Kate used to take delight in the fact that she was so hated and as far as I can tell, the fact that she was hated actually got her the DWTS job. So I don't know how she can claim that she lost work due to her bad reputation.
I think Kate has opened up a can of worms. She can't see it because all she cares about it making Jon pay, one way or the other. This time, IMO, she has the shoddy attorneys. If there is a conspiracy stinking up this whole thing, it's BV, Kate and ROL.
That reminds me, some people were complaining about giving the kids shrimp, but if you've seen the commercials for Red Lobster they advertise all you can eat shrimp for $15.99 and includes salad and biscuits.
That's really no more expensive than any regular plate of food when you eat out. And for kids it may cost even less, though I can't find the kiddie price.
It certainly as good a deal as Chipotle, which is not all you can eat and will cost at least over 10 bucks a pop by the time you order your drink and guac and so on.
I think too that a lot of this vengeful behavior on the part of TFW fans are due to the fact that they have so much vested with fighting with the haters that they can't be reasonable people anymore.
Her fan base are a few college students and those whackjobs Milo & Goody. She has bought everyone else.
_______________________ What? You mean those hundreds and hundreds of tweets today aren't from her adoring fans? How can that be? The sheeple swear up and down that she doesn't buy followers!
I hate the "c" word but a friend gave me another perspective: it is a useful organ and one for pleasure. That certainly does not describe TFW.
On the other hand, there is Greek mythology. Currently, kate is bringing to mind the Gorgons, sisters with serpents for hair. Specifically, she brings to mind Euryale, whose screams could kill.
She would literally have to prove that she went in for a job interview and the ONLY reason they didn't hire her is because they read Robert's book about the child abuse and now don't want to hire her. Can she really prove such a thing? Any employer is going to cover all their bases and list multiple reasons not to hire her, not just that. Plus, most places are allowed not to hire you without fear of repercussions, unless it was blatant discrimination.
And then you run into, but you are, or were at least, a child abuser. So, there's that. I mean, why SHOULD you get a job if you abuse children? It's a legitimate thing to legally deny someone a job. In CA it's called the Child Abuse Index and if you're on it, they have every legal right to deny you employment. And I don't believe PA is all that interested in hiring child abusers in light of recent events. I really can't picture a judge saying yes Kate you were right they were SOO wrong to deny you a job just because you were a child abuser how dare they. It's not gonna happen. What is she thinking? Her temperature reading on this situation is so off. She really is off in her own little world on this, on another planet.
I hope she has her jury. A jury in PA? The one state that really has her number. What is she thinking? She's going to be face to face with tax payers who have funded her lifestyle and her little whims for years. So yeah good luck with that.
Can Kate ask to have the case heard in another state if she thinks she won't get a fair shake with the citizens of PA?
Yes she can ask for a change in venue but those things are RARELY granted. Only in the movies and occasionally for very big cases. They often ask for it but no way would she get that.
"Coming soon" says Robert Hoffman. TFW is too stupid for words. What the hell is she thinkin? She just proves over and over what a venomous woman she is. I shall buy Roberts book AGAIN.
I read the Radar comments. They are usually very articulate, but scathing. Scathing.
The People article is fresh on their minds, especially the part about not working. The temperature on that seems to be she needs to get a J-O-B and stop trying to make money through things like lawsuits. That this is just out of spite since obviously Jon has no money. And that she doesn't work because of her own personality not anyone else so stop blaming others.
She's lost the general public. Completely lost them. They're done.
Take it with a grain of salt, but someone is saying they found she and Steve had set up an organization called the Korean-American Pharmacists Association of NYC. Presumably, to hide assets.
This is what she should have done. Ignored Robert's book or perhaps if she must issued a general denial of it. Then SHUT UP.
With all due respect to Robert it wasn't that well written or organized. It would have died within a few weeks at most months, and people would never have brought it up again except at places like here but who cares about here ;).
Now, he's published a book that looks and sounds better and promises to reveal even more dirt. I firmly believe that never would have happened had she not poked him. He would have felt satisfied he got the information out there and probably moved on.
What a total idiot.
In many ways, Kate and Robert have been in their own feud and we all know the best thing to do when that happens is ignore, ignore, ignore. She chose not to ignore, and she has no one to blame but herself.
Jon said she is sitting on a pile of money. I believe him. I would not put it past her and Steve to be cohorts in hiding money. If that is the case, maybe there is and has been more to their relationship than we have imagined. I told you guys she opened up a can of worms.
This is a small, yet perfect example of how this was a bad idea. Now, it's out there. Someone has posted about some company that allegedly hides assets. Whether or not it's true, there are many people who will read that and take it as fact. It makes her look sneaky and two-faced.
It may be completely false, but the point being, would that person have posted that info had Kate not gone on a rampage today? Doubt it.
Here's a link to that company she supposedly did to hide assets. If you don't want to post it that is ok. I didn't know if you knew about this link.
I don't know that she did it to hide money or not. Somewhere someone said it was common for people to do this but i can't remember the reasoning behind it.
I just re-downloaded my copy of The Book but I will buy it again when available. I will not ask for an updated copy, i will buy it again. Does anyone else get the feeling that TFW knows The Book is going to be re-released and this is her attempt to make a preemptive strike? All she's succeeded in doing is bringing attention to The Book and now more people will want a copy of it. It will be poetic justice if it comes out at the same time as the cookbook and outsells it. Karma is a bitch.
I think that's her K8, Inc thing which was probably fine, although not knowing much about it who knows.
I don't see the Korean organization. That sounds much more suspicious especially since it's about a specific trade organization that has absolutely nothing to do with who she is.
Kate Gosselin @Kateplusmy8 1h Watching 1 of our absolute favorite movies, 'Fly Away Home' all together in the boys room ********* I wonder if Kate's told the kids that she's suing their father yet. They are going to hear it soon...
If it's proven that she hid money during the divorce won't that open another can of worms? I'd think that at the very least the IRS might be a little interested. All it takes is for one person to put the bug in their ear and forensic accountants will dig in.
Maybe tlc WILL help with those being sued by TFMJG. After all, those depositions might include info about the divorce. Like who paid for TFMJG divorce lawyer. That will make their network look soooo good, dontcha think? Is there someone in discovery communications head offices now asking how they can make TFMJG go away?
Someone help the little ole lady out? Where is anyone seeing that Robert's new book is coming out? I see a new posting on his site, but that is all. I don't see coming soon at all.
Someone help the little ole lady out? Where is anyone seeing that Robert's new book is coming out? I see a new posting on his site, but that is all. I don't see coming soon at all.
---------
I don't see it, Remona. I saw the cover. Someone tweeted that he has a new post up. I couldn't find that either.
In Kate's mind re: Fly Away Home she IS both single mom/dad to her orphan children, so this can be a favorite movie. Funny tho how she is able to file suit against a dead dad. Tomorrow she will be tweeting about how the children really wish she had a bf in her life like the dad in the movie has a gf. Jon does not exist, well, now he does as a defendant in a lawsuit. Batshit crazy.
I also think TFW will be in for the surprise of her life when BV drops her like a hot potato. He made her think he would go to the mat for her, but when things get sticky with this lawsuit, and they will, he will dump her sorry butt good and fast. She is too self-absorbed to realize he has just been using her for publicity and his own gain.
On the last page of the lawsuit, I noticed Kate signed "Kate Gosselin". Isn't her official name Katie, not Kate. Is it legal for her to sign a legal document without using her legal name? Or, did she legally change her name to Kate?
She would literally have to prove that she went in for a job interview and the ONLY reason they didn't hire her is because they read Robert's book about the child abuse and now don't want to hire her. Can she really prove such a thing? Any employer is going to cover all their bases and list multiple reasons not to hire her, not just that. Plus, most places are allowed not to hire you without fear of repercussions, unless it was blatant discrimination. ****** Well, we know that Kate has not been applying for jobs. She's been hinting and hoping some network would take an interest in featuring her in another reality show, or as a talk show host. Wishing for a job on TV is not the same as applying for a job.
Further, didn't she do Celebrity Wife Swap after Hoffman's book was published then withdrawn from sale? If so, that would seem to detract from her claimed damages.
I am very surprised she got an attorney to take this case. I can only figure that the attorney is charging her an hourly rate, and not taking a percentage of any settlement. She would have to pay him a large up front retainer as well.
@XXXXXXXX A complaint (lawsuit) does NOT include all specifics, merely the basis, of the lawsuit. Methods will be disclosed as case progresses. ____________
One of the necessary components of a complaint is that it must state the cause or causes of action against the defendants. I am more familiar with personal injury cases, so I'll use those as examples.
Someone runs a red light and hits your vehicle in an intersection. You are injured. You lose time from work, and lose income. You have medical bills. You have to hire others to clean your house, etc. If you file a lawsuit, you will list the appropriate causes of actions, which in California would include "general negligence", "motor vehicle," etc. It's important to include those that apply because otherwise, a defendant can say you don't have a cause of action against him or her.
So a lawsuit must state all the causes of action, but it does not need to state every little specific.
As a non-attorney, I think Jon's defense attorney should attack the portion of the complaint that says he illegally obtained the computer disks. If what Robert said is true, neither Jon nor Robert illegally obtained the computer disks. An item thrown out into the garbage and placed out for pick up is free game.
It's a case of she said/he said. So Kate will claim that she didn't throw the discs out and that they were stolen from her home. Jon and Robert will say that Jon was moving his stuff out, Robert was helping him, and that Kate threw out the stuff Jon couldn't pack in one night. Robert returned the next day and retrieved them from the garbage. They are each other's witnesses.
Without any other proof (such as a video of Robert breaking into the home and stealing the discs; or Jon doing the same), it's going to be a case of which witness the jury finds more believable.
If there is a police report, that can be introduced as evidence. However, I don't think the police report includes citations for theft, or else they would have at least taken Jon or Robert in to the station. So that's not going to be much help.
I think Kate's goal is to make Jon's life miserable, drain him financially, etc. She apparently has the funds to do so. But if Jon can hang in there, convince a judge or jury that these claims are false, that there is no cause of action against him, perhaps he can win on a demurrer or motion for summary judgment.
On the last page of the lawsuit, I noticed Kate signed "Kate Gosselin". Isn't her official name Katie, not Kate. Is it legal for her to sign a legal document without using her legal name? Or, did she legally change her name to Kate?
---------------------
The plaintiff is Kate Gosselin. She signed her name Katie I. Gosselin. There is an "i" in Katie, ended by the loop ("e"). At least that's the way I see it. If you search for her signature (eBay) she signs a definite Kate, not Katie, and without the "I" for Irene. She did use her legal name when she signed it.
I'm not sure how they figure Jon is holding up filming anyway. The children filmed CWS did they not? Kate said she didn't even ask him.
And I thought Kate Coyne actually explained it quite clearly. TLC has been happy to offer an update special to the family, however it's on the condition that Jon be a part of it too. According to Coyne's very clear description, it was actually KATE who refused such terms. So, if the fans want to see the children back on T.V. they're barking up the wrong tree here. Ironically they only have KATE to blame, who is simply being stubborn and childish about refusing to work with Jon again. She hates Jon more than she loves her fans. If she really loved her fans, she would put aside her hatred for one episode and just give the go ahead to it so they can have the update special they so long for. It is KATE holding up filming, though they never seem to want to admit this.
The Twitter sheeple were quiet tonight, but the bots were out in droves, even the ones from Venezuela. Strange, since you'd think the fans would be grinning from ear to ear.
96. The defendants' actions violate the federal and Pennsyvania statutes set forth in this complaint, and also constitute a violation of Kate Gosselin's privacy.
This complaint seems hastily put together and at times doesn't make a lot of sense, like the rant about going through garbage. It almost has the feel of client-appeasement. Drawing something up, anything up, just to try to make the client happy and calm them down. I can picture Kate going on and on about the garbage unable to get off the subject until finally they said fine fine here we mentioned the garbage.
I tried to access the docket to see if anything is scheduled, but they make you pay 10 cents per page. I'm not giving one lousy dime for that woman. We might have some people here though who can take a look at it and keep track of it, I recall last time there were some people in various fields who had easy access to dockets for free.
By the way, the docket is completely public record so there is nothing wrong with looking at it.
I think that Jon has some assets--like, possibly retirement accounts, annuities, etc. --you can be cash poor and still living paycheck to paycheck. Otherwise, where are the damages supposed to come from? It doesn't make sense.
Another sad day for those poor kids. It has got to be absolute hell for them. If the lawsuit goes forward, I guess a lot of our questions will be answered. I am tired of speculating on what happened on that fateful night. As far as I am concerned, all of the parties have failed to act in the interest of the 8 innocent lives that are being publicly shredded, so I won't shed a tear for either of those idiots.
I have looked at various celebrity websites who have carried this lawsuit story today and the comments are brutal on every one of them.
When Robert's book became available online, I recall hustling to download it, it was there and gone in pretty quick order. So, how many people even knew Robert's book was out there with all it's damning information......not many.
In her STUPIDITY, she has brought attention to the book's content and if this does goes to court, the people she has scorned will be lining up to support the claims Robert has brought to light. Her rage, her vengeance, her QUEST to ruin the father of her children knows no bounds. The irony is she will bury herself faster than Robert ever could have. She brought his short-lived online book to the forefront, and Robert and Jon will finally have their day in court! What a fool.
That corporation was the same one we have already discussed here, and has bee discussed on other blogs--the one that says it is a foreign entity. I think that the Korean Pharmacists (or whatever it is), is a dba (doing business as), not the corporate name.
“Kate Gosselin has heard the allegations made by Stephanie Santoro that Jon Gosselin ‘hacked’ into her e-mails, phone, and online accounts, and she is profoundly disturbed by them,” the statement from Kate’s lawyers to Access Hollywood read. “Under the circumstances, Ms. Gosselin is carefully considering all of her legal options regarding this matter and she will pursue them if and when the time is right.”
What is puzzling is that the filing specifically states that the hacking activity was discovered recently.
I got Robert's book when it first came out. Tonight I wanted to check a date, so looked at it again. It appears to be a revised edition that has been edited to eliminate a lot of repeated material and add some new items. I am now getting to a discussion about the divorce that I don't remember from before.
If Robert has released a new version would it automatically update by itself?
Kate Gosselin is a Child and Animal abuser. The only thing she has said over and over again is the "information was obtained Illegally" She does NOT deny what was said isn't true. She says Jon stold from her.She abused the kids and all she's worried about what Jon did? Really TFW?
So you had the cover of People. I didn't take the time to hide your cover or even look at it...Prince William and Katharine had my attention.
Get a real job TFW. You are such a HASBEEN... How do you feel knowing that Honey Boo Boo is more of a story than you. And how about the duck dynasty people? Yes TFW all idiots can get a spot on the NY best sellers list. How is ur crook book doing?
What a puke! Your children will out sell you. And I will buy Jon's book just to stick it to you. To get the truth out. Kate...you ARE a Child and Animal Abuser. Tick tock TFW...You are done!
Haven't read all the comments, but I'm sure someone's already mentioned the part "Plaintiff has no adequate remedy of law for Defendant's continued violation..."
Does this not say, in clear language, black and white, that SHE HAS NO LEGAL STANDING???
