Ratings & Revenge: Nicole Eggert, Alexander Polinsky and the Dark Side of #Metoo
Nicole Eggert’s #Metoo claim against Scott Baio was full of holes. Why did Dr. Oz ignore them?
July 3, 2020- Held in Parsippany, New Jersey each fall, the Chiller Theater convention brings together retired television stars with their fans for a little reminiscing and a little commerce. The stars sit at long tables; autographs and fan photos are sold, stories are exchanged, childhoods are relived. It is a lighthearted event. But at Chiller late in October 2017, something darker lurked behind the “meet and greets” and mutual admiration. At Chiller one evening, as part of the cast of the 80s hit show “Charles in Charge” spent time reminiscing, former child actors Alexander Polinsky and Nicole Eggert discussed their intention to take down Scott Baio through a media campaign alleging he had abused them. Based on a two-year investigation, this is the never before told story of how these two child stars conspired, for reasons of their own, to destroy the life and career of their co-star with claims of abuse that don’t stand up to even simple scrutiny.
The conversation started with Polinsky, who had drifted through his life post-Charles in Charge without much direction, supporting himself with cartoon voiceover work and selling fans “telephone conversations” and website content via Patreon. He was deeply angered by Baio’s politics and told Eggert that Baio “had it coming” for his support of Donald Trump. He was also emotionally fragile, and had for years blamed Baio for being frequently teased on the Charles in Charge set. He had come to Baio’s surprise fiftieth birthday party in 2010 and would later claim he had been teased again by guests at the party. He believed Baio had set him up (as a surprise party, Baio had no idea it was taking place, much less the guests), and he was still carrying a grudge from decades ago.
He found a willing accomplice in Nicole Eggert, who according to multiple witnesses had avidly pursued Baio during her teen years on Charles in Charge. In the eighties and nineties, Baio had been one of Hollywood’s hottest stars, and dated some of Hollywood’s most beautiful women, like Heather Locklear, Nicolette Sheridan, Kay Lenz, and Pam Anderson. Eggert had been jealous as a teen, secretly following Baio around town and showing up unbidden at his home and at restaurants and clubs. Indeed, one of Eggert’s best friends from those years later described their activities as “borderline stalking” of Baio in a statement she gave to investigators. Baio had been mystified during those years at how often Eggert simply “showed up” wherever he was… all over Hollywood. As he discovered decades later, Eggert had simply followed him whenever she could.
In recent years, Eggert had run out of work, filed bankruptcy multiple times, suffered health problems and been detained for DUI. She had long resented Baio, who had consistently worked after Charles in Charge, and ultimately married Renee Sloan, a blonde beauty stuntwoman from Tennessee. During the year before the Chiller convention, there had been talk of a Charles in Charge reboot, and Eggert heard Baio had killed the idea by refusing to participate, which was untrue. But she believed it, and she told those around her at Chiller that she was going to get even. And across Hollywood, new winds were blowing that gave her a platform larger than she had ever imagined.
On October 6, 2017, Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey published a takedown of Harvey Weinstein and a Hollywood culture of silence towards women who have been sexually harassed or assaulted for decades. Their New York Times piece, meticulously researched and devastatingly reported, broke like a bombshell over Hollywood, and led to an immediate spasm of stories from actresses (and a few actors) who were now free to talk of sexual harassment and worse in a new culture of acceptance towards the victims, and anger towards their aggressors. But not every charge was vetted and checked like those in the New York Times. Indeed, while some of the men named were caught with evidence and corroboration, other claims offered no proof at all.
Many of these #metoo stories were decades old, and the evidence trail to substantiate them had long gone cold. The entire idea of due process for these charges was considered to be unnecessary or worse, part of a system that had oppressed these victims for many years. And their claims inevitably led to a steady parade of actors and media personalities apologizing and acknowledging misdeeds. Generally, their apologies were not accepted; they found their careers abruptly canceled. And in this new and viral culture of unquestioning acceptance of every claim as fact, a small number of women sensed an opportunity to address old slights by coming along for the ride with false allegations.
The number most often quoted for false rape allegations is 2% of all complaints. But according to Dr. Brent Turvey, considered one of the world’s leading experts in false allegations (and author of a peer reviewed volume of the same name used by profilers and investigators worldwide) false claims of rape range from 8% to 41%, depending on the study quoted and a wide array of local factors and law enforcement policies. His book explores the motivations for false allegations among both the alleged victims that make them and the authorities that take them. Leading the list are profit, personal gain, anger, and revenge. All of these would be seen in the Polinsky/Eggert matter.
