American Idol | Mario Vazquez | Music | News

Former Idol Contestant Mario Vasquez in Gay Sex Lawsuit

A former assistant accountant for Fremantle Media, Magdaleno Olmos, claims in a new lawsuit that former American Idol contestant Mario Vasquez stalked him, following him into a bathroom on the show's set where Vasquez then masturbated in front of him and propositioned him for oral sex.

VazquezAccording to documents obtained by TMZ, "In the lawsuit, Olmos claims 'Vazquez stared lasciviously, smiled lasciviously ... and on one occasion followed him into a bathroom ... knocked on the door of the plaintiff's stall and made eye contact through the space in the stall door.' The lawsuit alleges that Vazquez 'started to rub his genitals over his pants. Attempting to leave the bathroom, Olmos opened the door of the stall and saw Vazquez standing in front of him with his pants down masturbating.' According to the documents, Vazquez pushed Olmos 'further into the stall and continued masturbating with one hand and trying to pull down Olmos' pants with another hand.' Olmos claims that he tried to 'cover his body with his hands' but Vazquez touched his 'chest and stomach underneath his shirt, and Olmos' 'genitals" as Vazquez 'attempted to unzip' Olmos' pants. Vazquez then allegedly asked Olmos 'if he wanted oral sex.'"

Olmos claims that he was terminated by Fremantle Media after reporting the incident to one of his superiors. Fremantle and FOX entertainment are also named as defendants in the lawsuit.

Vasquez left the show, citing "personal reasons", shortly after the alleged incident took place. He has not spoken publicly about his sexuality.

"A.I." Contestant Accused of "Masturbating" in Suit [tmz]

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. I notice that these 'scandalous' situations only seem to pop up while the show is airing. It's as if they are orchestrated to create additional buzz surrounding the show.

    But, I'm sure that's just coincidence.

    Posted by: Dean | Mar 13, 2007 10:52:55 AM

  2. Eh. Naughty boys need love too.

    Posted by: FernLaPlante | Mar 13, 2007 11:08:07 AM

  3. This guy has both hands free and his pants on correctly yet Vazquez, who has his pants down (around his ankles?) and only one hand free, was still able to force himself on the guy and down his pants? And his resistance is covering his body with his hands? Instead of pushing Vazquez away or getting out? Something is not being said here.

    Posted by: Fry | Mar 13, 2007 11:14:48 AM

  4. Sounds like someone's just pissed because he got fired.

    Posted by: shane | Mar 13, 2007 11:17:35 AM

  5. Every gay man has at some point had unwanted attention "thrust", excuse the pun,
    upon them.
    Whats so different about this situation that this guy believes he needs to sue?
    Can we say...oh I don't know...BIG financial pay off perhaps.
    Sure I believe it may have happened.
    But this guys just looking to cash in.
    With a lawyer dramatizing the situation.."lasciviously"...
    Theres golddiggers in every community.

    Posted by: griffin1573 | Mar 13, 2007 11:23:11 AM

  6. No denying harrassment happens. But it's hard for me to take this account seriously when several "inappropriate" gestures occur BEFORE it ends with both men in a stall and Vasquez's hands all over the other guy.

    I've had unwanted advances but they never get beyond a grope or feel because I make it clear it's not acceptable.

    Men don't just get cornered in a stall by an aggressive pursuer unless there is some flirting leading up to it.

    And even if there was flirting, if touching and masturbating are unwanted, he should have said NO and walked out.

    But then he wouldn't have had a shot at millions of dollars in compensatory damages would he?

    Posted by: mark m | Mar 13, 2007 11:52:28 AM

  7. wow, 4 out of 5 so far. these comments remind me of this one movie from years ago. it was called 'the accused'. with jodie foster. yes, they called that 'victim' an attention-seeker too, or had it coming.

    Posted by: karl | Mar 13, 2007 12:36:32 PM

  8. This situation is FAR from that depicted in the 'The Accused'...please!

    Posted by: JB | Mar 13, 2007 1:00:57 PM

  9. Sometimes gay men are very destructive. Magdaleno Olmos is one of them. He wants money. With that money he is trying to bring down another gay man. Stop being so selfish Magdaleno.

    Posted by: Jack! | Mar 13, 2007 1:21:44 PM

  10. I agree with JB! "The Accused" was about a vicious gang rape. This is, well, not that for sure. It sounds fishy. I'm no defender of closet-case Vasquez, but this Olmos must have been one hot number for all this to happen!

    Posted by: martin | Mar 13, 2007 1:32:09 PM

  11. I'm with Martin. Let's see a pic of Olmos, if he's hot then I'm more willing to believe his story. Unless Vasquez really really really needed to get off that day.

    Posted by: Loki | Mar 13, 2007 1:44:15 PM

  12. So if he's ugly he deserved it? And if he's hot then you can understand why it happened?? Who are you people?? Jeez!! I am so glad I don't live in your reality!

    Posted by: Wayne | Mar 13, 2007 1:46:37 PM

  13. If he's ugly he should be glad he got attention from such a cutie! LOL. Wayne, lighten up, dude!

    Posted by: martin | Mar 13, 2007 4:45:25 PM

  14. Don't you rub your genitals "through" your pants, not over?
    "You" - not anyone here in particular:)

    Posted by: Chester | Mar 13, 2007 4:45:49 PM

  15. although this alleged incident coincides nicely with his abrupt departure from the show, it's hard to imagine cute little mario turning into such a sex-crazed beast in the restroom. there's either more to this story or nothing to it. ... where is this restroom again though ??

    Posted by: el polacko | Mar 13, 2007 5:31:29 PM

  16. jb & martin, my apologies. i didn't realize my analogy was faulty. silly me for thinking that comments automatically assuming the guy's just lying has something in common with people in 'the accused' automatically blaming the 'victim'. i guess the movie was just all about a gang rape, period, not something deeper about society in general.

    but that's enough from me. have a good week, guys.

    Posted by: karl | Mar 13, 2007 6:36:41 PM

  17. Karl,

    You are assuming there is a victim and a victimizer here. The burden of proof is with the plaintiff. If his story doesn't hold enough water to earn merit then one must be doubtful.

    No one here is suggesting anyone deserves rape or unwanted advances but we're also not talking about a 107 lb. woman being cornered by five large men.

    Yes your analogy was faulty.

    Posted by: mark m | Mar 13, 2007 6:42:47 PM

  18. Olmos claims to have been violated, yet he did nothing but to cover his body. Lets ask what happened after that??? He never said anything about him pushing Vasquez away and leaving the bathroom. It seems to me that there is an unfinished story... we're waiting Olmos...

    Posted by: lucian | Mar 17, 2007 6:24:57 PM

Post a comment


« «Adam Sandler and Kevin James' Wedding Photo« «