I followed the Casey Anthony case closely. I read all the discovery..to bad TFW didn't file in Florida with the Sunshine Laws. Anyway, at least in criminal cases, in order to introduce texts and phone records they have the record-keeper from the phone company authenticate them. In order to introduce police reports they have to have the police officer testify. Would these same rules apply here? I mean, is TFW really ready to go to all these lengths and pay all these people for this?
It is on Philly Action News right now. Blech. I haven't seen one article that doesn't have scathing comments about both of them yet.
The lawsuit, it appears, has been cocked up to threaten Jon and Robert. With Robert responding with a posting of the cover (I love it!), it proves to me that she has been aware of his new book and probably has had her attorneys threatening them for many months. If Robert has done this publication right this time, he should have all his legal ducks in a row and must feel confident. Maybe Jon's veiled threat about speaking out was also in response to Kate's attorneys. Sure, Jon and Robert (and laughably the 20 John and Jane Does) will have to respond to the lawsuit, but their attorney(s) surely are prepared.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out, and Kate has the money to make trouble, but I got to believe she has overplayed her hand this time. Facts trump lies.
Lori • 9 hours ago She has a nursing degree.... why doesn't she do something with that? I mean, I would not want her as a nurse, but she could certainly start or run a home health agency. 1 •Reply•Share ›
BigTuna212 Lori • 3 hours ago − Lori,seriously,would you want her as a nurse. If I had 2 broken legs and a cracked pelvis and she walked in as my nurse; I'd slither out of bed and down the hall like an inch worm to get away. ********* Please indulge me and post this comment from the Radar article. The visual had me spewing coffee this morning! I think Kate will come out of this quite scathed, given that she is roundly hated by the public. People will rally around Jon, more people will know what Kate wrote in her journal and will find out how she abused her children and defrauded the public, how she conspired to perpetuate a false image of living hand to mouth and how she was cashing in on the show, raking in 6-figure deals all behinds the scenes. The genie is out of the bottle and no amount of finger pointing at Jon and Robert will mitigate what she has admitted to doing in her own words, which she is tacitly saying is all true, by this very lawsuit.
And then you run into, but you are, or were at least, a child abuser. So, there's that. I mean, why SHOULD you get a job if you abuse children? It's a legitimate thing to legally deny someone a job. In CA it's called the Child Abuse Index and if you're on it, they have every legal right to deny you employment. ***********************************************
Here here! applause applause
Especially since she refused to get help or own up to the abuse. The fact that she confessed in writing that she KNEW she could seriously harm those kids but did not seek any professional help? Everyone deserves a chance, gosh even the people on dr phil get second chances, if you're willing to accept responsibility and work to change. And how can she say that the book is what caused her to not get any work? TLC FRICKEN SAW & TAPED THE ABUSE AND SHE STILL WAS EMPLOYED.
I wonder if any of the kids can sue Kate (and maybe Jon) for invasion of privacy etc. because they were unable to consent to filming as a child. I know they should be able to, given that there will forever be footage of them peeing, pooping, naked, vomiting... The kids were contractually bound to appear and film, given very little time off from filming if they were ill etc. It explains a lot when you see how filming pushed through with sick, vomiting, constipated, injured kids.
The story had hit TMZ and the comments are hilarious and/or obscene. The funniest one I can post: ” brought to you by the next Dina Lohan”. Commenters on TMZ are often obscene, and they have suggested creative ways to get TFMJG to shut up, none of which can be repeated here. TFMJG may think this lawsuit will get her another poor pitiful me sobbing with bills in my purse tour. That prior tour around the time of the divorce was brought to us all by TLC. I don't think there will be the same interest or sponsorship this time around. TFMJG is once again squandering any opportunity for positive publicity or to recreate her image. Besides, didn't some of what's in the book come out during Kevin and Jodi testimony before rep murt committee? This is just going to be one more opportunity for that to get rehashed in public. Hey, TFMJG, this is not going to have any effect on your family court judge either. Except they have more evidence that the children should spend more time with their father. You know, the reasonable parent.
As far as I am concerned, all of the parties have failed to act in the interest of the 8 innocent lives that are being publicly shredded,
---------------------------
I think that one of the reasons that Jon is being sued is because of revenge. She still blames him for not continuing the show. The divorce appears to have been the result of his refusal to stand with her. He pulled out because he didn't want the kids filmed. She couldn't make it on her own in the entertainment industry. In my opinion, his refusal to keep putting those children on display most definitely was acting in the interest of those eight children, and now he's paying for it.
I wonder if Hailey is the "ms doe"? She backed out of helping tfw now she's part of the team that TOOK HER DOWN! FYI-our local morning radio "entertainment gossip" segment had a say about this fiasco. Small city in Canada no less!
So there is still a battle. Do you think it will ever get better?
That’s because my former wife sees it as ownership and not as togetherness. I just want to do what’s best for the kids. ***********************************************
The lying, all the crap in between, is just ridiculous *******************************************
‘Whatever you want to do I’ll do it. If you want to live here, I’ll fight tooth and nail for you to live here. **********************************************
Going back to quitting the show, it wasn’t a good business decision. It was a horrible business decision. I destroyed everything but it was a moral thing and any time morals are involved you know there is going to be huge sacrifice. Whether it’s financial or time or anything like that but…they’re free now. I’m free now. So what’s the payoff? Freedom. To have a normal childhood where they can have their own friends outside of school, they can have friends up here, friends down there, I’ll take them anywhere, they can go to birthday parties and just be normal kids. ************************************************
I’ve read that you and your former wife have made peace with each other?
That’s not true. ***********************************************
She says the kids want to do this and I’m saying, they’re right here saying something else, so she’s speaking for them and they’re speaking for themselves when they are here. ********************************************
Honestly Jimmy, I haven’t spoken in 4 years, so now I’m doing stuff and it is all coming out because I don’t care anymore. Are you going to sue me? I don’t care. I’ll go to court by myself and for what? For freedom of speech? For freedom of expression? For actually telling the truth? I’m not under injunction anymore and I think that’s the fear of the network and the fear of my former wife but the truth is actually going to come out because one day, I’m just going to snap. Then it is all going to come out. I’m not bashing her but she has got to do what’s right for the kids. You know? When lies come out, I’m going to defend myself. I’ll go to court and tell the judge, here’s the proof, this is what my child wants, and no more B.S. and branding and marketing and product placement. They’re children. The court’s job is to protect the children, not us. The state doesn’t care about us. The state cares about the kids and to uphold the law, so do whatever. I have no fear anymore. I have no fear of the network. I don’t have fear of my former wife.
You don’t have to answer to anyone?
Nope. And I know I’ll be fine. You know, finances are finances and it’s rough right now but finances are rough for everybody. I’m no different. I just happened to be on television. I just happened to do this. I happened to be from here. Who cares? ***********************************************
Seems like he KNEW there was a lawsuit coming. Those poor poor kids, unbelievable. I truly believe the only outcome she wants and ever wanted was for him to lose ALL custody. He said it-OWNERSHIP.
Let's turn lemons into lemonade. What was posted by ROL, courtesy of Bullyville, is plastered all over the Internet. Robert's original book is now in the spotlight with some of the damning excerpts making mainstream. People who may never heard of the controversy are now asking themselves, what is in Kate's journal? And with a re-release, which I believe will happen, Robert's book will get major attention. She literally has shot the nose off her face with this tactic. All BV cares about is the publicity, his attorneys make money and get their names in the press (my guess the other firm was recommended by BV's), and Kate looks like a vindictive, disparate witch. Controversy sells, as we well know. Robert and Jon hopefully can raise money through appearances to their legal fees. I hate to see this explode, but there is no way the kids will not be affected by all this. It's too late. This has been brewing for a year.
http://cartwheel.target.com/ ***** How did Kate not get to be a Target spokesperson for this?: http://cartwheel.target.com/
Instead, she's got a crappy looking coupon site that has been 0 for 1 thus far, is not being promoted daily and doesn't rank high enough to be on at least the first 3 pages of Google results when you put in any of the "featured" stores on her page + coupon code. Sad, but not surprising, really.
Remona Blue said... 39 Someone help the little ole lady out? Where is anyone seeing that Robert's new book is coming out? I see a new posting on his site, but that is all. I don't see coming soon at all ***** Remona - If you hover your mouse over the book cover, "Coming Soon" appears in a little box. I didn't see it at first either.
He went and picked up the garbage because she clearly said she'd throw out whatever Jon left. He took it all home for Jon. The only reason there were things left is because she called the police, Jon and his FRIEND Robert were escorted out. Trash goes out the next day-SHE PLACES THE TRASH AT THE CURB. Robert went and got it FOR HIS FRIEND JON. They go through it and VOILA! Was it legal for her to throw Jon's possessions in the trash? She tells him to come collect his belongings and then calls the cops? Wonder if Jon would have even taken the disks etc. had he been permitted to move out like a decent human being? Plus, if he was living up over the garage, why were HER PERSONAL DIARIES, DOCUMENTS ETC. in there in the first place? As far as the bank accounts? Why were they HERS? They werent' divorced at that time? Wouldn't they be BOTH their bank accounts? Because she was HIDING MONEY.
Kate Gosselin is a woman at a loss. She lost her fame as TLC's reality TV darling and with it most of her income. She also had her dignity taken away thanks to last year's scathing tell-all book, Kate Gosselin: How She Fooled the World... Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/20130827_Sideshow__Kate_G__sues_Jon_G_.html#3FIgLJYxH8y37xmQ.99
Isn't this similar to what Em Tanner said to TFW? Something like, "I'm sorry you lost your way"?
Both the fans and the haters have been unusually quiet. I guess they can't get a word in edgewise with all of the bots flooding Twitter. Kate's TL was dead in the water; this certainly brought it to life.
Jon, Robert and the attorneys will now have to go through this complaint and mark "admitted" or "denied" to each point. It will be interesting to see what they do with #35, the "untrue" allegations.
"Upon information and belief Defendents John and Jane Does 1 thru 20 are individuals whose names and addresses of residence are unknown". ******************************************
Does this mean she's suing 20 people who were in on this 'theft', but she doesn't know WHO THEY ARE? WTF?
One of the six sheep is always talking about nails in coffins. I think that Kate just put one in hers with this lawsuit. In my opinion, this was the dumbest of all of her stunts. This just may be the one to do her in. I think that even fans are going to turn away when they see that this was done out of hatred for Jon and the kids' welfare comes second.
Anyway, at least in criminal cases, in order to introduce texts and phone records they have the record-keeper from the phone company authenticate them. In order to introduce police reports they have to have the police officer testify. Would these same rules apply here?
&&&
I assume PA has an evidence code so yes, you have to follow the rules of authentication whether it's civil or criminal, per your code.
Emails and texts are a hassle. A hassle. If someone is objecting, it's a royal pain to get them in. However, sometimes no one objects and then it's not a problem.
So it's theft and invasion of privacy? In her IJWYTK, did she not INVADE her children's most inner thoughts and feelings and plastered them in a book for the world to see? Wasn't it basically a book exposing all their "faults" (in her warped head) all the things they do to basically piss her off.
The kids were contractually bound to appear and film, given very little time off from filming if they were ill etc. It explains a lot when you see how filming pushed through with sick, vomiting, constipated, injured kids. ******************************************
Good point. We all read what Robert exposed. I recall another "damage control" episode where she claimed if any of the kids said they didn't want to be filmed or participate in a shoot/outing, they didn't. Bull$hit! I remember they TAPED AND SHOWED THE FOOTAGE OF THEM SAYING 'DONT' FILM ME'. Perfect example of a narcissists warped mind contradicting themselves in the same sentence.
Auntie Ann, I will help you go thru trash anytime! Sleepless, I am jellus of you and your Oreos! But I was consoled by finding the Real Deal - Hostess TWINKIES AND CUPCAKES! - on sale at my local 7-11 yesterday!
Here's the problem even if Kate was telling the truth about. Jon & Robert being stealing and the journals were fake. No one is going to believe her why cause she's lies/lied.
&&&
Yes I think this is what she doesn't understand. I think people either think it's malarky, or they actually think sure it could be true BUT for goodness sake it was just a hard drive calm down woman.
What she doesn't understand is that even if every last word of it is true, people now see her as a Dina Lohan. A lying, crying, stupid fame ho.
Sure it may be absolutely true you have no job, and that at one point your ex was trying to screw you over, and that various other bad things have happened to you. But quit your whining, nobody wants to hear it anymore. You whined one too many times.
By the way didn't Jon's text make it clear, if those are even true, that he was simply looking for ammunition in the middle of a nasty divorce? Remember at the time, this was right after Kate accused him of stealing money from the account. Kate was fighting HIM for full custody and all he was worth. That will come out too. From what I understand, he was looking for ammunition because SHE was attacking HIM first. Don't you have every right to gather as much info as you can to defend yourself? Or is he to just lay down and die when your wife tries to bury you in a divorce? Looking for evidence of her CHILD ABUSE to show to the judge in order to try to get more custody you have EVERY RIGHT TO DO. For all we know he did tell the judge all of that and for all we know that did play a role in his visitation time.
Wait a minute! She ADMITS in October 2009 she knew all about this. She has a BIG statute of limitations problem here. It's two years in PA for most causes of action.
I hope Jon and Robert's attorneys are aware of that article. I would be filing a motion to dismiss today due to the statute of limitations expiring alone and attach that article.
Wait a minute! She ADMITS in October 2009 she knew all about this. She has a BIG statute of limitations problem here. It's two years in PA for most causes of action.
I hope Jon and Robert's attorneys are aware of that article. I would be filing a motion to dismiss today due to the statute of limitations expiring alone and attach that article. ***********************************************
I've had time to really read the complaint closely for the first time and I noticed this glaring lie right off the bat. They claim the book
Um, no. The book was removed from Amazon because they received a formal complaint that, if I recall, mostly talked about copyright violations, and it is their POLICY to remove a work if a formal complaint is filed UNTIL the courts or the parties work it out. They are not taking sides, they simply have an iron clad policy that books are not permitted to be on the site if a complain filed with them remains outstanding. Period. When it's resolved, they'll gladly put it back up.
Amazon is not judge and jury and Amazon never said or even implied they were removing it because it was obtained illegally. What a lie.
Formerly Duped said... 93 OT to TFW's last tweet. Didn't she say they only had two TVs or something? Now they are watching TV in the room?
********
I thought the same thing. She said they had no tv in their room. She was being a good mom by making sure they were all watching a movie and noone had access to the tv where they might see the story I guess. #snark
Tucker's Mom said... 74 Lori • 9 hours ago She has a nursing degree.... why doesn't she do something with that? I mean, I would not want her as a nurse, but she could certainly start or run a home health agency. 1 •Reply•Share ›
BigTuna212 Lori • 3 hours ago − Lori,seriously,would you want her as a nurse. If I had 2 broken legs and a cracked pelvis and she walked in as my nurse; I'd slither out of bed and down the hall like an inch worm to get away. ___________
This is to funny I know if KK was my nurse or my families nurse I'd be like "Oh heck no".
I forwarded the damning article to both Jon and Robert. What they and their attorneys do with it is up to them.
That article basically buries her lawsuit as far as I'm concerned. You don't get to go around blabbing in 2009 you knew all about this alleged "hacking" then finally get around to suing in 2013. Law doesn't work that way.