Polinsky asked other Charles in Charge cast members at Chiller, including Willie Aames, the other adult lead from the original cast, to back up his and Eggert’s story about Scott Baio. According to those who know him, Aames is by nature a peacemaker, having suffered a difficult young adulthood that left him living, for a time, in the streets. He was also guilt ridden by the role he had played in the teasing of Polinsky on the “Charles in Charge” set. Aames had never seen any inappropriate conduct from Baio, either towards Polinsky or Eggert. But, at least at first, he agreed to support them as they “lived their truths,” though these “truths” were not his own.
Soon after, Polinsky tweeted that he had been abused and witnessed abuse by Scott Baio. Unsurprisingly, his post went viral, and he was approached by the producers of The Dr. Oz Show about doing a Scott Baio takedown episode. He entered negotiations to tell his story of being ridiculed and teased relentlessly on set. During all of his communications with Oz and the show producers, he never made any claim of having been sexually abused or assaulted.
But Dr. Oz producers had reached out because they were looking for their own big #metoo moment, and while they liked Polinsky’s story, it wasn’t enough. It wasn’t #metoo. It was only when Polinsky brought Nicole Eggert into the picture that they became excited. Eggert told them a story of having sex with Scott Baio before she was 18. Eggert claimed she would be supported by other members of the cast. Scott Baio was a big target, a teen heartthrob turned politically conservative in adulthood, and an avid Donald Trump supporter who spoke at the 2016 Republican Convention, which infuriated Polinsky. He was controversial, and controversy drives ratings. Having Nicole Eggert charge Scott Baio on-air with statutory rape would be a huge story any time, but in the dawning days of #metoo, it was a surefire ratings blockbuster.
However, there were several problems with the narrative Polinsky and Eggert offered Oz. Polinsky had named Willie Aames as an additional guest who would support their story. While the peacemaker in Willie Aames was willing to appear on Oz to support Polinsky and Eggert personally, he didn’t validate their claims… at all. Oz exchanged emails and had multiple telephone conversations with Aames, who told Oz that Eggert was abusing alcohol (as Aames had seen himself at the Chiller convention) and couldn’t be trusted. Oz continued to contact him, hoping perhaps that he would relent and tell a different story. But he never did. Oz had little time to consider Aames’ unexpected denial of Eggert’s claims. More problems were rearing their head that threatened to derail Oz’s exclusive.
First, Nicole Eggert was demanding payment before she would do the show, which sidetracked the episode. In a shocking audio recording, prepared for a podcast, Alex Polinsky speaks to a former “Charles in Charge” writer, discussing both Eggert’s dishonesty and her demands from Oz, “She’s made all kinds of things up. She’s lied to me and Willie and become a liability to our… (Triumvirate). But she’s demanding money from Oz and they might pay her… who knows? (She’s demanding money from who?) From Dr. Oz. To go on the show.”
Demanding payment should have sent up a warning flare to Dr. Oz that Eggert’s story was false. Indeed, Dr. Turvey in his book lists the red flags that suggest the possibility of a false allegation. Elements of this list echo Eggert’s history and claims:
· Profit or Personal Gain
· Anger & Revenge
· Concealment of Illicit Activity or Crime
· Mitigation of Responsibility
· Emotional Illness
With Eggert now seeking payment, she met Turvey’s criteria for most of these warning signs. Willie Aames, who had agreed to appear purely to support Polinsky and Eggert, was dismayed by her demand for cash, and he dropped out of the show. And soon after, so did Alexander Polinsky.
As Eggert had amplified her claims about Scott Baio, Polinsky was scared. He had received a cease and desist letter from Baio’s lawyer after his original tweet, and it rattled him. His friends told him that the salacious facts about Polinsky that would be uncovered in a lawsuit would end his cartoon voiceover career. He still wanted Baio taken down but was afraid to do it himself. He talked himself out of doing the show and dropped out as well.
By now, it was early January of 2018. Polinsky had tweeted about his so-called abuse months earlier, then stopped and fallen silent. Eggert had since started regularly tweeting accusations at Baio, deleting them minutes or hours later. It was clear that she was going to go public, and the only question was where. In the mind of producers, it was time to present a Dr. Oz show based solely on Eggert’s claims or lose her to someone else. Eggert told Polinsky that she was going to “play the role of big sister” and flew to New York for a January 10th taping. It is unknown whether Oz agreed to her demands and paid her to appear. After interviewing Eggert, as part of the process of preparing the show for air, Oz producers contacted Baio’s agent Harry Gold on January 16, 2018 by email, seeking Baio’s comment on Eggert’s claims.
