http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/11/hailey-glassman-tells-world-jon-gosselin-lied-calls-him-ridiculous
On and off girlfriend Hailey apparently heard the news that Jon was telling people he was spending Thanksgiving with his grandmother. Hailey tweeted today, "LOL-U are in Utah snowboarding w/"friends"-lol-ur redic [ridiculous]."
These people can't even give it a rest on Thanksgiving. Appears Hailey is definitely the ex right now. Expect the flame wars/tweet wars to probably continue.
8 sediments (sic) from readers:
Jon may be having some problems with Hailey and that lawsuit. Just about every young woman associated with him since he left Kate is badmouthing him these days. I think he's in big trouble, legally.
This brings up something I've been wondering about Jon and the legal advice he seems to have been given. Why would Jon's lawyer encourage him to break the contract by giving other interviews when he could have just waited until Jan or Feb when it would be renegotiated?
It seems like Jon could have stopped the filming of the kids in April or May when he finally had it with Kate and TLC. The kids would have been off the show. Jon could have waited a few months THEN pursued his other careers (Divorced Dad's Club, etc.)
OR he could have permitted filming, "phoned in" his TLC role, and collected the paycheck until the contracted expired.
Instead, he made money for his lawyer, his agent, and himself by giving interviews, allowed the kids to be filmed through summer, drained the joint account and got hauled into court, looked like he would steal from his own kids while making them work for the money he took, and now gets a big ol' lawsuit for Christmas. I think that sounds like lousy advice for the client and the kids didn't come first.
Why did it happen this way? What were the lawyers thinking?
I think both of them called the other's bluff.
This is what I think might have happened. Jon was very angry at TLC and was feeling empowered to do whatever he wanted. He had no patience to wait it out or try to negotiate, he wasn't even speaking to many of the parties. He just wanted it out. And he wanted to stick it to them by walking. I had always thought it would be fine for Jon to just walk because I didn't think TLC would be lousy enough to sue the father of their little money makers. I thought they would evaluate how that would make their public image look and would cut their losses. I should have known TLC doesn't give a damn, what was I thinking!
I think his lawyers thought that either TLC wouldn't sue them, or if they did, it would be an open and shut case and nothing to worry about. They were factoring in the varuable of the kids and how they would feel about this, whereas TLC could care less about Mady, Cara, Alexis, Hannah, Leah, Colin, Aaden and Joel.
I still think Jon could very well prevail on his lawsuit. But now it's being dragged out into this huge thing that I think is more than anyone anticipated.
Hindsight is 20/20. It seems like stupid legal advice now, but I don't think it was at the time.
Well, back when Jon was doing interviews I didn't know the details of the contract (still really don't, but we know more now.) For example, we didn't know that Jon had the power to halt filming at any time until he actually pulled the plug. Then I thought, why now? Why not in season 3 or when Kate filed or when he was suspicious of the bodyguard? If Jon thought it was bringing his family down, why not halt everything then?
Then, what happened amazed me! TLC, who was making money on the family franchise, just stopped filming. Did that surprise you? It surprised me. I thought it made TLC look good. They honored the contract. They wouldn't film if the parents objected. It made the decision to film 100% the parents' decision. They could sue for breach of contract because TLC never breached it.
Here's a question for a lawyer: what is TLC expecting to actually get from the judge? Money or just to stop Jon from giving interviews or just to assign some blame? I'm not sure what they want?
I don't think even TLC knows what they want. They are ASKING that Jon not be allowed to make money elsewhere. But at this point why does it matter anymore? Their relationship is so broken down it's unlikely Jon will ever work for them again. So they want to just stop someone from ever working again to prove a point? They are scumbags and they only care about money and being right.
As far as the contract, I don't think anyone can force someone to film their kids, whether there is a clause in the contract or not. I don't think they had a choice legally when a parent, who has custody and control of the children, says get off my property. Jon would be calling the cops on them if they didn't, which looks worse. They had to stop, it was inevitable. I think that clause was put in to try to make them look sensitive and caring....when really, you don't need a clause in a contract to tell someone stop filming my kids.
"I don't think they had a choice legally when a parent, who has custody and control of the children, says get off my property."
Oh, yeah, I agree with this, except Kate also has control and custody so there could have been a problem. Remember when Jon wouldn't open the gate for Kate? They both said later it was about his choice of a babysitter. She didn't want him hiring someone she didn't approve, according to both Jon and Kate. Kate backed down because he could hire whomever he wanted when he had custody. He could even lock Kate off the property which surprised me, not being a lawyer myself.