Someone should email Jon and Robert the link to that article. Someone might also suggest to either of them to start a legal defense fund. I'd contribute a couple of bucks and I bet others would too.
If Robert has a publisher this time around, would the publisher's legal team rep them?
LOL From the complain, the conduct was "outrageous." I didn't realize being outrageous was a crime. What's that fall under, the Tort of Outrageousness?
Like someone mentioned the other day, they keep picturing someone shouting: You're out of order! You're out of order!
If money is all she wants from Jon, isn't the lawsuit a form of extortion or blackmail, somewhat? I read that she is asking for a specific amount, $5,000 from Jon. Why a specific amount and why $5,000? She needs $5,000 for something in particular?
Jon hasn't asked for anything in return from her all these years except for more time with the children and to stop filming over new year eve which was his custody time.
I truly believe the reason she doesn't have Marty Singer(her previous pit-bull of an attorney) representing her in this case is because he made it perfectly clear to her that she does not have a case.
“Whether Jon is behind this book or not, it’s wrong…and if everybody’s wrong, nobody is right.” ****** Amen, Hailey. I read Jon's alleged texts again, but none ever admits to stealing Kate's hard drive. Not one. Plans to and going to steak it, yes, IF they're authentic, but never anything that proves he actually did it. For sure, Hailey will be dragged into this and although I do believe her relationship with Jon ended very, very badly, I think she'll choose his corner in this knock down, drag out fight, because Kate doesn't care who she hurts in her attempts to cut Jon out of the kids' lives. I do believe that is the end game here. Jon and Robert do not have deep pockets, and probably, never, ever will. So what's to gain? The kids and moving to L.A. or NYC to pursue fame.
Haven't read all the comments, but I'm sure someone's already mentioned the part "Plaintiff has no adequate remedy of law for Defendant's continued violation..."
Does this not say, in clear language, black and white, that SHE HAS NO LEGAL STANDING???
&&&
It's not a standing issue. Standing means you're not the one harmed. She was the one "harmed" there's no question about that, IF any of this harm occured.
I actually think they left out an important word in this boiler plate language, does anyone else? I think they meant to say plaintiff has no OTHER adequate remedy of law. Whenever you file a suit, you have to explain why this is the proper course of action. For instance why you should file in this court and why you should file this particular complaint. I have seen, rarely, things rejected because plaintiff has another adequate remedy at law, and then they will tell you what it is usually. (For instance, an appeal.)
They explained this court was proper because all the parties reside there, etc. So I think it's a typo and they left out no OTHER adequate remedy.
The complaint sounds a little weak on whether they are sure Jon is behind the book. And now here was Hailey herself who doesn't even seem to know. If he is so, so guilty, why does no one seem to be able to definitively say he was involved? Even Hailey is wishy washy and she dated the guy.
Terri I think so too. Where's Martie? I am no Martie fan, but I would be shocked if he would get himself involved in something this wishy washy. This complaint looks very hastily thrown together and is full of speculation and inaccurate statements.
After reading the complaint, it seems to be they are throwing in a lot of legal mumbo jumbo on hacking and so on, but are very light and vague on the details of how they claim this went down. A lot of it is speculation. Oh well there's no WAY he could have collected all those documents from just the trash curb! (Um, sure you could, if the trash bags were numerous as they might be when throwing everything out, or if the info was in electronic form). They never say they really know that didn't happen for SURE, they are just using faulty logic to tell the court see LOGICALLY it couldn't have happened. That's not the same thing at all as having proof. Any such complaint should always be taken seriously, but especially in light of her statute of limitations problems I'm not sure this is going anywhere.
The complaint sounds a little weak on whether they are sure Jon is behind the book. And now here was Hailey herself who doesn't even seem to know. If he is so, so guilty, why does no one seem to be able to definitively say he was involved? Even Hailey is wishy washy and she dated the guy.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
What I don't understand is the relationship between Robert and Jon. There are many reports out there claiming they were business partners, Exactly what business were the two of them in together?
And even funnier, what if, after all this, her case is thrown out but his book gets published? And she alone was the one responsible for the book's popularity?
I read Jon's alleged texts again, but none ever admits to stealing Kate's hard drive. Not one. Plans to and going to steak it, yes, IF they're authentic, but never anything that proves he actually did it.
&&&
No, they don't. Where is the final text in the puzzle a few days later--hey Hailey I got the hard drive!!! How come that's completely missing?
When making up fake texts, you might want to be sure you say they actually did the "crime" instead of just talking about it. He's allowed to talk about getting his hands on her hard drive especially to defend himself in a divorce. For all we know he might have just walked up to the house, knocked on the door and asked for it. Nothing illegal about that.
Even Hailey is wishy washy and she dated the guy. **** Yes, everything published is speculative and in no way proves Jon physically took the hard drive and gave it to Robert. Maybe they've got a "smoking gun", but this isn't it. Kate ratchets up the language, thanking Hailey for "proof" Jon did it, but she's speculating. It's that's all she's got, it's not proof positive. It's a guy with a reason to get evidence to help defend himself in court.
If my DH backed up my computer's hard drive without my knowledge, is that illegal? My laptop is what I use 99.99999999% percent of the time, but he'll hop on occasionally. He's allowed, of course, but the computer is considered mine. But, we're married, living under the same roof? So would it be illegal for him to copy anything?
Here's another question-- why have a "security" team that leaves you wide open like this? Wouldn't that be part of protecting a client? Keeping private information private and safe, and employing experts to advise you and beef up your computer security? Come on now, Jon doesn't work for the CIA or Dept. of Homeland Security, so we're not talking FBI wiretaps here.
In PA like most states anything you acquire during the marriage is considered marital property and you both may access it equally. If you want to designate something your separate property you actually have to put that in writing and nobody bothers to do that unless you're really wealthy and talking about huge assets. Not for some measly 700 buck laptop.
23 Pa.C.S.A. § 3501 Definitions (a) General rule.--As used in this chapter, "marital property" means all property acquired by either party during the marriage and the increase in value of any nonmarital property acquired pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (3) as measured and determined under subsection (a.1).
So if they bought the computer in the marriage he may have had every right to look at its contents.
That 2009 article proves that Kate had nothing back then to prove that Jon hacked into anything or she would have filed charges.
She filed a civil suit because there is no proof criminally beyond a shadow of a doubt. I believe the burden of proof in a civil case does not have the higher standard. This is all a publicity, money grab scheme to deny Jon his custody rights and bankrupt him.I keep referring back to that Naughty But Nice article a while back that Kate wants to move to LA. Wanna bet Jon has been standing in her way?
Any celebrity or person of interest (or, anyone) in their right mine should have their hard drives destroyed by professionals before throwing it out or at the very least wipe it yourself using your computer program built into most computers. It's just common sense. The law is the law, and once she put those files by the side of the road without wiping them first, they were fair game. It may be a harsh rule, but it's her own fault. Ignorance, haste, or an anger management problem is not an excuse. She should count herself lucky that some pedophile didn't get a hold of her 5,000 pictures and that it was just Robert and Jon.
Here's another question-- why have a "security" team that leaves you wide open like this? Wouldn't that be part of protecting a client? Keeping private information private and safe, and employing experts to advise you and beef up your computer security? ____
Isn't this why she hired Steve and keeps him around?
Steve said that KK got threats via mail and e-mail so why didn't he notice something?
That article basically buries her lawsuit as far as I'm concerned. You don't get to go around blabbing in 2009 you knew all about this alleged "hacking" then finally get around to suing in 2013. Law doesn't work that way.
-----------
What? She knew about this in 2009? The complaint filed alleges ID theft. Statute of Limitations in PA for ID theft is four years from when it happened, or when it was discovered. I thought she just "discovered" it when the book was published.
Wait a minute! She ADMITS in October 2009 she knew all about this. She has a BIG statute of limitations problem here. It's two years in PA for most causes of action.
&&&&&&&
Sorry, I read from the bottomup. Unless it's been changed, SL in PA is four years for ID theft, which means that perhaps the reason this is being filed now is because it will run out in October (if that's when she knew about it). However, it it happened in April, what took her six months to discover it?
Sorry, I read from the bottomup. Unless it's been changed, SL in PA is four years for ID theft, which means that perhaps the reason this is being filed now is because it will run out in October (if that's when she knew about it). However, it it happened in April, what took her six months to discover it?
&&&
As they say, something doesn't add up.
It would be typical TFW to file something on the LAST day before the SOL expires. You know so you can toy with your subject for four years first.
Filing for monetary damages from two guys who don't have much money begs the question: why file? To force them to settle, to STFU, or face bankruptcy. She is slick siting on a pile of cash throwing it to retain attorneys who won't get a dime from Jon or Robert because they can't reimburse those fees if they lose.
I am going to try and schedule a Baltimore trip to the book festival. Several of my favorite authors will be there, it would be fun to go hear them speak. if I happen to see TFMJG I can report back if I also see the booby guard.
Excuse me for my ignorance, but if she is only suing for $5,000, does that make this a small claims court case? Then why involve lawyers (who will charge more than $5,000 to try the case)? Don't people generally represent themselves in a small claims case?
Again though, there's potential problems here. They were married. Unless Kate specifically designated her computer as her separate property, her spouse would have every right to access it.
There's certain things you give up when you get married, and one is having your own little property all to yourself that no one is allowed to touch. Your husband can look at what he wants of yours. Unless you go to the trouble to designate it as separate property, you're out of luck. That's why you wouldn't see a lawsuit because your husband "stole" your car or "stole" this or that (unless we're talking post divorce which is different.)
Remember Breaking Bad when he moved back in against Skyler's wishes and she called the cops? The cops said sorry ma'am, you're married, and he's on the mortgage. He can be here.
5,000 is only what she's valued the computer at. She is vague on what other money she wants but does apparently specify other damages and attorneys fees etc.
It's all so silly anyway since Jon has nothing. What's the point?
Remember how Kate kept saying she was recently divorced, or divorced two years ago instead of four? Is that her way of trying to bamboozle her attorney, Jon's attorney, Robert's attorney AND a judge? Doe she really think everyone is that stupid?
You know, I always thought the reason she put that deadbolt on her bedroom door was to keep Jon away from snooping prior to the divorce. It made sense to me because this would be the time a spouse would be looking for evidence ( a friend of mine discovered her husband was hiding a secret cash account from her prior to their divorce while going through his desk).
I gotta say this whole stolen hard drive thing is silly. As the IT guy, I am sure Jon backed up her computer, probably onto disks. Kate would have been too lazy to have bothered. So in my mind, the backups he did were with her permission until she locked him out, don't you think?
Remember how Kate kept saying she was recently divorced, or divorced two years ago instead of four? Is that her way of trying to bamboozle her attorney, Jon's attorney, Robert's attorney AND a judge? Doe she really think everyone is that stupid?
&&&
Yes, I think it's to make this all seem fresh and current. Jon JUST screwed her over so that's why she has to get back at him.
It is not in her best interest that people remember the truth, that this divorce was YEARS AGO. Because it makes her look like a harpy little shrew who can't let anything go. She wants you to think this is all so just yesterday. How stupid does she think we are?
Is there a chance that she 'knew' about it sooner than Oct.? Oct might just be when she decided to sell the story about it. Maybe it was outside the 4 yr SL. (hoping)
Oh, thanks for the explanation Admin! I thought TFW was suing for $5,000 so Jon would settle and sign a non-disclosure. I figure that is the real point of the lawsuit; she wants to force Robert and Jon to settle, and in the settlement have them sign something saying they will not talk about her anymore to the media.
I think her pride and money are at stake as long as she has people telling the truth of her bad behavior. And there's nothing she values more than being able to control how people view her and having as much money as possible in the bank.
Because it can't be said enough, this all happened in the middle of a divorce when Kate was trying to BLEED HIM DRY and TAKE HIS KIDS. It's not like he was sitting there one day thinking hmmm how can I sucker punch Kate because I'm bored and that sounds like fun? Um, no, he was trying to keep his head above water and make sure he continues to see his children he loves because Kate and, might I had her high powered TLC attorneys, were trying to bury him for GOOD.
Seriously, who is going to get upset at any spouse and parent for simply wanting to find the ammunition he knows is there in order to defend themselves? People understand it. Lots of people have been through a divorce or seen one up close and they understand it.
I would think that if backup disks are produced with the dates they were backed up, I believe this will either prove or disprove her allegations. If backed up prior to the divorce, she is toast. Robert said what he retrieved were disks.
"Does this mean she's suing 20 people who were in on this 'theft', but she doesn't know WHO THEY ARE? WTF?"
&&&&&&&&&&
I don't understand that at all. The sheeple were all excited that the process servers are going to be busy this week with the 20 people being sued. If the names and addresses are unknown, then they really are going to be busy trying to find them!
"She does NOT deny what was said isn't true."
&&&&&&&&&&
Starz, perhaps not online or in an interview, but it is stated in the complaint (#35) that the stories were not true. Problem is, if that's part of the complaint, she's going to have to either admit or deny the validity of those stories. Depositions will not be a day at the beach for her.
The suit claims these 20 John and Jane doe's encouraged and supported Robert and Jon as they went about their evil plan to hack Kate.
Um, I don't think any of barely even hard of Robert back then when this allegedly happened, or if we did thought nothing of it--oh that's just a pap and Dana Hoffman's wife. We knew Dana but Robert was a tiny minor character in all this. Personally I didn't even recognize his name when he popped up last year claiming to have written a book, and some of us weren't even sure if he was really related to Dana at all!
Who is this secret society of 20 cheering them on and can we invite them to join us here?!
I agree, if the discs were backed up during the marriage she's pretty much out of luck.
Wouldn't Jon have known much of what was in the book? The abuse, the way she treated kids and pets, her outrageous demands, her schemes/scams? What was in the computer or journal may have been familiar to him anyway.Does that count for anything legally?
Geez, a $5000 computer? Must have been a TLC freebie. Only the best for Kate.
Just curious: Wouldn't Robert have to wait for the lawsuit to settle before he releases his book? Just in case it is found out during the trial that he has obtained his information falsely?
Those alleged texts from John to Hailey were just too much by a half. Why would he incriminate himself to a woman with whom he had a very volatile relationship? They sounded fake when I first read them and they sound even more fake today.
All Jon has to say is he always backed up the computers to disks and last time he saw them they were in his garage apartment and presumed tossed in the trash by Kate (per her threat).
Boom, case closed.
I'm not clear if that would explain Robert having the emails. When I back up my computer I don't think that includes my emails as they are stored online. Maybe they were backed up as part of Kate's work on Multiple Blessings with Beth.
It comes down to her word against Jon and Robert and I didn't even read a hint of proof in that complaint, just some silly thing about the trash and how he couldn't have found all those pictures in the trash. That part was ridiculous.
Well, the story has hit the mainstream media. Free publicity for the re-release of Robert’s book.
&&&&&
I'm watching Fox News right now. Yep. They have the story.
Snippets..."They used to be reality television's happily married couple. so much for that. Remember that? Wish I didn't. They USED to be reality stars...years ago...but that was then. Kate alleges Jon hacked computer after they were separated and gave to Hoffman. It gets dirtier. Hoffman admits to picking through trash, including journals in which she admits to spanking the kids on a daily basis. Comment on The Spanker. She tried to raise some money getting herself back on television. Didn't work. Kate at 38...don't encourage it!"