Oz producer Christine Byun described seven claims Eggert made during the show taping, specifically that (quoting):
- Mr. Baio initiated improper sexual contact with Ms. Eggert while she was an actress on “Charles in Charge” and under the age of 18.
- Mr. Baio went to Ms. Eggert’s home without her parents or other adult present.
- Mr. Baio spent time alone with Ms. Eggert at his home without anyone else present.
- Mr. Baio touched Ms. Eggert’s genitals when she was under age.
- Mr. Baio and Ms. Eggert engaged in sexual intercourse when Ms. Eggert was 17.
- Mr. Baio asked Ms. Eggert to keep their sexual interactions “secret”.
- Mr. Baio was verbally abusive and bullied cast members on the set of “Charles in Charge.”
The email was routed by Gold to Baio, who sent it to his attorney, and to his PR strategist friend Brian Glicklich (author of this article). Baio denied all of the accusations of underage sexual contact of any kind, however he did acknowledge having had sex with Eggert one time, after she had turned 18. Given the passage of time and the atmosphere in the wake of the New York Times’ article, however, it was clear that a simple denial was inadequate to deal with Eggert’s claims. Ultimately, it was Eggert’s own desire to remain in the limelight that undermined her story.
Baio’s team went to the internet, looking for articles and interviews with Eggert that might conflict with what she told Dr. Oz. It was tedious and methodical work. Eggert had risen to fame from her role in “Charles on Charge,” and her succeeding role in “Baywatch” gave her similar status among men that Baio had with women. They were heartthrob stars. As a result, thousands of stories about Eggert were spread across the Internet. But one soon caught their attention, for two very different reasons.
On October 2, 2013, Nicole Eggert appeared live on a podcast with Nik Richie. Owner of a website called “TheDirty,” Richie was considered by many to be one of the most misogynistic purveyors of online smut and revenge directed almost uniformly against women. Anonymous men would send in pictures of their ex’s, or women who wouldn’t date them, or women they hated for any number of reasons to be held up to very public ridicule on “TheDirty’s” large and public website. Richie and these anonymous writers would dissect the women in these photos, commenting critically on their appearance, such as one item (accompanied by a photo of the female subject):
“Nik, ***** **** always been a stuck-up b*tch, but at least a hot stuck up b*tch. That is, until now. She has COMPLETELY ruined herself by getting huge fake ***s and ugly *ss lip injections that make her look like a bee stung duck. ***** was in her prime back in 2011–2012, not a single operation to alter her already perfect appearance. her **** were fine, her face was fine, but now she is a fake blown up plastic doll and the look doesnt even look good on her, it is utterly ridiculous. no wonder ***** doesnt want her back.”
Thus, Richie seemed an odd choice for a woman claiming to have been sexually assaulted. Later, it would emerge that Eggert and Richie shared a manager, David Weintraub, who had built a career representing a changing cast of has-beens and never-will-bes. Weintraub fancied himself a gangster type, posting photos on Instagram with guns and tall stacks of cash. But he made that cash in a more prosaic way… selling gossip stories and photos to publications like TMZ and reality shows to anyone who would buy them. The marquee product on his website is called Hollywood Hillbillies, described as “…the hilarious antics of internet superstars Michael “The Angry Ginger” and his “Mema” as they trade in their simple country living in Georgia for the bright lights of Hollywood.” Later, it would emerge that many of Eggert’s TMZ “exclusive” stories were believed to have been the product of payments made by the publication to Eggert through Weintraub. Accusing Scott Baio was a lucrative business.
Nik Richie’s interview with Eggert was both jovial and sexually explicit, and Eggert is seen (TheBlast.com obtained and published a video of the broadcast) laughing and making jokes as Richie probes her sexual history. Months later, Baio’s investigator would interview a former friend of Eggert’s during the time the Richie interview was conducted, and she described Nicole asking her to be prepared to call in to the show and ask a question if Eggert texted her… the Richie show was distributed live by internet radio on Sunday nights, and the audience was miniscule. During the show, the topic turns to Baio, and Baio’s team listened transfixed as Eggert talked about her one and only sexual encounter with him. She laughed when she told Ritchie that she had instigated it, that she had a boyfriend, but wanted to lose her virginity and picked Baio to “pop her cherry,” and that it had happened long after the show had ended taping and been retired.
