Understand Your Rights. Solve Your Legal Problems
Corey Feldman alleges in a newly released documentary that Corey Haim molested him while both were minors during the making of The Lost Boys.
The claim is not part of an active criminal case, but it raises urgent legal questions about historic abuse allegations, time limits, and what accountability can look like decades later.
Corey Feldman has alleged that Corey Haim molested him during the making of The Lost Boys, describing the accusation in his documentary Corey Feldman vs. the World.
The allegation concerns events Feldman says occurred while both actors were under 18—Feldman was 16 and Haim was 14 at the time.
The comments surfaced publicly this week following coverage published on December 17, 2025, shortly after the documentary’s U.S. release earlier in December.
The allegation is not connected to any current court proceeding, and Haim, who died in 2010 cannot respond in court or be prosecuted.
That legal reality is central to why this story lands differently from most celebrity legal cases: the emotional impact is immediate, but the legal avenues are sharply limited.
Feldman has spent years publicly addressing alleged abuse in Hollywood, and this latest claim reopens unresolved questions about how the law handles historic allegations when time, evidence, and jurisdictional limits collide.
Feldman makes the allegation in Corey Feldman vs. the World, stating that an unwanted sexual approach occurred during the production period of The Lost Boys.
He has described feeling frightened and says the interaction was not consensual.
The Lost Boys was released in 1987, with principal filming taking place in 1986.
Publicly available production records show that much of the movie was shot in Santa Cruz, California.
Corey Haim died in 2010 at the age of 38.
Following the documentary’s release, U.S. media reports say a representative for Haim’s estate did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
Feldman has previously alleged that Haim was sexually assaulted by actor Charlie Sheen during the filming of Lucas in 1986. Sheen has denied those allegations, and Haim’s mother, Judy Haim, publicly disputed them in past interviews.
This allegation falls within the category of historic sexual abuse claims disclosed outside a courtroom.
In criminal law, prosecutors must prove alleged offences beyond a reasonable doubt using admissible evidence such as contemporaneous reports, corroborating witness testimony, or documented disclosures.
A key procedural barrier here is that a deceased individual cannot be criminally prosecuted.
Even if an alleged offender is alive, statutes of limitation often restrict how long after an alleged offence charges or civil claims can be brought.
Some jurisdictions have modified those limits or created temporary “lookback windows,” but those laws vary and do not automatically apply to every case.
Documentaries and interviews can bring allegations into public view, but they do not initiate legal proceedings on their own. Courts require formal complaints, jurisdictional authority, and legally viable timing.
No. There is no publicly reported criminal charge or civil lawsuit connected to this specific allegation.
Criminal prosecution cannot proceed against a deceased individual, and standard trial procedures cannot occur.
They determine whether courts can hear a case at all. In historic abuse cases, time limits often prevent prosecution or civil claims decades later.
Typically, investigators look for corroborating evidence, witness accounts, records, or prior reports within a jurisdiction and timeframe that allows legal action.
Sometimes disputes arise around estates, defamation, or media claims, but those depend on separate filings and facts not reported here.
This case illustrates a reality many survivors encounter: public disclosure and legal resolution are not the same.
The justice system operates within strict procedural rules that can limit action long after alleged events occurred.
It also highlights why legislative reforms around historic abuse claims continue to be debated.
Extended limitation periods or temporary claim windows are often intended to address delayed disclosure, but they do not guarantee a case can proceed.
Most importantly, it underscores that legal findings come from courts, evidence, and procedure, not from media narratives alone, however serious the allegations may be.
Best-case procedural scenario: The allegation contributes to broader institutional discussions about safeguarding, reporting mechanisms, and survivor protections, without formal court action.
Worst-case procedural scenario: The claim remains entirely outside legal processes, leaving no judicial determination because prosecution and civil routes are unavailable.
Most common procedural pathway in similar cases: The issue is examined in public discourse and media coverage while legal systems remain constrained by jurisdiction, time limits, and the absence of a formal filing.
Does a documentary allegation automatically trigger a police investigation?
No. Authorities typically act based on reports, jurisdiction, evidence availability, and whether legal time limits permit action.
Is a public allegation the same as proof in court?
No. Courts rely on sworn testimony and admissible evidence tested through legal procedure.
Can there be a definitive legal outcome here?
A definitive legal finding generally requires a viable court process, which is not currently present.
Corey Feldman’s allegation that Corey Haim molested him carries significant emotional and public weight, but it remains largely outside the scope of the legal system.
Because Haim died in 2010 and no criminal or civil proceedings are active, courts have no procedural pathway to examine or rule on the claim.
The release of Feldman’s documentary in December 2025 has renewed public scrutiny, yet long-standing legal constraints—jurisdiction, time limits, and the absence of a living defendant continue to limit formal accountability.
The case highlights a recurring reality in historic abuse allegations: public disclosure can prompt awareness and debate, even when the justice system is no longer positioned to deliver a legal resolution.