It comes down to her word against Jon and Robert and I didn't even read a hint of proof in that complaint, just some silly thing about the trash and how he couldn't have found all those pictures in the trash. That part was ridiculous. ****** I always assumed all the photos that Robert claims to have are digital, along with all the correspondence, contracts etc. I never thought he was physically gathering them up, which again, would suggest that Kate throws out sensitive physical documents and photos without shredding them first. So, that allegation seems cooked up to me.
Is there a chance that she 'knew' about it sooner than Oct.? Oct might just be when she decided to sell the story about it. Maybe it was outside the 4 yr SL. (hoping)
&&&&&&
That's what is fishy. The "stealing" was done in April, but she didn't find out about it until October? If the hard drive was taken out of her computer, didn't she use that computer to access any information on it? She might have had multiple computers, but still...
Robert has insisted that this was not about a hard drive, but disks. Does Kate know the difference?
She knows this lawsuit will go on for years and most likely neither Jon nor Robert has the funds to see it through to the end and they'll buckle and agree to settle.
Hence, the difficulty in drafting SLAPP legislation, and in applying it, is to craft an approach which affords an early termination to invalid abusive suits, without denying a legitimate day in court to valid good faith claims. **** This is from Wiki re: SLAPP suits. So, does this support some theories that early termination might be anticipated, say, based on statutes of limitation or insufficient evidence (he said/she said sordid mess). So, it could be an intimidation tactic. If so, it's sure is an expensive one.
It seems Blogger is eating some of my posts. so trying again...
If it is money all she wants from Jon and is telling him to pay or go to court, isn't that extortion? Or is there another label for that kind of action?
If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck... Wiki also mentions including spurious defendants in the suit and attempting to identify anonymous critics or critics with pseudonyms.
The way I see it is this will backfire big time, for her that is. What she thought would garner interest in her cookbook will only create more interest in Robert's book, a big win for him. Sadly, the children remain the victims of her cruel behaviour in her ongoing attention seeking behavior.
I found a trove of information regarding SLAPP suits. http://www.thefirstamendment.org/antislappresourcecenter.html#SLAPPing
One of the more interesting things is that Jon can file a SLAPPback which would make TFW liable for charges. If I recall correctly this was done a couple of years ago...I can't remember who did it but it was a successful move. Anyways...carry on. This episode of Kate+Hate is brought to you by Quilted Northern. "Luxury you can see and feel".
I truly believe the reason she doesn't have Marty Singer(her previous pit-bull of an attorney) representing her in this case is because he made it perfectly clear to her that she does not have a case.
****
Agree. There's a reason only BV and his lawyers are the only ones who would take a case like this.
SLAPP (144) I think Perez hit the nail on the head. This is not about money. This is about bullying Jon and Robert into submission. She thinks Robert will back off and agree to withdraw the book for good, Jon will give her full custody, and she can move to LA, become the next Real Housewife, and be a big star. One problem, though--Robert has already shown that he is not about to let her push him around. She pushed, and he already pushed back, within hours of this suit being filed. Jon has stated that he doesn't care. He is going to fight for his kids, even if it bankrupts him. He let her bully him for too long, and I think he is done with it. I bet TFW was on the phone, screaming at her lawyers first thing this morning. How dare Robert post that book cover! Stop him!!! Make him pay!!!! I get the feeling that she is about to destroy herself. She is out for vengeance, and she is going to risk it all to get it. She could end up losing everything, and bankrupting herself as well as Jon. How is this supposed to benefit the kids? 10 years in the future, will she be telling them, "Sorry kids, but your college money is gone. I had to take your dad to court. Remember--we get what we get and we don't get upset. And you get nothing".
Remember this? Sorry, I don't know how to make it clickable: http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/04/im-suing-kate-gosselin-for-releasing-my-texts-that-proved-jon-gave-computer-to-author-says-hailey-glassman/
The thing that has always baffled me is why would Robert wait 2-3 years to publish a Kate Gosselin tell all, rather than at the height of her popularity, if he was in it for the money? That's just stupid, imo.
It's possible that Jon and Robert were in cahoots during the time of the divorce and concocted this plan to write a tell all, but again, why wait until Kate was no longer popular? Because of the gag order and a fear of being sued by TLC?
The "no other adequate remedy at law" language is the standard to get an injunction. It just means damage is being done or is about to be done that monetary damages alone won't be able to remedy. To get an injunction forcing return of the drives/disks or stopping the publishing of the book will require the filing of a motion for preliminary injunction, and most likely an evidentiary hearing.
Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said... 140 The suit claims these 20 John and Jane doe's encouraged and supported Robert and Jon as they went about their evil plan to hack Kate.
********************************************
Wondering if she's using the big email hacking scandal in the UK as her "precedent"? You know those evil p-p-pppaps! And how utterly shtoopid to say that allll that info couldn't have been in the trash? Is she that dense? Hoffman has maintained, even taking a polygraph test, that he found DISKS!! You're living under a rock if you don't know a computer disk can store tons and tons of information.
5,000 is only what she's valued the computer at. She *****
That alone is hilarious. Was the computer plated in 14K gold? New computers are like new cars - the minute you "drive them off the lot," they decrease substantially in value. You can easily buy a brand new computer for $1,000 or less these days, desktop or laptop. Of course, there are more expensive models, but I really doubt they had some sort of super computer in their home at that time. The value is very off (just like Kate, I might add!)
You know, I always thought the reason she put that deadbolt on her bedroom door was to keep Jon away from snooping prior to the divorce. It made sense to me because this would be the time a spouse would be looking for evidence ( a friend of mine discovered her husband was hiding a secret cash account from her prior to their divorce while going through his desk). ********************************************
Exactly! She WAS hiding money. Jon's said it before.
Remember Breaking Bad when he moved back in against Skyler's wishes and she called the cops? The cops said sorry ma'am, you're married, and he's on the mortgage. He can be here. ****** Exactly, I thought the same thing. So if at the time, Jon and Kate were still legally married but she was pushing him out of the house, he could still take things, including back up disks to their shared computer.
Stuff like this is what makes me scratch my head and wonder why any attorney would take on this case. However, times are tough all over, even for attorneys. Perhaps this particular attorney realizes this is a dog of a case, but he figured, "well, if this lady wants to pay my hefty retainer and hourly fee, who am I to argue?" After all, he can present the case with whatever flimsy evidence Kate's provided him, a good defense attorney can make mincemeat of the allegations, and hopefully the judge makes some pointed remarks about frivolous lawsuits clogging up the courts.
She knows this lawsuit will go on for years and most likely neither Jon nor Robert has the funds to see it through to the end and they'll buckle and agree to settle. ************************************************ I am so wishing that this book makes tons and tons of money. I hope their attorneys are postponing being paid until there is a verdict and/or the book flies off the shelves. I hope they have attorneys who are sick of the double standard regarding mom vs. dad custody or are willing to fight for victims of parent alienation. I hope she gets her well deserved karma FINALLY!
Perez is reporting exclusively that his source says this is a SLAPP suit to stop Hoffman's book and draw attention to her cookbook.
====
Let her draw attention to her charity cookbook. See where that gets her. Does she think it's a culinary masterpiece? Food critics don't even have to read the entire thing, they can pan it from the preview on Amazon.
"Yeah, I want to buy a cookbook from an child/animal abusing, ex-husband hating bitch who can't cook her way out of a paperbag,"...said no Mom ever.
She is such a joke. And like that DWTS judge said, "No self-awareness," if she thinks this will get her full custody so she can move to LA. She just doesn't get that Hollywood doesn't want her.
Comment on the Hilton site from someone who thinks Jon is releasing this book, implores him to think about what he might be doing to the mother of his children. You cannot make up this stuff. Oh sure Kate, this SLAPP suit will sell cookbooks, put you on the talk show circuit and get you a media job. She reads too much Milo.
What about residuals? Do reality tv participants get residuals? Is Jon entitled to them from Jon & Kate Plus 8? If so, maybe TFW is going after those assets.
TFW is angry because she doesn't have a man that will love her and accept her for who she is. I believe she did or does love Steve and that relationship didn't pan out the way she wanted, i.e., having him divorce his wife and committing to a relationship with her. He won't divorce his wife and marry her and she hasn't moved on to any other relationships since her divorce of nearly 3 years. Jon has. She hates him because he's moved on and can find love with another woman regardless of his financial situation, an angry, devious ex wife and eight kids. TFW needs a man who loves her regardless of who or what she is, and apparently this isn't happening. Hence, this lawsuit against Jon. I don't believe this is about the money, but her own loneliness and not having a loving relationship in her real life. She hates Jon because he has that.
Can anyone answer a question I have? If this suit ever sees the inside of a court room do all of those confidentiality agreements go out the window. I always thought that when it comes to a court of law you can't use those as a reason not to testify truthfully.
Wow, this is getting interesting. I think most of us here calling one of theses take your pick>1. trying to stay relevant, 2. trying to get full custody, 3. publicity stunt,(figuring people will buy her picture book/cookbook , feeling sorry for her) 4. pulling the I've changed bit, cause the poor me act is not working anymore, 5. I've got 8 count them 8 struggling act, while going out and buying brand new car, and taking a trip to the Kentucky Derby, 6. can't go to the beach this year> nobody grifted us a beach house. 7. People mag article(cause everybody still loves me and TLC, won't do a follow up-date on their most famous star), 8. the ultra> sueing ex hubby for possibly leaking daming info(she has never denied), not that she herself or friends ever leaked info to the media rags. ALL BACKFIRING! Interesting, didn't someone say or some article, say that Kate was shopping around for any lawyer to take/make this case? Cause, her lawyers said there was no case? As the one recent article said, get the popcorn out!
The only reason for the delay IMO is that RH claims he is not a writer and it must have taken a lot of time away from his own life to go through all the material and compile it. As is, it was not well-organized, repetitive and had errors. Not criticizing, just that it must have been difficult for him to complete.
but her own loneliness and not having a loving relationship in her real life. She hates Jon because he has that. ****** I tend to believe that, too. Kate's reaction every time she's been asked if she cares that Jon is dating is so over the top that she's just trying way too hard to be convincing. Her face contorts, her shoulders shrug, the big "pffffft" with hand flicking tells me that she's lying. I think she does care. I've said before that Kate reminds me of C.J. Craig on The West Wing. CJ was very busy in the Bartlett administration and for 8 years, never had a real, committed relationship because she got all her testosterone supply and attention from men at work. All day, every day. That's what Kate got from Steve and perhaps to some extent, the crew. She was the center of attention and maybe, perhaps, there was a physical relationship somewhere in there, but now it's all over. Done. Gone. If this case goes forward, I can't see Steve and possible infidelity NOT being brought into the fray, simply because Jon would have been looking for proof of an affair.
I forwarded the damning article to both Jon and Robert. What they and their attorneys do with it is up to them.
That article basically buries her lawsuit as far as I'm concerned. You don't get to go around blabbing in 2009 you knew all about this alleged "hacking" then finally get around to suing in 2013. Law doesn't work that way. ****** Boy wouldn't that be a come-uppance. It seems to clearly show Kate had knowledge of this alleged hacking way back in 2009.
LOL - I would not want to be her attorney. Can you imagine trying to work with this woman? First of all, she's nuts. Second of all, she's a liar. Third of all, anyone who does business with her gets burned somehow, and that's going to include this attorney, when she stiffs him on his fees. Not to mention, looking like a fool to the Court for alleging that discovery of this alleged hacking was "recent," when Kate gives an interview in 2009 discussed this supposed hacking! No one likes to be made a fool of, and I imagine Kate's attorney will not be appreciative.
This is BACKFIRING big time. Cause, people will be more interested in Robert's book than Kates picture book-cookbook. Publicity went wrong way. Kate will blame yet another of her failures on Jon. Kate will never admit it's all her fault. Kate has been given more opportunities, than most people, get in a lifetime(people are lucky to get one opportunity, in a lifetime) , and she blew every one of them. She is a trip!
MsGoody2Shoes21 @msgoody2shoes21 42m @Kateplusmy8 You might as well get child support from Jon. I don't care if it's $25 week per child. Make Jon pay child support for HIS kids.
**********
So Goody thinks that TFW, out of the goodness of her heart, relived Jon of CS but is suing him for millions? Huh? Obviously she would be getting CS if she could. He must not be legally required to pay it.
getofftwitter said... 184 Interesting, didn't someone say or some article, say that Kate was shopping around for any lawyer to take/make this case? Cause, her lawyers said there was no case? __________________
Yes, it was an ROL article. I don't have time to search for it now, but I remember reading it and commenting on it at the time. It may have been in April.
How will Kate be able to prove that Jon had to hack into her computer, her e-mails, etc.? What if Jon claims that he knew Kate's passwords, and that she knew he knew.
I am not married, but don't spouses sometimes share that sort of information with each other?
I also believe Kate is not very tech savvy (take a look at her website if you need any convincing of that!), and that while they were married, Jon was probably the one who handled many of the computer issues.
Admin - I agree with your assessment of the complaint. It's sloppy work, looks like it was thrown together hastily with little proof-reading, and weak on its allegations. I would like to see Jon and/or Robert hire a competent attorney, who will rip the many holes in this complaint to shreds.
Millicent said... Exactly, I thought the same thing. So if at the time, Jon and Kate were still legally married but she was pushing him out of the house, he could still take things, including back up disks to their shared computer. ---------- I was thinking that was the reason she couldn't get criminal charges--because they were still legally married, although separated -- Much harder bar to prove than a civil suit. Also, wouldn't the intent figure into this? If he was just checking online accounts to uncover money stashes, that is on thing. But, maybe accessing her email accounts with the intent to embarrass, expose, profit from damage or harm is something more serious.
The hacking story was everywhere in 2009. I had just started following stories then, and I remember it.
The Perez Hilton article confirmed what I was wondering about. It seems that she got wind of Robert's intention of re-releasing the book so she filed a lawsuit to try and stop it. I think it really is all smoke and mirrors. I hope for Jon's sake that the Judge who eventually throws this case out will make her pay all of his legal costs.
5,000 is only what she's valued the computer at. She *****
That alone is hilarious. Was the computer plated in 14K gold? New computers are like new cars - the minute you "drive them off the lot," they decrease substantially in value. You can easily buy a brand new computer for $1,000 or less these days, desktop or laptop. Of course, there are more expensive models, but I really doubt they had some sort of super computer in their home at that time. The value is very off (just like Kate, I might add!)
She didn't value the computer at $5,000. Read the complaint for yourself rather than relying on the blog's administrator to interpret it for you. Item 47. The claim is that they caused in excess of $5,000 damage by accessing the computer and computer services, not that the computer itself was valued at 5K.
Just started reading through the comments, but isn't TFW really opening herself up to a lot of questioning. What about all the former nannies, assistants, housekeepers, tv crew that had signed confidentiality agreements. If they are brought to the witness stand, and questioned about her abuse of the kids, does she think a jury is going to look favorably at her? I have not seen very many pro Kate comments regarding this latest more. Most say, her again, thought she was gone, running out of money looking for a fast buck. And it's done nothing for her book sales, she back to 1-3 per day.