Both her lighthearted attitude and the specificity of her recollection that their encounter had happened after the show finale had been taped was telling, and contradicted her claims to Oz made more than 3 years later. Baio’s team went to IMDB and started looking for a list of episodes. It was surprisingly difficult to find the taping dates, as just the airdates were listed. Charles in Charge had been broadcast over five seasons, and the final season had twenty-six episodes. The last episode aired November 10, 1990. Nicole Eggert was born January 13, 1972, which put her 18th birthday on that date in 1990. It strongly suggested that she had lied to Oz, but it wasn’t quite enough. They needed the taping date. Ultimately, they turned to Ebay, and found an autographed script for sale from Episode 21, five prior to the finale, which taped on May 18, 1990. The 26th episode would have been taped weeks later, sometime mid-summer. Eggert emphatically told Richie that her one-time sex with Baio was long after the show concluded taping. There is no way she could have been underage when it happened.
Baio’s lawyer sent the producers of Dr. Oz a letter, laying out these facts and requesting that they cancel the broadcast. Christine Byun responded with a list of more questions based on Eggert’s claims. Baio was alarmed that Oz appeared to be ready to air an episode with clearly inaccurate information for ratings in the midst of the #metoo tidal wave and wanted a more direct approach. On January 17, 2018, Baio’s attorney fired off a demand letter to Harpo Productions Co-Presidents Sheri Salata and Erik Logan calling for the show’s cancellation as an alternative to litigation. She cited case precedents that included Bollea vs. Gawker Media, the infamous Hulk Hogan case that brought down Nick Denton and his media company. Baio’s lawyer did not tell Harpo that she had been one of the attorneys who worked for Hogan on that case.
A few days later, word came back by phone; the evidence was convincing. The show was cancelled. A sigh of relief rolled through the Baio camp, but it was short lived. Megyn Kelly, who had just launched a new show on NBC, was giving Eggert a full episode. There was no opportunity to protest; the show would air in just a few days, and it would not be stopped. Baio’s team opened negotiations with ABC and CBS for an exclusive morning interview to counter what they knew Eggert would say to Megyn Kelly. ABC’s ratings and setup were most compelling, and Baio headed to New York for an interview on Good Morning America with Amy Robach.
But the news that day for Baio was even worse. When Oz discovered that Megyn Kelly had Eggert, he took their episode (recorded weeks earlier) off the shelf and decided to air it the same day as Kelly. Oz asked Eggert to come by to tape an update, and mindful of Baio’s unwinding of Eggert’s story, asked her to provide any other witness she had for corroboration. Eggert provided Christi Applegate (no relation to the actress), a longtime friend who had known Eggert during the Charles in Charge years. Oz recorded an interview with her before Eggert arrived at the studio for her update. Applegate’s interview was a completely unexpected bombshell, the content of which has never before been detailed.
As Oz had questioned Applegate in the taped interview, she used her own birthday as a reference point to prove when Eggert had told her about having sex with Baio. She said it happened at or near her 16th birthday party, forgetting or ignoring that since she was 2 years and 5 months younger than Eggert (according to public records), Eggert had indeed been over 18 when she had sex with Baio. Intending to prove Eggert’s story was true, Applegate had accidentally undermined it. Eggert arrived sometime after Applegate’s interview at Oz’s studio for her update with David Weintraub and Eggert’s lawyer Lisa Bloom, who would soon find herself exposed as having worked for Harvey Weinstein to undermine Rose McGowan and other alleged victims of his sexual harassment and abuse. Eggert sat for a taped update, and Oz played part of Applegate’s interview to her as cameras rolled. He asked her to reconcile Applegate’s specific recollection with her claim.
Eggert lost her composure and flew off the set, halting the interview. She, Bloom and Weintraub had a verbal altercation with producers Byun and James Avenell best described as a screaming match.
This is known because someone caught it on cell phone video and leaked an excerpt to TMZ. In the videotape, Eggert and her reps are yelling at Byun and Avenell about being sandbagged. Byun talks about conducting an investigation for legal purposes, and Bloom fires back that Byun “isn’t the FBI.” Interestingly, given the camera’s position (facing the Oz producers and next to the Eggert team), it is likely that the leaked video was made and leaked by someone from Eggert’s group. The Dr. Oz Show refused to tell TMZ what happened.
