Categories: Beefs

See, with Linda's cheek swab sample, the lab was able to confirm that the sticky residue on the sex toy Schutt had found in her luggage contained examples of her skin cells. (Ew, right?) But there were other cells there, too. So what did the lab do?

It did a paternity test. That's right, the lab was able to show with almost total certainty (99.9891 percent!) that the sperm cells on the vibrator were those of Linda's biological father.

That's you, buddy.


So, by the time Kelly Cramer wandered into the Miami federal court to have a look-see in 2006, there was an algae-bloom of scum-filled documents padding court files from one end of the country to the other. You were suing Linda. She was suing you. Her husband, Sargent, was suing you, and you were suing him and his dad. You were even suing Linda's new boyfriend in California, the one she had taken up with after she and Schutt split permanently.

And now the whole thing was going to come out in a story in our newspaper, New Times Broward-Palm Beach, as well as in its sister-publication, The Village Voice.

So what did you do? What rich people always do. You tried to silence everyone with your cash.

With just days to go before our story was to be published, you wrote checks for millions of dollars to settle all of the lawsuits and get them sealed from public view as quickly as you could. (You also hired an L.A. public relations firm in an attempt to intimidate us, and even tried to haul us into court to have legal materials pulled down from the website, but we don't scare easy, bub.)

Now, I had to admit, it was pretty smart sealing those court cases. See, I knew full well how other news organizations handle these kinds of things. Even though you were a super-rich Westchester County resident who managed hedge funds and had spent several years shtupping your own daughter and had even "married" her in Westminster Abbey, The New York Times, I knew, would never touch this story if they couldn't pull the court files on their own. And sure enough, they never have. (Kelly Cramer tells me, however, that you were never able to convince the federal judge in Connecticut to seal the case there, and Times reporters can to this day use Pacer to download some of the original documents in all their sexy glory -- they just might look up Civil No. 3:05-CV-01456, if they had any interest.)

The New York Post, God bless 'em, did put together a righteous write-up of its own, relying on our reporting, but then the Post had at least one reporter who knew all about you, and convinced editors there that you were every bit the scumbag our story made you out to be.

If the Times stayed silent, newspapers and magazines from Greece to Australia inundated us with requests for the Westminster Abbey photos and other documents.

The heat got so bad for you, we heard that you were spending a lot of time in Dubai. (Looks like you've also changed your name, slightly. Born David Bruce McMahan, you went by D. Bruce McMahan until we wrote about you. Now you're David B. McMahan, apparently.)

But we weren't done with you. Eventually, that fifth wife, Elena, wanted to tell her own tale.

At the time of our 2006 story, "Daddy's Girl," you had reconciled with her (temporarily), and she didn't want to cooperate. But a year later, she'd changed her mind.

Kelly Cramer and one of our photographers got together with Elena and took a trip up to your Pelham estate, and the result was our 2007 story, "Daddy's Dog." (Note to Wikipedia: this story appeared in the Voice, not BPB.)

Elena, McMahan's fifth wife
Elena explained to Kelly that you restricted her to certain parts of the estate, and so Elena was unable to show us the legendary bedroom where you'd seduced Linda with Braveheart.

Elena also told Kelly how you regularly threatened to have her deported or to take away the two young children you'd had with her.

The woman was terrified.

Today, Elena is telling the court that she never talked to Kelly Cramer or was photographed by the Voice at all -- that she never showed anyone your precious estate.

No doubt, this is a frightened woman's attempt to save herself and her children from whatever evil you have planned for her. My feelings certainly aren't hurt that Elena is now saying in court that the Voice made up its story out of whole cloth. It isn't true, but knowing the way you are, I don't blame Elena one bit for trying any and all legal strategies to fend off your litigious attacks.

Still, you can't help working all the angles, and you've used Elena's denials about the Voice story to try to haul me into court to defend the Voice's honor.

Nice try, moneybags.

The court saw through your little stratagem, but you're appealing the judge's decision to quash my subpoena because, well, why not? You have more money than you know what to do with.

That couldn't be more obvious seeing how much money you spent scrubbing Wikipedia. For months after our original story came out, you had your goons launch daily attacks at the website, using sock puppets and other methods to intimidate the online encyclopedia into removing any mention of what was in our stories.

For a long time, there was only the barest evidence of what we'd written, a link to Kelly's story at the bottom of your page, which was otherwise a press-release-sounding happy page about your companies.

Today, there's no page at all. As far as Wikipedia is concerned, you don't even exist.

Now that's the raw power of money for you.

Still, our original stories are maintained at both The Village Voice and New Times Broward-Palm Beach, and both websites also link to the original court exhibits, some of which I've also linked to in this piece.