If this case gets far enough, the discovery phase should be quite interesting. Maybe TFMJG doesn't realize discovery is a two-way street??
_____________________ Yes, indeed. Depositions can be brutal. They can take days and days, and even weeks. I would think that Kate would know that, having been the defendant in Sylvia's lawsuit.
976 sediments (sic) from readers:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 976 Newer› Newest»Kate used to take delight in the fact that she was so hated and as far as I can tell, the fact that she was hated actually got her the DWTS job. So I don't know how she can claim that she lost work due to her bad reputation.
Marie
No one of these fans thinks about how this hurts others. They just think about vengeance.
88888888888888
Speaks volumes, doesn't it?
I think Kate has opened up a can of worms. She can't see it because all she cares about it making Jon pay, one way or the other. This time, IMO, she has the shoddy attorneys. If there is a conspiracy stinking up this whole thing, it's BV, Kate and ROL.
That reminds me, some people were complaining about giving the kids shrimp, but if you've seen the commercials for Red Lobster they advertise all you can eat shrimp for $15.99 and includes salad and biscuits.
That's really no more expensive than any regular plate of food when you eat out. And for kids it may cost even less, though I can't find the kiddie price.
It certainly as good a deal as Chipotle, which is not all you can eat and will cost at least over 10 bucks a pop by the time you order your drink and guac and so on.
I think too that a lot of this vengeful behavior on the part of TFW fans are due to the fact that they have so much vested with fighting with the haters that they can't be reasonable people anymore.
Marie
Her fan base are a few college students and those whackjobs Milo & Goody. She has bought everyone else.
_______________________
What? You mean those hundreds and hundreds of tweets today aren't from her adoring fans? How can that be? The sheeple swear up and down that she doesn't buy followers!
If Kate say's yes what Jon and Robert did ruined me.
Couldn't their lawyer say well you had K+8 for two seasons and. You were in the media with your marathons and.
Your cruise and you were on talk show such as Katie Wendy Williams and you were just in people magazine.
And she was doing countless interviews during K+8 and her run with CC.
How can she prove that Jon and Robert messed her up in the media?
Yes if anything her notorious reputation is why she gets work.
Other moms of multiples don't get work. I don't see Becki Dilley or any other family TLC has featured going on DWTS.
Octomom got a LITTLE work, and guess what, she's notorious too! Coincidence?
Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said... 177
Yes if anything her notorious reputation is why she gets work.
____
Didn't she just admit this in her people interview?
And if she did how will she spin her own words to a judge?
I hate the "c" word but a friend gave me another perspective: it is a useful organ and one for pleasure.
That certainly does not describe TFW.
On the other hand, there is Greek mythology.
Currently, kate is bringing to mind
the Gorgons, sisters with serpents for hair. Specifically, she brings to mind
Euryale, whose screams could kill.
(I take this as figuratively and literally).
She would literally have to prove that she went in for a job interview and the ONLY reason they didn't hire her is because they read Robert's book about the child abuse and now don't want to hire her. Can she really prove such a thing? Any employer is going to cover all their bases and list multiple reasons not to hire her, not just that. Plus, most places are allowed not to hire you without fear of repercussions, unless it was blatant discrimination.
And then you run into, but you are, or were at least, a child abuser. So, there's that. I mean, why SHOULD you get a job if you abuse children? It's a legitimate thing to legally deny someone a job. In CA it's called the Child Abuse Index and if you're on it, they have every legal right to deny you employment. And I don't believe PA is all that interested in hiring child abusers in light of recent events. I really can't picture a judge saying yes Kate you were right they were SOO wrong to deny you a job just because you were a child abuser how dare they. It's not gonna happen. What is she thinking? Her temperature reading on this situation is so off. She really is off in her own little world on this, on another planet.
Go Robert, check it out. He is about to keep his promise.
http://gosselinbook.com/
Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said... 168
I hope she has her jury. A jury in PA? The one state that really has her number. What is she thinking? She's going to be face to face with tax payers who have funded her lifestyle and her little whims for years. So yeah good luck with that.
Can Kate ask to have the case heard in another state if she thinks she won't get a fair shake with the citizens of PA?
Zelda said... 185
Go Robert, check it out. He is about to keep his promise.
http://gosselinbook.com/
____
What!!!!!. Okay I will buy this book if it's coming.
By the way, http://gosselinbook.com/, it's the new book cover. I love Robert Hoffman. And just maybe, the serpent has pushed Jon too far this time.
Yes she can ask for a change in venue but those things are RARELY granted. Only in the movies and occasionally for very big cases. They often ask for it but no way would she get that.
Love the new book cover. Says it all.
The expression "let sleeping dogs lie" comes to mind right about now.
"Coming soon" says Robert Hoffman. TFW is too stupid for words. What the hell is she thinkin?
She just proves over and over what a venomous woman she is. I shall buy Roberts book AGAIN.
What is she thinking? Her temperature reading on this situation is so off. She really is off in her own little world on this, on another planet.
------------------------
Once again, as so many have said all along...she just doesn't think.
Did someone say that they want Oreo cookies? :)
I read the Radar comments. They are usually very articulate, but scathing. Scathing.
The People article is fresh on their minds, especially the part about not working. The temperature on that seems to be she needs to get a J-O-B and stop trying to make money through things like lawsuits. That this is just out of spite since obviously Jon has no money. And that she doesn't work because of her own personality not anyone else so stop blaming others.
She's lost the general public. Completely lost them. They're done.
Take it with a grain of salt, but someone is saying they found she and Steve had set up an organization called the Korean-American Pharmacists Association of NYC. Presumably, to hide assets.
This is what she should have done. Ignored Robert's book or perhaps if she must issued a general denial of it. Then SHUT UP.
With all due respect to Robert it wasn't that well written or organized. It would have died within a few weeks at most months, and people would never have brought it up again except at places like here but who cares about here ;).
Now, he's published a book that looks and sounds better and promises to reveal even more dirt. I firmly believe that never would have happened had she not poked him. He would have felt satisfied he got the information out there and probably moved on.
What a total idiot.
In many ways, Kate and Robert have been in their own feud and we all know the best thing to do when that happens is ignore, ignore, ignore. She chose not to ignore, and she has no one to blame but herself.
Jon said she is sitting on a pile of money. I believe him. I would not put it past her and Steve to be cohorts in hiding money. If that is the case, maybe there is and has been more to their relationship than we have imagined. I told you guys she opened up a can of worms.
Like Robert's cover.
This is a small, yet perfect example of how this was a bad idea. Now, it's out there. Someone has posted about some company that allegedly hides assets. Whether or not it's true, there are many people who will read that and take it as fact. It makes her look sneaky and two-faced.
It may be completely false, but the point being, would that person have posted that info had Kate not gone on a rampage today? Doubt it.
Wouldn't it be hilarious if TLC paid Jon & Robert legal bills?
Here's a link to that company she supposedly did to hide assets. If you don't want to post it that is ok. I didn't know if you knew about this link.
I don't know that she did it to hide money or not. Somewhere someone said it was common for people to do this but i can't remember the reasoning behind it.
http://appext9.dos.ny.gov/corp_public/CORPSEARCH.ENTITY_INFORMATION?p_nameid=3876840&p_corpid=3871296&p_entity_name=k8%20&p_name_type=A&p_search_type=BEGINS&p_srch_results_page=0
Oops I sent wrong link. But it is the one for her K8, Inc 'company'
"Coming soon" says Robert Hoffman. TFW is too stupid for words. What the hell is she thinkin?
----------------
Where does it say "coming soon?" I guess I'm not looking in the right place.
I just re-downloaded my copy of The Book but I will buy it again when available. I will not ask for an updated copy, i will buy it again. Does anyone else get the feeling that TFW knows The Book is going to be re-released and this is her attempt to make a preemptive strike? All she's succeeded in doing is bringing attention to The Book and now more people will want a copy of it. It will be poetic justice if it comes out at the same time as the cookbook and outsells it. Karma is a bitch.
I think that's her K8, Inc thing which was probably fine, although not knowing much about it who knows.
I don't see the Korean organization. That sounds much more suspicious especially since it's about a specific trade organization that has absolutely nothing to do with who she is.
It's kind of sad that KK say's she doesn't have time for a job.
But she has time to file a lawsuit and go to court if needed.
So who's going to watch the poor kids while mom is suing dad???
I did see a link once for the Korean one but I guess I didn't bookmark it. sorry for the goof up.
Very nice book cover, Robert, and love your timing.
Kate Gosselin @Kateplusmy8 1h
Watching 1 of our absolute favorite movies, 'Fly Away Home' all together in the boys room
*********
I wonder if Kate's told the kids that she's suing their father yet. They are going to hear it soon...
If it's proven that she hid money during the divorce won't that open another can of worms? I'd think that at the very least the IRS might be a little interested. All it takes is for one person to put the bug in their ear and forensic accountants will dig in.
OMG they have a upcoming reality show about nurse on MTV looks like KK messed up again.
Maybe tlc WILL help with those being sued by TFMJG. After all, those depositions might include info about the divorce. Like who paid for TFMJG divorce lawyer. That will make their network look soooo good, dontcha think?
Is there someone in discovery communications head offices now asking how they can make TFMJG go away?
Fly away home is about a real single dad who would do anything for his daughter. Oh and he had a girlfriend.
Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said... 5
Fly away home is about a real single dad who would do anything for his daughter. Oh and he had a girlfriend.
___
Interesting.....
Someone help the little ole lady out? Where is anyone seeing that Robert's new book is coming out? I see a new posting on his site, but that is all. I don't see coming soon at all.
Kate made the comment that she's not the same person she was back then. Boy, she got that one right. She's worse.
In Fly Away Home, she didn't want to live with him, but he was patient with her and didn't push her. Eventually she ended up very happy with him.
Someone help the little ole lady out? Where is anyone seeing that Robert's new book is coming out? I see a new posting on his site, but that is all. I don't see coming soon at all.
---------
I don't see it, Remona. I saw the cover. Someone tweeted that he has a new post up. I couldn't find that either.
In Kate's mind re: Fly Away Home she IS both single mom/dad to her orphan children, so this can be a favorite movie. Funny tho how she is able to file suit against a dead dad. Tomorrow she will be tweeting about how the children really wish she had a bf in her life like the dad in the movie has a gf. Jon does not exist, well, now he does as a defendant in a lawsuit. Batshit crazy.
HOLY SH*T! You are crazed, TFW, you are CRAZED!
I think Robert's new book cover looks fantastic!
I also think TFW will be in for the surprise of her life when BV drops her like a hot potato. He made her think he would go to the mat for her, but when things get sticky with this lawsuit, and they will, he will dump her sorry butt good and fast. She is too self-absorbed to realize he has just been using her for publicity and his own gain.
Wow. Just wow.
Glad I ordered her cookbook when I did. I'm sure the price is going to go up again. It dropped to $13, so I'll get it for that price.
KimmyD @KmmieD 1m
@Kateplusmy8 You should make a deal w Jon to drop the lawsuit if he lets the kids back on TV. I miss those lil rascals
This is the mindset of the sheeple...exploitation of the kids for their own entertainment and enjoyment.
What a world...
On the last page of the lawsuit, I noticed Kate signed "Kate Gosselin". Isn't her official name Katie, not Kate. Is it legal for her to sign a legal document without using her legal name? Or, did she legally change her name to Kate?
KK can't go to work cause she's to busy filing lawsuits.
You should make a deal w Jon to drop the lawsuit if he lets the kids back on TV. I miss those lil rascals
&&&
Do they see the irony in such statements when they look at the new cover with eight little pawns?
Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said... 184
She would literally have to prove that she went in for a job interview and the ONLY reason they didn't hire her is because they read Robert's book about the child abuse and now don't want to hire her. Can she really prove such a thing? Any employer is going to cover all their bases and list multiple reasons not to hire her, not just that. Plus, most places are allowed not to hire you without fear of repercussions, unless it was blatant discrimination.
******
Well, we know that Kate has not been applying for jobs. She's been hinting and hoping some network would take an interest in featuring her in another reality show, or as a talk show host. Wishing for a job on TV is not the same as applying for a job.
Further, didn't she do Celebrity Wife Swap after Hoffman's book was published then withdrawn from sale? If so, that would seem to detract from her claimed damages.
I am very surprised she got an attorney to take this case. I can only figure that the attorney is charging her an hourly rate, and not taking a percentage of any settlement. She would have to pay him a large up front retainer as well.
I would like to ask this to you, kate.
What would Jesus do?
You remember Him, don't you?
Waiting with my Visa close at hand, Robert.
Hurry up!
@XXXXXXXX
A complaint (lawsuit) does NOT include all specifics, merely the basis, of the lawsuit. Methods will be disclosed as case progresses.
____________
One of the necessary components of a complaint is that it must state the cause or causes of action against the defendants. I am more familiar with personal injury cases, so I'll use those as examples.
Someone runs a red light and hits your vehicle in an intersection. You are injured. You lose time from work, and lose income. You have medical bills. You have to hire others to clean your house, etc. If you file a lawsuit, you will list the appropriate causes of actions, which in California would include "general negligence", "motor vehicle," etc. It's important to include those that apply because otherwise, a defendant can say you don't have a cause of action against him or her.
So a lawsuit must state all the causes of action, but it does not need to state every little specific.
As a non-attorney, I think Jon's defense attorney should attack the portion of the complaint that says he illegally obtained the computer disks. If what Robert said is true, neither Jon nor Robert illegally obtained the computer disks. An item thrown out into the garbage and placed out for pick up is free game.
It's a case of she said/he said. So Kate will claim that she didn't throw the discs out and that they were stolen from her home. Jon and Robert will say that Jon was moving his stuff out, Robert was helping him, and that Kate threw out the stuff Jon couldn't pack in one night. Robert returned the next day and retrieved them from the garbage. They are each other's witnesses.
Without any other proof (such as a video of Robert breaking into the home and stealing the discs; or Jon doing the same), it's going to be a case of which witness the jury finds more believable.
If there is a police report, that can be introduced as evidence. However, I don't think the police report includes citations for theft, or else they would have at least taken Jon or Robert in to the station. So that's not going to be much help.
I think Kate's goal is to make Jon's life miserable, drain him financially, etc. She apparently has the funds to do so. But if Jon can hang in there, convince a judge or jury that these claims are false, that there is no cause of action against him, perhaps he can win on a demurrer or motion for summary judgment.
Do they see the irony in such statements when they look at the new cover with eight little pawns?
_______________________________
I'll bet dollars to donuts they haven't made the connection.
On the last page of the lawsuit, I noticed Kate signed "Kate Gosselin". Isn't her official name Katie, not Kate. Is it legal for her to sign a legal document without using her legal name? Or, did she legally change her name to Kate?
---------------------
The plaintiff is Kate Gosselin. She signed her name Katie I. Gosselin. There is an "i" in Katie, ended by the loop ("e"). At least that's the way I see it. If you search for her signature (eBay) she signs a definite Kate, not Katie, and without the "I" for Irene. She did use her legal name when she signed it.
chefsummer said... 22
KK can't go to work cause she's to busy filing lawsuits.
====
After what the kids earn for her, it's her secondary source of income... CanWeSue Inc.
