You have got to be one of the least knowledgeable persons about movie making history that I have ever conversed with. Its all make believe. In real life the guys who played good guys were often complete scumbags and the ones who played bad guys were often total straight arrows. It doesn't make much to continue arguing with you about this. You are star struck and know basically nothing about what you are expounding on, and you have no desire or ability to look into it without your preconceived notions. Comical but sad.
You can repeat everything you just said, which you have done already in several posts.
The fact still is this -— ALL ARE RUMORS. Her family DID NOT NAME KIRK OPENLY even at a time when doing so would have been acceptable.
Your only “best” evidence is that the description of the rapist “fits” him.
That’s it!! You expect to convince based on this?
Also we part ways with an actress losing her stature and ability to find work after she comes out to accuse a sexual predator. THINGS HAD CHANGED BY THE 1970’s. This was the decade when explicit sex and 4 letter curse words started to proliferate on screen.
If Natalie was raped and she Ided Kirk say in 1975, her career would NOT be affected.
1. She was an established actress with millions of adoring fans.
2. She was the victim. If she were truthful, most Americans would support the victim.
3. She would have had corroboration from people close to her. That’s additional support.
That she never said anything despite all that does NOT give support to your contention.
You want to convince? At least show me something she wrote privately. In her diary, or an old tape where she named him. Better still, show me a blue dress with his sperm on it like Clinton had.
Absent that, I am well within my rights to doubt the story.