If The New York Times and other news organizations will continue to ignore your sordid tale, and Wikipedia will be intimidated out of mentioning it, at least here at the Voice, you'll always be in our thoughts, Daddy.

UPDATE: Wikipedia's reason for not wanting a McMahan page? According to one of their minions, I'm a "hack."

The last time, while they were under constant attack by McMahan's lawyers, they pulled down references to our articles because, they said, The Village Voice was not a legitimate source of information for biographies of living people.

Say what? I tracked down the Wikipedia minion who had written that, who turned out to be an electrical engineer in England. He sent me some long explanations about the nature of journalism and what information is reliable. But eventually, I got him to admit that Wikipedia was wiping the McMahan page simply through fear. They were afraid of being sued by McMahan, but it was easier to say that the Voice wasn't a legitimate source. You can imagine that my respect for Wikipedia took a nosedive at that point.

This time, we get a Wikipedia minion saying that McMahan isn't "notable" and that I'm a hack. You can almost smell the fear, can't you?

Not notable? Well, OK, Wikipedia, how's this for notable. It turns out that moneybags McMahan put on a show earlier this year with his new $3 million race car, and unveiled it with the help of 2010's Playmate of the year, Hope Dworacyk. Notable enough for you?

I don't know. Hedge fund kabillionaire, noted "philanthropist," race car dreamer, Westchester County bigwig, and...oh, he married his own daughter in Westminster Abbey. Is that really not notable enough?

UPDATE 2: And now it's down. Well, we learn once again that Wikipedia is afraid of McMahan (which is fine, we don't expect others to take on these kinds of stories), but that they will continue to slime the Voice as their reason for taking down information about him.

For the benefit of Wikipedia editors, who still may not understand this situation, the Voice is doing things the old-fashioned way here. We are reporting what court documents revealed about a relationship between a very notable super-rich old guy who abused his grown daughter for years. Those facts are contained in court documents which are available here and elsewhere. Normally, that is the bedrock of what Wikipedia considers legitimate sourcing. In this case, however, McMahan's money talks.

Tony Ortega is the editor-in-chief of The Village Voice.


My Voice Nation Help

Wow, I'm suprised that McMahan  has not yet hosted a Mitt Romney fundraiser. He seems like just the type.


wow - that's such a clever retort!  sounds like something Wikipedia would say about the VV.............

RadioPaul 2 Like

This silly fucktard is still trying to get this (TRUE) story removed from the web. LOL Hey Bruce if Scientology cannot scrub their scumery from the web, what makes you think you can? Take your medicen punk.


 @RadioPaul It is just unbelievable to me that anyone could make apologies for this man, despite how much money he may have.  This is one of the sickest, most vile things I have ever read.


Sure, blame Wikipedia's minions. They deleted the page because he isn't notable enough to justify his having an article on him, and any article made would be vandalized immediately upon mention of the above story. It's not about fear, Wikipedia can't be sued for defamation as the company hosting the site doesn't create the content. There's a law that says a website can't be held responsible for the things their users say. IndieGogo used that law in their recent legal issue with Charles Carreon. There's just no reason to have the article.

And Wikipedia doesn't have 'minions'. It has independent volunteer editors, and every person can become an editor at any time. You don't need to use such inflammatory language for no reason.


I think it'd be pretty easy to deny the advances of my biological father, let alone for years as a grown adult (and keep it a secret).  I don't doubt that some of this is true, but do you think that perhaps it is sensationalized because of the testimony of the different parties?  Both sides aren't innocent here.

scary 2 Like

Holy shit! Great read, and what a horrible story.

masspassat 2 Like

Thank you for the article.  Obviously, the Village Voice is one of the few sources of information left that is not bought and sold by corporate interests.  Keep up the good work, it is appreciated!


Great article, but why do you feel so strongly that this needs to be posted to Wikipedia?  To quote their website, it's a 'free encyclopedia that anyone can edit'.  It's not the end all definition of who a person is.  Granted, they get a good amount of traffic, but I found your article without did many others.  


Keep fighting the good fight.  This is a story that will clearly spread on its own merit and facts.  He'll get his due.