I'm not sure how they figure Jon is holding up filming anyway. The children filmed CWS did they not? Kate said she didn't even ask him.
And I thought Kate Coyne actually explained it quite clearly. TLC has been happy to offer an update special to the family, however it's on the condition that Jon be a part of it too. According to Coyne's very clear description, it was actually KATE who refused such terms. So, if the fans want to see the children back on T.V. they're barking up the wrong tree here. Ironically they only have KATE to blame, who is simply being stubborn and childish about refusing to work with Jon again. She hates Jon more than she loves her fans. If she really loved her fans, she would put aside her hatred for one episode and just give the go ahead to it so they can have the update special they so long for. It is KATE holding up filming, though they never seem to want to admit this.
So much irony today.
The Twitter sheeple were quiet tonight, but the bots were out in droves, even the ones from Venezuela. Strange, since you'd think the fans would be grinning from ear to ear.
And if Kate bankrupts Jon and sends him to prison (in her mind), he'll be out of the picture and she can film that update with TLC.
I love the new cover of the book as well.
96. The defendants' actions violate the federal and Pennsyvania statutes set forth in this complaint, and also constitute a violation of Kate Gosselin's privacy.
Privacy? Ask your children about privacy Kate.
This complaint seems hastily put together and at times doesn't make a lot of sense, like the rant about going through garbage. It almost has the feel of client-appeasement. Drawing something up, anything up, just to try to make the client happy and calm them down. I can picture Kate going on and on about the garbage unable to get off the subject until finally they said fine fine here we mentioned the garbage.
I tried to access the docket to see if anything is scheduled, but they make you pay 10 cents per page. I'm not giving one lousy dime for that woman. We might have some people here though who can take a look at it and keep track of it, I recall last time there were some people in various fields who had easy access to dockets for free.
By the way, the docket is completely public record so there is nothing wrong with looking at it.
By the way, the docket is completely public record so there is nothing wrong with looking at it.
====
Maybe we should wait until they throw it out of court, then we can go through the garbage and retrieve it.
I think that Jon has some assets--like, possibly retirement accounts, annuities, etc. --you can be cash poor and still living paycheck to paycheck. Otherwise, where are the damages supposed to come from? It doesn't make sense.
Another sad day for those poor kids. It has got to be absolute hell for them. If the lawsuit goes forward, I guess a lot of our questions will be answered. I am tired of speculating on what happened on that fateful night. As far as I am concerned, all of the parties have failed to act in the interest of the 8 innocent lives that are being publicly shredded, so I won't shed a tear for either of those idiots.
I have looked at various celebrity websites who have carried this lawsuit story today and the comments are brutal on every one of them.
When Robert's book became available online, I recall hustling to download it, it was there and gone in pretty quick order. So, how many people even knew Robert's book was out there with all it's damning information......not many.
In her STUPIDITY, she has brought attention to the book's content and if this does goes to court, the people she has scorned will be lining up to support the claims Robert has brought to light. Her rage, her vengeance, her QUEST to ruin the father of her children knows no bounds. The irony is she will bury herself faster than Robert ever could have. She brought his short-lived online book to the forefront, and Robert and Jon will finally have their day in court! What a fool.
That corporation was the same one we have already discussed here, and has bee discussed on other blogs--the one that says it is a foreign entity. I think that the Korean Pharmacists (or whatever it is), is a dba (doing business as), not the corporate name.
Just read the filing papers and thought that the wording of the hacking sounded familiar.
This is an article from October 2009 ( there are many more, too)
http://www.accesshollywood.com/kate-gosselin-profoundly-disturbed-over-allegations-jon-hacked-into-her-accounts_article_24282?__source=rss%7Clatest_news
“Kate Gosselin has heard the allegations made by Stephanie Santoro that Jon Gosselin ‘hacked’ into her e-mails, phone, and online accounts, and she is profoundly disturbed by them,” the statement from Kate’s lawyers to Access Hollywood read. “Under the circumstances, Ms. Gosselin is carefully considering all of her legal options regarding this matter and she will pursue them if and when the time is right.”
What is puzzling is that the filing specifically states that the hacking activity was discovered recently.
I got Robert's book when it first came out. Tonight I wanted to check a date, so looked at it again. It appears to be a revised edition that has been edited to eliminate a lot of repeated material and add some new items. I am now getting to a discussion about the divorce that I don't remember from before.
If Robert has released a new version would it automatically update by itself?
Here's the new cover
http://www.gosselinbook.com/
Kate Gosselin is a Child and Animal abuser. The only thing she has said over and over again is the "information was obtained Illegally" She does NOT deny what was said isn't true. She says Jon stold from her.She abused the kids and all she's worried about what Jon did? Really TFW?
So you had the cover of People. I didn't take the time to hide your cover or even look at it...Prince William and Katharine had my attention.
Get a real job TFW. You are such a HASBEEN... How do you feel knowing that Honey Boo Boo is more of a story than you. And how about the duck dynasty people? Yes TFW all idiots can get a spot on the NY best sellers list. How is ur crook book doing?
What a puke! Your children will out sell you. And I will buy Jon's book just to stick it to you. To get the truth out.
Kate...you ARE a Child and Animal Abuser. Tick tock TFW...You are done!
Haven't read all the comments, but I'm sure someone's already mentioned the part "Plaintiff has no adequate remedy of law for Defendant's continued violation..."
Does this not say, in clear language, black and white, that SHE HAS NO LEGAL STANDING???
Does anyone think that Kate found out that Robert's book was going to be re-released and that's why she filed suit?
Marie
I followed the Casey Anthony case closely. I read all the discovery..to bad TFW didn't file in Florida with the Sunshine Laws. Anyway, at least in criminal cases, in order to introduce texts and phone records they have the record-keeper from the phone company authenticate them. In order to introduce police reports they have to have the police officer testify. Would these same rules apply here? I mean, is TFW really ready to go to all these lengths and pay all these people for this?
It is on Philly Action News right now. Blech. I haven't seen one article that doesn't have scathing comments about both of them yet.
Are TFW's attorneys also BV's attorney?
The lawsuit, it appears, has been cocked up to threaten Jon and Robert. With Robert responding with a posting of the cover (I love it!), it proves to me that she has been aware of his new book and probably has had her attorneys threatening them for many months. If Robert has done this publication right this time, he should have all his legal ducks in a row and must feel confident. Maybe Jon's veiled threat about speaking out was also in response to Kate's attorneys. Sure, Jon and Robert (and laughably the 20 John and Jane Does) will have to respond to the lawsuit, but their attorney(s) surely are prepared.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out, and Kate has the money to make trouble, but I got to believe she has overplayed her hand this time. Facts trump lies.
Lori • 9 hours ago
She has a nursing degree.... why doesn't she do something with that? I mean, I would not want her as a nurse, but she could certainly start or run a home health agency.
1 •Reply•Share ›
BigTuna212 Lori • 3 hours ago −
Lori,seriously,would you want her as a nurse. If I had 2 broken legs and a cracked pelvis and she walked in as my nurse; I'd slither out of bed and down the hall like an inch worm to get away.
*********
Please indulge me and post this comment from the Radar article. The visual had me spewing coffee this morning!
I think Kate will come out of this quite scathed, given that she is roundly hated by the public. People will rally around Jon, more people will know what Kate wrote in her journal and will find out how she abused her children and defrauded the public, how she conspired to perpetuate a false image of living hand to mouth and how she was cashing in on the show, raking in 6-figure deals all behinds the scenes.
The genie is out of the bottle and no amount of finger pointing at Jon and Robert will mitigate what she has admitted to doing in her own words, which she is tacitly saying is all true, by this very lawsuit.
And then you run into, but you are, or were at least, a child abuser. So, there's that. I mean, why SHOULD you get a job if you abuse children? It's a legitimate thing to legally deny someone a job. In CA it's called the Child Abuse Index and if you're on it, they have every legal right to deny you employment.
***********************************************
Here here! applause applause
Especially since she refused to get help or own up to the abuse. The fact that she confessed in writing that she KNEW she could seriously harm those kids but did not seek any professional help? Everyone deserves a chance, gosh even the people on dr phil get second chances, if you're willing to accept responsibility and work to change.
And how can she say that the book is what caused her to not get any work? TLC FRICKEN SAW & TAPED THE ABUSE AND SHE STILL WAS EMPLOYED.
I wonder if any of the kids can sue Kate (and maybe Jon) for invasion of privacy etc. because they were unable to consent to filming as a child.
I know they should be able to, given that there will forever be footage of them peeing, pooping, naked, vomiting...
The kids were contractually bound to appear and film, given very little time off from filming if they were ill etc. It explains a lot when you see how filming pushed through with sick, vomiting, constipated, injured kids.
The story had hit TMZ and the comments are hilarious and/or obscene. The funniest one I can post: ” brought to you by the next Dina Lohan”.
Commenters on TMZ are often obscene, and they have suggested creative ways to get TFMJG to shut up, none of which can be repeated here.
TFMJG may think this lawsuit will get her another poor pitiful me sobbing with bills in my purse tour. That prior tour around the time of the divorce was brought to us all by TLC. I don't think there will be the same interest or sponsorship this time around.
TFMJG is once again squandering any opportunity for positive publicity or to recreate her image.
Besides, didn't some of what's in the book come out during Kevin and Jodi testimony before rep murt committee? This is just going to be one more opportunity for that to get rehashed in public.
Hey, TFMJG, this is not going to have any effect on your family court judge either. Except they have more evidence that the children should spend more time with their father. You know, the reasonable parent.
As far as I am concerned, all of the parties have failed to act in the interest of the 8 innocent lives that are being publicly shredded,
---------------------------
I think that one of the reasons that Jon is being sued is because of revenge. She still blames him for not continuing the show. The divorce appears to have been the result of his refusal to stand with her. He pulled out because he didn't want the kids filmed. She couldn't make it on her own in the entertainment industry. In my opinion, his refusal to keep putting those children on display most definitely was acting in the interest of those eight children, and now he's paying for it.
I wonder if Hailey is the "ms doe"? She backed out of helping tfw now she's part of the team that TOOK HER DOWN!
FYI-our local morning radio "entertainment gossip" segment had a say about this fiasco.
Small city in Canada no less!
Quotes from Jon's interview with Round Table
So there is still a battle. Do you think it will ever get better?
That’s because my former wife sees it as ownership and not as togetherness. I just want to do what’s best for the kids.
***********************************************
The lying, all the crap in between, is just ridiculous
*******************************************
‘Whatever you want to do I’ll do it. If you want to live here, I’ll fight tooth and nail for you to live here.
**********************************************
Going back to quitting the show, it wasn’t a good business decision. It was a horrible business decision. I destroyed everything but it was a moral thing and any time morals are involved you know there is going to be huge sacrifice. Whether it’s financial or time or anything like that but…they’re free now. I’m free now. So what’s the payoff? Freedom. To have a normal childhood where they can have their own friends outside of school, they can have friends up here, friends down there, I’ll take them anywhere, they can go to birthday parties and just be normal kids.
************************************************
I’ve read that you and your former wife have made peace with each other?
That’s not true.
***********************************************
She says the kids want to do this and I’m saying, they’re right here saying something else, so she’s speaking for them and they’re speaking for themselves when they are here.
********************************************
Honestly Jimmy, I haven’t spoken in 4 years, so now I’m doing stuff and it is all coming out because I don’t care anymore. Are you going to sue me? I don’t care. I’ll go to court by myself and for what? For freedom of speech? For freedom of expression? For actually telling the truth? I’m not under injunction anymore and I think that’s the fear of the network and the fear of my former wife but the truth is actually going to come out because one day, I’m just going to snap. Then it is all going to come out. I’m not bashing her but she has got to do what’s right for the kids. You know? When lies come out, I’m going to defend myself. I’ll go to court and tell the judge, here’s the proof, this is what my child wants, and no more B.S. and branding and marketing and product placement. They’re children. The court’s job is to protect the children, not us. The state doesn’t care about us. The state cares about the kids and to uphold the law, so do whatever. I have no fear anymore. I have no fear of the network. I don’t have fear of my former wife.
You don’t have to answer to anyone?
Nope. And I know I’ll be fine. You know, finances are finances and it’s rough right now but finances are rough for everybody. I’m no different. I just happened to be on television. I just happened to do this. I happened to be from here. Who cares?
***********************************************
Seems like he KNEW there was a lawsuit coming.
Those poor poor kids, unbelievable.
I truly believe the only outcome she wants and ever wanted was for him to lose ALL custody. He said it-OWNERSHIP.
Let's turn lemons into lemonade. What was posted by ROL, courtesy of Bullyville, is plastered all over the Internet. Robert's original book is now in the spotlight with some of the damning excerpts making mainstream. People who may never heard of the controversy are now asking themselves, what is in Kate's journal? And with a re-release, which I believe will happen, Robert's book will get major attention. She literally has shot the nose off her face with this tactic. All BV cares about is the publicity, his attorneys make money and get their names in the press (my guess the other firm was recommended by BV's), and Kate looks like a vindictive, disparate witch. Controversy sells, as we well know. Robert and Jon hopefully can raise money through appearances to their legal fees. I hate to see this explode, but there is no way the kids will not be affected by all this. It's too late. This has been brewing for a year.
http://cartwheel.target.com/
*****
How did Kate not get to be a Target spokesperson for this?:
http://cartwheel.target.com/
Instead, she's got a crappy looking coupon site that has been 0 for 1 thus far, is not being promoted daily and doesn't rank high enough to be on at least the first 3 pages of Google results when you put in any of the "featured" stores on her page + coupon code.
Sad, but not surprising, really.
Remona Blue said... 39
Someone help the little ole lady out? Where is anyone seeing that Robert's new book is coming out? I see a new posting on his site, but that is all. I don't see coming soon at all
*****
Remona - If you hover your mouse over the book cover, "Coming Soon" appears in a little box. I didn't see it at first either.
He went and picked up the garbage because she clearly said she'd throw out whatever Jon left. He took it all home for Jon. The only reason there were things left is because she called the police, Jon and his FRIEND Robert were escorted out. Trash goes out the next day-SHE PLACES THE TRASH AT THE CURB. Robert went and got it FOR HIS FRIEND JON. They go through it and VOILA! Was it legal for her to throw Jon's possessions in the trash? She tells him to come collect his belongings and then calls the cops?
Wonder if Jon would have even taken the disks etc. had he been permitted to move out like a decent human being? Plus, if he was living up over the garage, why were HER PERSONAL DIARIES, DOCUMENTS ETC. in there in the first place?
As far as the bank accounts? Why were they HERS? They werent' divorced at that time? Wouldn't they be BOTH their bank accounts? Because she was HIDING MONEY.
Kate Gosselin is a woman at a loss. She lost her fame as TLC's reality TV darling and with it most of her income. She also had her dignity taken away thanks to last year's scathing tell-all book, Kate Gosselin: How She Fooled the World...
Read more at http://www.philly.com/philly/entertainment/20130827_Sideshow__Kate_G__sues_Jon_G_.html#3FIgLJYxH8y37xmQ.99
Isn't this similar to what Em Tanner said to TFW? Something like, "I'm sorry you lost your way"?