Glicklich was tipped to TMZ’s article prior to publication, and when it appeared, he sought to learn from the show what information had been given to Oz by Christi Applegate, provoking the blowup. But Avenell stonewalled him, and the Applegate material was never aired or been explained by Oz, which is exactly what Nicole Eggert wanted. Applegate would later place a scripted post on her Facebook page, deliberately setting it to public visibility, in which she backed Eggert’s story and falsely said that she was just over a year younger than Eggert, instead of almost 2 1/2 years younger.
Oz now had at least four separate red flags that Eggert was lying: her demand for payment, the rejection of her claims by fellow cast members, the contradiction in her story with the Nik Richie interview, and her best friend’s inadvertent undermining of her claims. Indeed, Eggert’s story as told to Oz was completely contradicted by the Nik Richie interview five years prior. The show aired anyway, and glossed over her contradicted story and on-set blowup. Oz got his ratings. Eggert got her platform. It was a sweeps week, as Eggert excitedly texted Willie Aames. Eggert rose to number one on the Internet Movie Database’s “Star Meter,” a measurement that obsessed she and Polinsky. And it was just another in a series of controversies and claims of victimhood that have surrounded Nicole Eggert for years.
In 2007, Eggert was dating Leor Dimant, known more commonly as DJ Lethal. A member of Limp Bizkit and House of Pain, Lethal was arrested by Los Angeles Police after Eggert claimed he had beaten her and burned her with cigarettes before and during a trip to Mexico. Eggert produced for LAPD photos she claimed she had taken showing facial bruises. During the Baio investigation, investigators took a statement from a witness who had seen the original images on Eggert’s computer, and claimed Eggert had used makeup to create the bruising effect.
Lethal hired a criminal attorney. The District Attorney filed charges against him and offered a plea deal that required only taking an anger management class. It was a painless alternative to a possible jail sentence. But Lethal refused, demanding a trial to prove his innocence. At this trial in 2008, the judge found Lethal not guilty, owing to, as TMZ reported, “inconsistencies in (Eggert’s) statement and testimony.” In short, the statement she gave to police was radically different than her testimony at trial. Lethal gave an interview leaving the courthouse and said, “I think Miss Nicole Eggert needs to get some mental evaluation.” Eggert’s pattern of accusation and inconsistencies is one that would be repeated throughout the Baio matter.
At various points in 2018, Eggert described her experiences with Baio as being both consensual and forced. She described her assault as having happened at ages that varied from 13 (before she even joined the cast, but a very important age with regards to the statute of limitations) to 16. She claimed his behavior was daily and witnessed by everyone on the set, but never explained why no one ever reported a young teen being, in her own words, dragged by her hair across the set. She claimed Baio sexually assaulted her in the garage at his house, when he lived in a condo with a parking space in a common area. These changing stories played out against the backdrop of gossip media and social media coverage.
In the weeks after Eggert’s talk show media tour, she consulted with attorney Lisa Bloom about filing a police complaint. Earlier, Polinsky had emailed Bloom’s mother, Gloria Allred, and been rebuffed. His claims of being teased or harassed verbally were clearly not being taken seriously. So Polinsky searched his memory and recalled a dressing room incident to recount to law enforcement.
Polinsky, who was a minor during the filming of “Charles in Charge,” claimed that Baio had exposed himself by cutting a hole in a tent used by Polinsky as a dressing room on set, and thrusting his genitals through the opening. According to Polinsky’s former business partner (who also was dating him), Polinsky recalled the incident, but couldn’t remember who had done it. He had named Baio because he believed no one could prove him wrong. That proved to be incorrect. During the later investigation, Baio would be contacted by the wardrobe supervisor on the show who recollected clearly Polinsky running out of his tent screaming from the event, but with Scott Baio at the wardrobe supervisor’s side. Baio could not have done it. And Eggert’s story, like Polinsky’s, was soon contradicted from another source she never considered.
Eggert told detectives that Willie Aames would corroborate her story. Aames had told Oz the prior fall that Eggert was not to be believed, but Oz had not passed that along to Eggert. Aames was suffering from tragedy; his mother had recently passed away, and his brother in Oregon was dealing with cancer. He wanted nothing to do with Eggert’s story and had told her so. But the detectives had his cel phone number, provided by Eggert, and they wanted to interview him. He was living in Canada, and called his US lawyer to ask what would happen if he simply said no. His lawyer told him they could put an order at the border that would detain him when he tried to see his brother, and for Willie Aames, this was just too much to take.
