

4 hours ago, millennium said:

While elsewhere Jared Leto is celebrated for sending anal beads and used condoms to his co-workers.

I think they're the same people who liked Thomas Gibson kicked Virgil Williams... ;D