Both the fans and the haters have been unusually quiet. I guess they can't get a word in edgewise with all of the bots flooding Twitter. Kate's TL was dead in the water; this certainly brought it to life.
Jon, Robert and the attorneys will now have to go through this complaint and mark "admitted" or "denied" to each point. It will be interesting to see what they do with #35, the "untrue" allegations.
Well people magazine online pick up the story. I bet she's making them look bad now.
I bet they wish they never did her "I've chamge interview".
"Upon information and belief Defendents John and Jane Does 1 thru 20 are individuals whose names and addresses of residence are unknown".
******************************************
Does this mean she's suing 20 people who were in on this 'theft', but she doesn't know WHO THEY ARE? WTF?
One of the six sheep is always talking about nails in coffins. I think that Kate just put one in hers with this lawsuit. In my opinion, this was the dumbest of all of her stunts. This just may be the one to do her in. I think that even fans are going to turn away when they see that this was done out of hatred for Jon and the kids' welfare comes second.
Anyway, at least in criminal cases, in order to introduce texts and phone records they have the record-keeper from the phone company authenticate them. In order to introduce police reports they have to have the police officer testify. Would these same rules apply here?
&&&
I assume PA has an evidence code so yes, you have to follow the rules of authentication whether it's civil or criminal, per your code.
Emails and texts are a hassle. A hassle. If someone is objecting, it's a royal pain to get them in. However, sometimes no one objects and then it's not a problem.
Question what kind of writer would not know if her hard driver is missing?
So it's theft and invasion of privacy?
In her IJWYTK, did she not INVADE her children's most inner thoughts and feelings and plastered them in a book for the world to see?
Wasn't it basically a book exposing all their "faults" (in her warped head) all the things they do to basically piss her off.
OT to TFW's last tweet. Didn't she say they only had two TVs or something? Now they are watching TV in the boys' room?
The kids were contractually bound to appear and film, given very little time off from filming if they were ill etc. It explains a lot when you see how filming pushed through with sick, vomiting, constipated, injured kids.
******************************************
Good point. We all read what Robert exposed. I recall another "damage control" episode where she claimed if any of the kids said they didn't want to be filmed or participate in a shoot/outing, they didn't. Bull$hit! I remember they TAPED AND SHOWED THE FOOTAGE OF THEM SAYING 'DONT' FILM ME'. Perfect example of a narcissists warped mind contradicting themselves in the same sentence.
Here's the problem even if Kate was telling the truth about. Jon & Robert being stealing and the journals were fake.
No one is going to believe her why cause she's lies/lied. So much and she's been caught lying so much.
It's like fool me once shame on me. Fool me twice shame on you. People are tired of her lying and trying to fool.
Auntie Ann, I will help you go thru trash anytime!
Sleepless, I am jellus of you and your Oreos! But I was consoled by finding the Real Deal - Hostess TWINKIES AND CUPCAKES! - on sale at my local 7-11 yesterday!
Here's the problem even if Kate was telling the truth about. Jon & Robert being stealing and the journals were fake. No one is going to believe her why cause she's lies/lied.
&&&
Yes I think this is what she doesn't understand. I think people either think it's malarky, or they actually think sure it could be true BUT for goodness sake it was just a hard drive calm down woman.
What she doesn't understand is that even if every last word of it is true, people now see her as a Dina Lohan. A lying, crying, stupid fame ho.
Sure it may be absolutely true you have no job, and that at one point your ex was trying to screw you over, and that various other bad things have happened to you. But quit your whining, nobody wants to hear it anymore. You whined one too many times.
By the way didn't Jon's text make it clear, if those are even true, that he was simply looking for ammunition in the middle of a nasty divorce? Remember at the time, this was right after Kate accused him of stealing money from the account. Kate was fighting HIM for full custody and all he was worth. That will come out too. From what I understand, he was looking for ammunition because SHE was attacking HIM first. Don't you have every right to gather as much info as you can to defend yourself? Or is he to just lay down and die when your wife tries to bury you in a divorce? Looking for evidence of her CHILD ABUSE to show to the judge in order to try to get more custody you have EVERY RIGHT TO DO. For all we know he did tell the judge all of that and for all we know that did play a role in his visitation time.
This is an article from October 2009
&&&
Wait a minute! She ADMITS in October 2009 she knew all about this. She has a BIG statute of limitations problem here. It's two years in PA for most causes of action.
I hope Jon and Robert's attorneys are aware of that article. I would be filing a motion to dismiss today due to the statute of limitations expiring alone and attach that article.
Wait a minute! She ADMITS in October 2009 she knew all about this. She has a BIG statute of limitations problem here. It's two years in PA for most causes of action.
I hope Jon and Robert's attorneys are aware of that article. I would be filing a motion to dismiss today due to the statute of limitations expiring alone and attach that article.
***********************************************
Please email him Admin. Or one of your sources
The texts about Jon grabbing the computer were from Hailey who doesn't want to be involved in this mess, remember?
http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/04/im-suing-kate-gosselin-for-releasing-my-texts-that-proved-jon-gave-computer-to-author-says-hailey-glassman/
I've had time to really read the complaint closely for the first time and I noticed this glaring lie right off the bat. They claim the book
Um, no. The book was removed from Amazon because they received a formal complaint that, if I recall, mostly talked about copyright violations, and it is their POLICY to remove a work if a formal complaint is filed UNTIL the courts or the parties work it out. They are not taking sides, they simply have an iron clad policy that books are not permitted to be on the site if a complain filed with them remains outstanding. Period. When it's resolved, they'll gladly put it back up.
Amazon is not judge and jury and Amazon never said or even implied they were removing it because it was obtained illegally. What a lie.
Formerly Duped said... 93
OT to TFW's last tweet. Didn't she say they only had two TVs or something? Now they are watching TV in the room?
********
I thought the same thing. She said they had no tv in their room. She was being a good mom by making sure they were all watching a movie and noone had access to the tv where they might see the story I guess. #snark
Tucker's Mom said... 74
Lori • 9 hours ago
She has a nursing degree.... why doesn't she do something with that? I mean, I would not want her as a nurse, but she could certainly start or run a home health agency.
1 •Reply•Share ›
BigTuna212 Lori • 3 hours ago −
Lori,seriously,would you want her as a nurse. If I had 2 broken legs and a cracked pelvis and she walked in as my nurse; I'd slither out of bed and down the hall like an inch worm to get away.
___________
This is to funny I know if KK was my nurse or my families nurse I'd be like "Oh heck no".
Oops I guess my copy and paste from the complaint didn't work. I said they claim the book was removed from Amazon because it was OBTAINED ILLEGALLY.
WTF? LOL that's not why it was removed.
I forwarded the damning article to both Jon and Robert. What they and their attorneys do with it is up to them.
That article basically buries her lawsuit as far as I'm concerned. You don't get to go around blabbing in 2009 you knew all about this alleged "hacking" then finally get around to suing in 2013. Law doesn't work that way.
Someone should email Jon and Robert the link to that article. Someone might also suggest to either of them to start a legal defense fund. I'd contribute a couple of bucks and I bet others would too.
If Robert has a publisher this time around, would the publisher's legal team rep them?
LOL From the complain, the conduct was "outrageous." I didn't realize being outrageous was a crime. What's that fall under, the Tort of Outrageousness?
Like someone mentioned the other day, they keep picturing someone shouting: You're out of order! You're out of order!
If money is all she wants from Jon, isn't the lawsuit a form of extortion or blackmail, somewhat? I read that she is asking for a specific amount, $5,000 from Jon. Why a specific amount and why $5,000? She needs $5,000 for something in particular?
Jon hasn't asked for anything in return from her all these years except for more time with the children and to stop filming over new year eve which was his custody time.
I truly believe the reason she doesn't have Marty Singer(her previous pit-bull of an attorney) representing her in this case is because he made it perfectly clear to her that she does not have a case.
Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said... 105
This is kind of like when she admit in her interview with Natalie Morales in 09' that she and Jon separated in 08'.
She was playing the poor scored wife when she knew she and Jon were done. She/TLC just had to cast him as a lying cheater.
“Whether Jon is behind this book or not, it’s wrong…and if everybody’s wrong, nobody is right.”
******
Amen, Hailey.
I read Jon's alleged texts again, but none ever admits to stealing Kate's hard drive. Not one.
Plans to and going to steak it, yes, IF they're authentic, but never anything that proves he actually did it.
For sure, Hailey will be dragged into this and although I do believe her relationship with Jon ended very, very badly, I think she'll choose his corner in this knock down, drag out fight, because Kate doesn't care who she hurts in her attempts to cut Jon out of the kids' lives.
I do believe that is the end game here. Jon and Robert do not have deep pockets, and probably, never, ever will. So what's to gain?
The kids and moving to L.A. or NYC to pursue fame.
Haven't read all the comments, but I'm sure someone's already mentioned the part "Plaintiff has no adequate remedy of law for Defendant's continued violation..."
Does this not say, in clear language, black and white, that SHE HAS NO LEGAL STANDING???
&&&
It's not a standing issue. Standing means you're not the one harmed. She was the one "harmed" there's no question about that, IF any of this harm occured.
I actually think they left out an important word in this boiler plate language, does anyone else? I think they meant to say plaintiff has no OTHER adequate remedy of law. Whenever you file a suit, you have to explain why this is the proper course of action. For instance why you should file in this court and why you should file this particular complaint. I have seen, rarely, things rejected because plaintiff has another adequate remedy at law, and then they will tell you what it is usually. (For instance, an appeal.)
They explained this court was proper because all the parties reside there, etc. So I think it's a typo and they left out no OTHER adequate remedy.
“Whether Jon is behind this book or not
&&&
The complaint sounds a little weak on whether they are sure Jon is behind the book. And now here was Hailey herself who doesn't even seem to know. If he is so, so guilty, why does no one seem to be able to definitively say he was involved? Even Hailey is wishy washy and she dated the guy.
Terri I think so too. Where's Martie? I am no Martie fan, but I would be shocked if he would get himself involved in something this wishy washy. This complaint looks very hastily thrown together and is full of speculation and inaccurate statements.
After reading the complaint, it seems to be they are throwing in a lot of legal mumbo jumbo on hacking and so on, but are very light and vague on the details of how they claim this went down. A lot of it is speculation. Oh well there's no WAY he could have collected all those documents from just the trash curb! (Um, sure you could, if the trash bags were numerous as they might be when throwing everything out, or if the info was in electronic form). They never say they really know that didn't happen for SURE, they are just using faulty logic to tell the court see LOGICALLY it couldn't have happened. That's not the same thing at all as having proof. Any such complaint should always be taken seriously, but especially in light of her statute of limitations problems I'm not sure this is going anywhere.
The complaint sounds a little weak on whether they are sure Jon is behind the book. And now here was Hailey herself who doesn't even seem to know. If he is so, so guilty, why does no one seem to be able to definitively say he was involved? Even Hailey is wishy washy and she dated the guy.
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
What I don't understand is the relationship between Robert and Jon. There are many reports out there claiming they were business partners, Exactly what business were the two of them in together?
Wouldn't it be funny if Robert's book is available on Amazon, sells more the first month than her cookbook total then his book is "bundled" with hers?
And even funnier, what if, after all this, her case is thrown out but his book gets published? And she alone was the one responsible for the book's popularity?
I read Jon's alleged texts again, but none ever admits to stealing Kate's hard drive. Not one.
Plans to and going to steak it, yes, IF they're authentic, but never anything that proves he actually did it.
&&&
No, they don't. Where is the final text in the puzzle a few days later--hey Hailey I got the hard drive!!! How come that's completely missing?
When making up fake texts, you might want to be sure you say they actually did the "crime" instead of just talking about it. He's allowed to talk about getting his hands on her hard drive especially to defend himself in a divorce. For all we know he might have just walked up to the house, knocked on the door and asked for it. Nothing illegal about that.
Even Hailey is wishy washy and she dated the guy.
****
Yes, everything published is speculative and in no way proves Jon physically took the hard drive and gave it to Robert.
Maybe they've got a "smoking gun", but this isn't it.
Kate ratchets up the language, thanking Hailey for "proof" Jon did it, but she's speculating.
It's that's all she's got, it's not proof positive.
It's a guy with a reason to get evidence to help defend himself in court.
If my DH backed up my computer's hard drive without my knowledge, is that illegal?
My laptop is what I use 99.99999999% percent of the time, but he'll hop on occasionally. He's allowed, of course, but the computer is considered mine.
But, we're married, living under the same roof? So would it be illegal for him to copy anything?
Here's another question-- why have a "security" team that leaves you wide open like this? Wouldn't that be part of protecting a client? Keeping private information private and safe, and employing experts to advise you and beef up your computer security?
Come on now, Jon doesn't work for the CIA or Dept. of Homeland Security, so we're not talking FBI wiretaps here.
In PA like most states anything you acquire during the marriage is considered marital property and you both may access it equally. If you want to designate something your separate property you actually have to put that in writing and nobody bothers to do that unless you're really wealthy and talking about huge assets. Not for some measly 700 buck laptop.
23 Pa.C.S.A. § 3501 Definitions (a) General rule.--As used in this chapter, "marital property" means all property acquired by either party during the marriage and the increase in value of any nonmarital property acquired pursuant to paragraphs (1) and (3) as measured and determined under subsection (a.1).
So if they bought the computer in the marriage he may have had every right to look at its contents.
Thanks, Admin.
This really seems to come down to Kate being royally pissed that the truth was exposed.
I think Kate underestimated Jon, big time.
That 2009 article proves that Kate had nothing back then to prove that Jon hacked into anything or she would have filed charges.
She filed a civil suit because there is no proof criminally beyond a shadow of a doubt. I believe the burden of proof in a civil case does not have the higher standard. This is all a publicity, money grab scheme to deny Jon his custody rights and bankrupt him.I keep referring back to that Naughty But Nice article a while back that Kate wants to move to LA. Wanna bet Jon has been standing in her way?
Any celebrity or person of interest (or, anyone) in their right mine should have their hard drives destroyed by professionals before throwing it out or at the very least wipe it yourself using your computer program built into most computers. It's just common sense. The law is the law, and once she put those files by the side of the road without wiping them first, they were fair game. It may be a harsh rule, but it's her own fault. Ignorance, haste, or an anger management problem is not an excuse. She should count herself lucky that some pedophile didn't get a hold of her 5,000 pictures and that it was just Robert and Jon.
Tucker's Mom said... 118
Here's another question-- why have a "security" team that leaves you wide open like this? Wouldn't that be part of protecting a client? Keeping private information private and safe, and employing experts to advise you and beef up your computer security?
____
Isn't this why she hired Steve and keeps him around?
Steve said that KK got threats via mail and e-mail so why didn't he notice something?
That article basically buries her lawsuit as far as I'm concerned. You don't get to go around blabbing in 2009 you knew all about this alleged "hacking" then finally get around to suing in 2013. Law doesn't work that way.
-----------
What? She knew about this in 2009? The complaint filed alleges ID theft. Statute of Limitations in PA for ID theft is four years from when it happened, or when it was discovered. I thought she just "discovered" it when the book was published.
I am so confused.
Wait a minute! She ADMITS in October 2009 she knew all about this. She has a BIG statute of limitations problem here. It's two years in PA for most causes of action.