Looks like some pretty seriuous stuff man. WOw.

webmaster227 1 Like

Frankly, the author sounds like an asshole.  She was getting her Ph.D for pete's sake, she wasn't some helpless lost child in the woods, and she was totally agreeable to everything that happened.  Who the FUCK are we to judge what goes on between two educated, responsible adults and why do we have to pretend she's some kind of innocent victim and that the author is doing some kind of public service?

walterh14 1 Like


 Frankly...the author comes across as someone who endured an assload of crap from a sicko with too much money and ZERO integrity. It happens more often than you would clearly like to think. As for "Who the FUCK are we to judge..." society dictates as a norm that certain things CAN NOT BE TOLERATED. For VERY good reasons I might add. Children born on incest are OFTEN plagued with deformities and suseptable to illness. WE,...are those who stand for integrity and moral fiber. You don't have to be a bible thumping zealot to know decensy. And that moral code which is clearly ABSENT within this guy is precisely why articles like this HAVE TO BE printed.

stellarfella123 2 Like

 @webmaster227 spoken like a total miscreant who is pro incest......I hope u don't have daughters...creepy fuck!!

rich 1 Like

 @webmaster227 You seem to be ignoring the obvious conflict of interest and highly one-sided power relationship. She may have thought she wanted it at the time but it's unlikely to have been a rational decision.

anon3244 3 Like

 @webmaster227   you're implying that a man having sex with his daughter is not fucked up? "who are we to judge what goes on between two educated, responsible adults..." You're a fucking retard


 @anon3244  @webmaster227 hey anon,u are the retard,why dont we start blaming the daughter for a change,huh?she was not coerced into fucking him,so GTFO



If it were true I don't see how legal threats can get it removed, even if he is a billionaire.



 Then you've never pissed off a man with money. IT HAPPENS SOMEWHERE EVER SINGLE DAY.



 And there is a link provided in the article that I am certain will lead to what you doubt exists. It would be career suicide to post other wise.

idledpolkapeel 2 Like

this is pretty much the underbelly of the world. the elite 1% are incestuous religious fanatics who think they're gods.

Fletcher 1 Like

Eh, this whole story is crap.  The wife, daughter, and daughter's husband are looking for a quick buck.  There's a reason why the judges agreed to seal the court records.  There's a reason why the New York Times (and every other legitimate newspaper) has ignored the story.

Fletcher 1 Like

Think about it, what's more plausible?  That this guy decided to bone his grown daughter, and she decided to go along with it despite being engaged, and it went on for years and years with totally ridiculous emails, nonstop banging, international travel, and a "wedding" at Westminster Abbey?


Or that the guys wife, estranged daughter, and her husband hatched a scheme to rip off a billionaire?  


The emails "evidence" was just printouts, and his wife admitted she had access to his email anyway.  The wedding ring pictures were of him and his wife (which is why they're Russian Orthodox rings, duh).  And the dildo?  If you found a dildo in your wife's luggage, would you put it in a ziploc bag and save it for future DNA testing?  And as for the semen on it, I'd think his wife would have pretty easy access to his semen.


The article also fails to mention that when his wife wrote him a letter demanding payments valued at about $100,000,000.  As well as "control of the activities" of his hedge fund.  In the letter, she specifically mentions the "evidence I have against you demonstrating adultery and incest".  


Extortion, plain and simple.  


Don't believe me?  Look at the letter yourself:





 Just as you yourself pointed out Fletcher...such things can easilly be faked. Whats easier to believe, numerouse e-mails over months or years falsified or a single letter. The server could prove when they were sent, and testimony can prove WHO sent them.



 @walterh14 Elena (the wife) admitted to sending the letter in her deposition.  She denied it at first, because it makes it clear that she's extorting him, but then acknowledged it.  Read the article:


As for the emails, you assume that the server did support the fact that they were sent.  In fact, all that was entered into evidence was paper printouts of the emails.  Again, it's in the article.  Why do you think the judges sealed the lawsuits?  Why do you think Linda's lawyer, the famous Gloria Allred, dropped her as a client after she failed a polygraph?  Everybody who was close to this case knew it was a pack of lies.  


Seriously, what real "evidence" is there?  A few printouts of alleged emails.  Even if they were real, his wife had access to his email account.  And a sex toy with his semen on it - not hard to get for his WIFE.  


Pictures of them kissing?  Hotel room bills? Witnesses to them being affectionate?  Nope, nope, nope.

moneyhoney 1 Like

 @Fletcher I hope you're getting paid well for being such a dedicated shill.


 @moneyhoney I get paid nothing, I just get curious when people publish such absurd, implausible stories.  I also like pointing out what a POS the Village Voice has become.  It used to be much better than crap like this.  

Charlotte 2 Like

There's no defending this guy, because he seems awful, but I don't quite understand how she was the victim here. She wasn't groomed as a child, she was a grown woman in charge of her own life when he first "seduced" her. It's insulting when culture, in the past, has sent the message that women seduce men and those men aren't responsible for themselves. It's also insulting to suggest that an adult women, who made a choice to sleep with her father, was somehow abused.