I brought that incident up because Jon set a precedent for controlling who is on the property during his custody and making solo decisions about the kids. I think Kate could have pushed for continued filming based on that incident alone. Yet, not really, because of the contract. To film over his objections would be to breach the contract. So I do think the contract helped Jon and I was impressed that TLC honored it. They could have easily said that he breached the contract first, so they aren't bound by the contract, and Kate wants to film, so they'll film when she has custody and decision-making control.
The question remains, why didn't Jon stop filming months earlier? Why did his lawyers not tell him what you just said, that no company can film kids when permission has been withdrawn? What took so long?
Is TLC seeking any money from Jon? People are talking like he'll owe them money? what money? Why would he have to pay them anything if there is a contract that let him stop filming?
"I don't think they had a choice legally when a parent, who has custody and control of the children, says get off my property."
Oh, yeah, I agree with this, except Kate also has control and custody so there could have been a problem. Remember when Jon wouldn't open the gate for Kate? They both said later it was about his choice of a babysitter. She didn't want him hiring someone she didn't approve, according to both Jon and Kate. Kate backed down because he could hire whomever he wanted when he had custody. He could even lock Kate off the property which surprised me, not being a lawyer myself.
I brought that incident up because Jon set a precedent for controlling who is on the property during his custody and making solo decisions about the kids. I think Kate could have pushed for continued filming based on that incident alone. Yet, not really, because of the contract. To film over his objections would be to breach the contract. So I do think the contract helped Jon and I was impressed that TLC honored it. They could have easily said that he breached the contract first, so they aren't bound by the contract, and Kate wants to film, so they'll film when she has custody and decision-making control.
The question remains, why didn't Jon stop filming months earlier? Why did his lawyers not tell him what you just said, that no company can film kids when permission has been withdrawn? What took so long?
Is TLC seeking any money from Jon? People are talking like he'll owe them money? what money? Why would he have to pay them anything if there is a contract that let him stop filming?
I think both of them called the other's bluff.
This is what I think might have happened. Jon was very angry at TLC and was feeling empowered to do whatever he wanted. He had no patience to wait it out or try to negotiate, he wasn't even speaking to many of the parties. He just wanted it out. And he wanted to stick it to them by walking. I had always thought it would be fine for Jon to just walk because I didn't think TLC would be lousy enough to sue the father of their little money makers. I thought they would evaluate how that would make their public image look and would cut their losses. I should have known TLC doesn't give a damn, what was I thinking!
I think his lawyers thought that either TLC wouldn't sue them, or if they did, it would be an open and shut case and nothing to worry about. They were factoring in the varuable of the kids and how they would feel about this, whereas TLC could care less about Mady, Cara, Alexis, Hannah, Leah, Colin, Aaden and Joel.
I still think Jon could very well prevail on his lawsuit. But now it's being dragged out into this huge thing that I think is more than anyone anticipated.
Hindsight is 20/20. It seems like stupid legal advice now, but I don't think it was at the time.
Jon may be having some problems with Hailey and that lawsuit. Just about every young woman associated with him since he left Kate is badmouthing him these days. I think he's in big trouble, legally.
This brings up something I've been wondering about Jon and the legal advice he seems to have been given. Why would Jon's lawyer encourage him to break the contract by giving other interviews when he could have just waited until Jan or Feb when it would be renegotiated?
It seems like Jon could have stopped the filming of the kids in April or May when he finally had it with Kate and TLC. The kids would have been off the show. Jon could have waited a few months THEN pursued his other careers (Divorced Dad's Club, etc.)
OR he could have permitted filming, "phoned in" his TLC role, and collected the paycheck until the contracted expired.
Instead, he made money for his lawyer, his agent, and himself by giving interviews, allowed the kids to be filmed through summer, drained the joint account and got hauled into court, looked like he would steal from his own kids while making them work for the money he took, and now gets a big ol' lawsuit for Christmas. I think that sounds like lousy advice for the client and the kids didn't come first.
Why did it happen this way? What were the lawyers thinking?
Post a Comment
Want to see your comment published? Follow a few simple rules:
1. Do not use Anonymous. Pick a name (click Name/URL to type in a name) and stick to the same name.
2. Anonymous insider stories should be emailed to us directly (in confidence). They will not be posted here unless we can verify the validity, such as with photos. This is not to discourage legitimate insiders from speaking out, but to guard against all the fake stories out there.
3. No insulting other posters or picking fights, refusing to let things go and move on. Stop with the snotty comments--they will be rejected. Treat people here like how you would talk to the person you most respect in your life, it's just pleasant that way.
4. No trash talking other blogs/bloggers here.