He told LAPD that if they came to see him in Canada, he would speak, and they took him up on the offer. In a three-hour interview, he told them in no uncertain terms that he had never seen Scott Baio behave inappropriately toward Nicole Eggert or anyone else. He told them that Nicole had grown up too fast and had an aggressive and overbearing mother who wanted her daughter to become an enduring star. He told them about Nicole’s fast life as a teenager and her subsequent bouts with alcohol abuse. He also told them about how Eggert and Polinsky sought his support in their determination to get Scott Baio, and how he wanted nothing to do with it, and that it wasn’t going to end well. The police were shocked. This was Eggert’s key witness, and he had completely undermined her story. They thanked him and left. Later, the detectives would read parts of his statement to Eggert, who angrily texted Willie about it. The text messages are still in his phone under “Nickel,” the nickname he gave her.
Eggert later also publicly claimed that castmember Josie Davis, who was a year younger than Eggert, had also been assaulted by Baio and released what she claimed were text messages from Davis that appeared to be fake. Davis responded by having her lawyer send Eggert a cease and desist letter and making a public statement that she had never seen any inappropriate behavior on the Charles in Charge set. It was another Nicole Eggert story that failed to hold up when examined.
Ultimately, the Los Angeles District Attorney never filed charges. The investigation was considered little more than a show, designed to pander to public sentiment. Before it even started it was clear that the statute of limitations had long run its course. Baio was frustrated and angry that the DA allowed themselves to be used as a publicity tool by Eggert, and despite providing clear and compelling evidence that her story was false, they refused to publicly detail what they found, much less charge her with making a false report. Nonetheless, Eggert placed a story with TMZ claiming that the DA had “believed her,” and would have filed charges if they could. Baio’s criminal attorney had to obtain a letter from the DA’s office disputing another Nicole Eggert claim.
The DA has since refused to release any details of their investigation, citing the statute of limitations that they knew about before they opened the investigation and took Eggert’s report in Lisa Bloom’s office, with blinds opened wide to permit paparazzi easy access to photos. Notably, the police never even bothered to interview Baio after completing their investigation of Eggert’s claims.
In fact, as the police investigation proceeded, Scott Baio took and passed five polygraph tests from two examiners while Eggert claimed she already had and then refused to produce its results. Then she claimed Baio’s tests, seen and written about by dozens of members of the media at a press conference, were lies. By now the inconsistencies in her stories were expected. She and a ring of hangers-on used social media to harass Baio any time he said or did anything.
Baio offered to appear at a benefit event for a police officer killed in the Thousand Oaks Borderline shooting; Baio attended the officer’s church. Eggert used an anonymous email address to start a campaign to have Baio uninvited, repeating her old claims as fact. She and those around her created enough conflict that the entire event was cancelled.
Scott Baio’s worst year ever had all started with a TV Host, Mehmet Oz, who chased ratings over answers. Oz was witness to the dark side of #metoo; an allegation of criminal behavior from a woman who had done it before, with incentive to lie, and a story that fell apart before it could be aired. He broadcast it anyway. He didn’t really care about the human cost. But that cost was very real. It was late summer in 2018, and Scott Baio had spent well into six figures fighting Nicole Eggert and wasted most of a year of his life doing it. As an actor, his phone had stopped ringing; who would take a chance on him again? Scott Baio had lived the same dark side of #metoo that Oz had supported; a small number of angry or disturbed women using the pain of their sisters to seek fame, or fortune, or revenge. For some, like Nicole Eggert, all three were exactly the same.
Update 5PM 7/3: Nicole Eggert posted a response to this story on Facebook. It is:
“So it’s a holiday weekend and Scott Baio has his paid PR/crisis manger write an article on a public forum page full of lies abt me completely making things up and then Baio posts it on Twitter as real news! And tags Dr Oz calling him names! Someone close to him needs to get him mental help. He is spiraling and still abusing me relentlessly daily. The amount of time he puts into trying to make myself and Alexander look bad simply for telling the truth is psychotic at this point. Man does he have some karma coming his way. My mind is blown at the desperate lengths he goes to. Anyway, shopping done, gardening done and ready to enjoy this weekend! Have a great one friends!”
Eggert did not attempt to refute any of the material reported in the article.