Women are not children, as much as people like to pretend they are one in the same. Women, by nature, are not vulnerable, pathetic creatures, who simply can't be blamed for who they willingly have sex with. As far as I can tell, he didn't physically threaten her. He fired her, yes, but it looks like she only had that job because of their relationship.


Linda was a willing participant. She was not abused. Stop being so goddamn insulting to us women by holding us just as competent and capable of making decisions for ourselves as children. Linda slept with her father willingly. She was not abused.


Wow, to catch a predator you need a willing victim.


Spoiler alert - Tony Ortega is ACTUALLY Sargent Schutt


when you link out to domains that dont exist to prove ur point - meh, well... you look like a hack 

thisisme 1 Like

Whether the author gets carried away or not doesn't invalidate the scumduggery of Bruce McMahan, and Wikipedia at that. Can someone who works at Wikipedia tell us how frequently this silencing and censoring happens?


Not saying that McMahan isn't a douchebag... But the author of this article definitely is...


Interesting story, albeit poorly written. Don't understand what the point of calling him all those names are? Sounds like an angry high school kid calling their parents names. Keep your own angst out of it and you have a rich story.


Just like this skank to blame a man, like she was some innocent victim. Time to stand up to skank behavior:

RhetoricPerson 1 Like

 @brocklee802  shut the fuck up you ass hole. you use the word "skank" but what do you call a man that spends years seducing and fucking his own daughter?


 @RhetoricPerson  @brocklee802 He's not saying that McMahan is not a jerk, he is saying that McMahan's daughter was complicit. It's also her fault. If he is sick for screwing his daughter, then she is just as sick for having a consensual relationship with her father for YEARS.  If it were just a few times you could say that she was pressured into it, but it went on for years, she was obviously into it and willing.


I was very by this, this article is very, very antagonistic towards this guy, but has nothing to say about the other half of the situation.


What really boggles my mind is that I'm pretty sure that the folks at the village voice support things like free love and gay marriage. Tell me, what is the difference between those things and this case? If she had been under age, your fury would be more understandable, but she was 21 when it started.  Culturally we have a big taboo against incest, but if you don't subscribe to the judeo-christian system of morality there really is no legitimate philosophical reason to be against two consenting adults, who happen to be related, who get it on.  Especially if they only met after they were both over the age of 18. Heck, she was 21 when they met!!  If this were a case of pedophelia, it would make sense for even very socially liberal folks to be furious. But given that its two adults...... the double standard when it comes to sex with very socially liberal people just boggles the mind. Same is true with their double standard over murder. Can't put convicted criminals to death, but abort all the babies you want. You people are crazy.  Sounds to me like this author has SOMETHING ELSE against this guy. Maybe all that hatred towards the fact that he is rich is a clue....?


 @Matt  @brocklee802  Free love and gay marriage are very different from psychological abuse, adultery, and incest. The philosophical reason for not having sex with his daughter would be that it is unhealthy. Unhealthy how? Its unhealthy in the same way that it is unhealthy to have sex with any desperate woman. Would you have sex with a drunk stranger with relationship issues looking for a random hook up at a singles bar? I wouldn't, and I also wouldn't have sex with my own daughter, and I also believe in different systems of morality other than theistic ones. Break out of your shell. There is more to life than "judeo christian" STUFF. More troubling than your rant is that you seem to be ignoring Mr. Brocklee802's use of the hateful term "skank" and encourages us men to "stand up to skank behavior."  The blatant sexism of his comment, coupled with the Santorum-esque homophobia of yours has been just enough to ruin my day. Thanks a lot.P.S. what has the author got against this guy? The fact that Mr. Bruce can sue the author in any court he wants to, as many times as he wants to, for as many reasons as he can think of. It's not the fact that he's wealthy, it's the fact that he's an amoral, fascistic, deceptive, daughter-fucker.


 @Matt  Completely agreed with you until the last part. We all live with a certain double standard though, it's just innate and I'm sure you most likely do too even if you don't realize it yet. It's not like people pro-choice want all babies aborted, but they feel that the choice is u p to the mother who has the baby. People outside of the situation has NOTHING to do with it. They will not be feeding, clothing, taking care of, or teaching the baby. Also, I'm pro-choice and I believe in the death penalty when USED PROPERLY, because innocent people have died and knowingly even with petitions and protest against it. I forgot the mans name but he died in 2011 for a crime he obviously didn't commit. It's obvious this guy has a vendetta against Bruce because of all the law suits and pressure they were putting on them, rather than hide he'd rather fight back.  It's not good journalism admittedly but ah wells.

lazaroumonkeyterror 1 Like

Wow, This makes Game Of Thrones look normal in comparison.

Now Trending

New York Concert Tickets

From the Vault