&&&&&&&
Sorry, I read from the bottomup. Unless it's been changed, SL in PA is four years for ID theft, which means that perhaps the reason this is being filed now is because it will run out in October (if that's when she knew about it). However, it it happened in April, what took her six months to discover it?
What ID theft? That's the one thing I don't get.
Sorry, I read from the bottomup. Unless it's been changed, SL in PA is four years for ID theft, which means that perhaps the reason this is being filed now is because it will run out in October (if that's when she knew about it). However, it it happened in April, what took her six months to discover it?
&&&
As they say, something doesn't add up.
It would be typical TFW to file something on the LAST day before the SOL expires. You know so you can toy with your subject for four years first.
Filing for monetary damages from two guys who don't have much money begs the question: why file? To force them to settle, to STFU, or face bankruptcy. She is slick siting on a pile of cash throwing it to retain attorneys who won't get a dime from Jon or Robert because they can't reimburse those fees if they lose.
I wonder if Steve is sweating a little bit if this goes to trial.
I am going to try and schedule a Baltimore trip to the book festival. Several of my favorite authors will be there, it would be fun to go hear them speak. if I happen to see TFMJG I can report back if I also see the booby guard.
What ID theft? That's the one thing I don't get.
&&&&&
Allegedly stealing a password, gaining access to someone's personal computer, and therefore, their information, is ID theft.
Excuse me for my ignorance, but if she is only suing for $5,000, does that make this a small claims court case? Then why involve lawyers (who will charge more than $5,000 to try the case)? Don't people generally represent themselves in a small claims case?
Again though, there's potential problems here. They were married. Unless Kate specifically designated her computer as her separate property, her spouse would have every right to access it.
There's certain things you give up when you get married, and one is having your own little property all to yourself that no one is allowed to touch. Your husband can look at what he wants of yours. Unless you go to the trouble to designate it as separate property, you're out of luck. That's why you wouldn't see a lawsuit because your husband "stole" your car or "stole" this or that (unless we're talking post divorce which is different.)
Remember Breaking Bad when he moved back in against Skyler's wishes and she called the cops? The cops said sorry ma'am, you're married, and he's on the mortgage. He can be here.
5,000 is only what she's valued the computer at. She is vague on what other money she wants but does apparently specify other damages and attorneys fees etc.
It's all so silly anyway since Jon has nothing. What's the point?
Remember how Kate kept saying she was recently divorced, or divorced two years ago instead of four? Is that her way of trying to bamboozle her attorney, Jon's attorney, Robert's attorney AND a judge? Doe she really think everyone is that stupid?
PA Dutch Mom said... 129
Allegedly stealing a password, gaining access to someone's personal computer, and therefore, their information, is ID theft
Ahh...I just thought of using someone's ID to get loans, credit cards etc. Thanks for the clarification PA.
You know, I always thought the reason she put that deadbolt on her bedroom door was to keep Jon away from snooping prior to the divorce. It made sense to me because this would be the time a spouse would be looking for evidence ( a friend of mine discovered her husband was hiding a secret cash account from her prior to their divorce while going through his desk).
I gotta say this whole stolen hard drive thing is silly. As the IT guy, I am sure Jon backed up her computer, probably onto disks. Kate would have been too lazy to have bothered. So in my mind, the backups he did were with her permission until she locked him out, don't you think?
Remember how Kate kept saying she was recently divorced, or divorced two years ago instead of four? Is that her way of trying to bamboozle her attorney, Jon's attorney, Robert's attorney AND a judge? Doe she really think everyone is that stupid?
&&&
Yes, I think it's to make this all seem fresh and current. Jon JUST screwed her over so that's why she has to get back at him.
It is not in her best interest that people remember the truth, that this divorce was YEARS AGO. Because it makes her look like a harpy little shrew who can't let anything go. She wants you to think this is all so just yesterday. How stupid does she think we are?
Well, the story has hit the mainstream media. Free publicity for the re-release of Robert’s book.
None of the articles mention TFW’s cookbook though.
http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/gossip/la-et-mg-kate-gosselin-sues-jon-gosselin-hacking-lawsuit-tell-all-20130826,0,6727839.story
http://www.chicagotribune.com/videogallery/77171756/Gosselin-Accuses-Jon-of-Hacking#gl-0/c-3/t-48
http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/jon-kate-17-page-lawsuit-alleged-hacking-article-1.1437600
Is there a chance that she 'knew' about it sooner than Oct.? Oct might just be when she decided to sell the story about it. Maybe it was outside the 4 yr SL. (hoping)
Oh, thanks for the explanation Admin! I thought TFW was suing for $5,000 so Jon would settle and sign a non-disclosure. I figure that is the real point of the lawsuit; she wants to force Robert and Jon to settle, and in the settlement have them sign something saying they will not talk about her anymore to the media.
I think her pride and money are at stake as long as she has people telling the truth of her bad behavior. And there's nothing she values more than being able to control how people view her and having as much money as possible in the bank.
Because it can't be said enough, this all happened in the middle of a divorce when Kate was trying to BLEED HIM DRY and TAKE HIS KIDS. It's not like he was sitting there one day thinking hmmm how can I sucker punch Kate because I'm bored and that sounds like fun? Um, no, he was trying to keep his head above water and make sure he continues to see his children he loves because Kate and, might I had her high powered TLC attorneys, were trying to bury him for GOOD.
Seriously, who is going to get upset at any spouse and parent for simply wanting to find the ammunition he knows is there in order to defend themselves? People understand it. Lots of people have been through a divorce or seen one up close and they understand it.
She really, really misjudged this one. By a mile.
I would think that if backup disks are produced with the dates they were backed up, I believe this will either prove or disprove her allegations. If backed up prior to the divorce, she is toast. Robert said what he retrieved were disks.
"Does this mean she's suing 20 people who were in on this 'theft', but she doesn't know WHO THEY ARE? WTF?"
&&&&&&&&&&
I don't understand that at all. The sheeple were all excited that the process servers are going to be busy this week with the 20 people being sued. If the names and addresses are unknown, then they really are going to be busy trying to find them!
"She does NOT deny what was said isn't true."
&&&&&&&&&&
Starz, perhaps not online or in an interview, but it is stated in the complaint (#35) that the stories were not true. Problem is, if that's part of the complaint, she's going to have to either admit or deny the validity of those stories. Depositions will not be a day at the beach for her.
Remona Blue said... 39
If you move your cursor over the book cover it says, "coming soon"
The suit claims these 20 John and Jane doe's encouraged and supported Robert and Jon as they went about their evil plan to hack Kate.
Um, I don't think any of barely even hard of Robert back then when this allegedly happened, or if we did thought nothing of it--oh that's just a pap and Dana Hoffman's wife. We knew Dana but Robert was a tiny minor character in all this. Personally I didn't even recognize his name when he popped up last year claiming to have written a book, and some of us weren't even sure if he was really related to Dana at all!
Who is this secret society of 20 cheering them on and can we invite them to join us here?!
I agree, if the discs were backed up during the marriage she's pretty much out of luck.
Wouldn't Jon have known much of what was in the book? The abuse, the way she treated kids and pets, her outrageous demands, her schemes/scams?
What was in the computer or journal may have been familiar to him anyway.Does that count for anything legally?
Geez, a $5000 computer? Must have been a TLC freebie. Only the best for Kate.
Just curious: Wouldn't Robert have to wait for the lawsuit to settle before he releases his book? Just in case it is found out during the trial that he has obtained his information falsely?
Does anyone have any inside info about Robert releasing the book again. I'm assuming he's not kidding around here...
cuz, I'm buying it.
Those alleged texts from John to Hailey were just too much by a half. Why would he incriminate himself to a woman with whom he had a very volatile relationship? They sounded fake when I first read them and they sound even more fake today.
Maybe those 20 Does are ones like Hailey who could be refusing to help Kate so she is going after them for helping Jon.
All Jon has to say is he always backed up the computers to disks and last time he saw them they were in his garage apartment and presumed tossed in the trash by Kate (per her threat).
Boom, case closed.
I'm not clear if that would explain Robert having the emails. When I back up my computer I don't think that includes my emails as they are stored online. Maybe they were backed up as part of Kate's work on Multiple Blessings with Beth.
It comes down to her word against Jon and Robert and I didn't even read a hint of proof in that complaint, just some silly thing about the trash and how he couldn't have found all those pictures in the trash. That part was ridiculous.
How are they going to prove these twenty Jane and John Does cheered them on? Secret video from the pep rally they held?
Well, the story has hit the mainstream media. Free publicity for the re-release of Robert’s book.
&&&&&
I'm watching Fox News right now. Yep. They have the story.
Snippets..."They used to be reality television's happily married couple. so much for that. Remember that? Wish I didn't. They USED to be reality stars...years ago...but that was then. Kate alleges Jon hacked computer after they were separated and gave to Hoffman. It gets dirtier. Hoffman admits to picking through trash, including journals in which she admits to spanking the kids on a daily basis. Comment on The Spanker. She tried to raise some money getting herself back on television. Didn't work. Kate at 38...don't encourage it!"
No love there between Fox and Kate!
It comes down to her word against Jon and Robert and I didn't even read a hint of proof in that complaint, just some silly thing about the trash and how he couldn't have found all those pictures in the trash. That part was ridiculous.
******
I always assumed all the photos that Robert claims to have are digital, along with all the correspondence, contracts etc.
I never thought he was physically gathering them up, which again, would suggest that Kate throws out sensitive physical documents and photos without shredding them first.
So, that allegation seems cooked up to me.
Perez is reporting exclusively that his source says this is a SLAPP suit to stop Hoffman's book and draw attention to her cookbook.
http://perezhilton.com/2013-08-27-kate-gosselin-called-out-for-filing-slapp-suit-against-ex-husband-jon-gosselin#sthash.ceSkGTfX.rJwKZ7Vd.dpbs
Never thought I would say this but go Perez! That's right, this IS a SLAPP suit. Come on, we're not stupid about seeing the timing.
Is there a chance that she 'knew' about it sooner than Oct.? Oct might just be when she decided to sell the story about it. Maybe it was outside the 4 yr SL. (hoping)
&&&&&&
That's what is fishy. The "stealing" was done in April, but she didn't find out about it until October? If the hard drive was taken out of her computer, didn't she use that computer to access any information on it? She might have had multiple computers, but still...
Robert has insisted that this was not about a hard drive, but disks. Does Kate know the difference?
She knows this lawsuit will go on for years and most likely neither Jon nor Robert has the funds to see it through to the end and they'll buckle and agree to settle.
Hence, the difficulty in drafting SLAPP legislation, and in applying it, is to craft an approach which affords an early termination to invalid abusive suits, without denying a legitimate day in court to valid good faith claims.
****
This is from Wiki re: SLAPP suits.
So, does this support some theories that early termination might be anticipated, say, based on statutes of limitation or insufficient evidence (he said/she said sordid mess).
So, it could be an intimidation tactic. If so, it's sure is an expensive one.
It seems Blogger is eating some of my posts. so trying again...
If it is money all she wants from Jon and is telling him to pay or go to court, isn't that extortion? Or is there another label for that kind of action?
LB
If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck... Wiki also mentions including spurious defendants in the suit and attempting to identify anonymous critics or critics with pseudonyms.
The way I see it is this will backfire big time, for her that is. What she thought would garner interest in her cookbook will only create more interest in Robert's book, a big win for him. Sadly, the children remain the victims of her cruel behaviour in her ongoing attention seeking behavior.
bm
I found a trove of information regarding SLAPP suits. http://www.thefirstamendment.org/antislappresourcecenter.html#SLAPPing
One of the more interesting things is that Jon can file a SLAPPback which would make TFW liable for charges. If I recall correctly this was done a couple of years ago...I can't remember who did it but it was a successful move. Anyways...carry on. This episode of Kate+Hate is brought to you by Quilted Northern. "Luxury you can see and feel".
SLAPP suit? Would that be to finally get Jon to give in and allow her to what she wants, ie. to move/film the children?
bm
Terri said...
I truly believe the reason she doesn't have Marty Singer(her previous pit-bull of an attorney) representing her in this case is because he made it perfectly clear to her that she does not have a case.
****
Agree. There's a reason only BV and his lawyers are the only ones who would take a case like this.
SLAPP (144)
I think Perez hit the nail on the head. This is not about money. This is about bullying Jon and Robert into submission. She thinks Robert will back off and agree to withdraw the book for good, Jon will give her full custody, and she can move to LA, become the next Real Housewife, and be a big star. One problem, though--Robert has already shown that he is not about to let her push him around. She pushed, and he already pushed back, within hours of this suit being filed. Jon has stated that he doesn't care. He is going to fight for his kids, even if it bankrupts him. He let her bully him for too long, and I think he is done with it.
I bet TFW was on the phone, screaming at her lawyers first thing this morning. How dare Robert post that book cover! Stop him!!! Make him pay!!!!
I get the feeling that she is about to destroy herself. She is out for vengeance, and she is going to risk it all to get it. She could end up losing everything, and bankrupting herself as well as Jon. How is this supposed to benefit the kids? 10 years in the future, will she be telling them, "Sorry kids, but your college money is gone. I had to take your dad to court. Remember--we get what we get and we don't get upset. And you get nothing".
Remember this? Sorry, I don't know how to make it clickable: http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2013/04/im-suing-kate-gosselin-for-releasing-my-texts-that-proved-jon-gave-computer-to-author-says-hailey-glassman/
The thing that has always baffled me is why would Robert wait 2-3 years to publish a Kate Gosselin tell all, rather than at the height of her popularity, if he was in it for the money? That's just stupid, imo.
It's possible that Jon and Robert were in cahoots during the time of the divorce and concocted this plan to write a tell all, but again, why wait until Kate was no longer popular? Because of the gag order and a fear of being sued by TLC?
Some things just don't add up.
The "no other adequate remedy at law" language is the standard to get an injunction. It just means damage is being done or is about to be done that monetary damages alone won't be able to remedy. To get an injunction forcing return of the drives/disks or stopping the publishing of the book will require the filing of a motion for preliminary injunction, and most likely an evidentiary hearing.
Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said... 140
The suit claims these 20 John and Jane doe's encouraged and supported Robert and Jon as they went about their evil plan to hack Kate.
********************************************
Wondering if she's using the big email hacking scandal in the UK as her "precedent"? You know those evil p-p-pppaps! And how utterly shtoopid to say that allll that info couldn't have been in the trash? Is she that dense? Hoffman has maintained, even taking a polygraph test, that he found DISKS!! You're living under a rock if you don't know a computer disk can store tons and tons of information.
The suit claims these 20 John and Jane doe's encouraged and supported Robert and Jon as they went about their evil plan to hack Kate.
********
I wonder if Robert's one time friend and co-pap, Al Walentis will end up being at the top of the list of 20 Does.
Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said... 132
5,000 is only what she's valued the computer at. She
*****
That alone is hilarious. Was the computer plated in 14K gold? New computers are like new cars - the minute you "drive them off the lot," they decrease substantially in value. You can easily buy a brand new computer for $1,000 or less these days, desktop or laptop. Of course, there are more expensive models, but I really doubt they had some sort of super computer in their home at that time. The value is very off (just like Kate, I might add!)
You know, I always thought the reason she put that deadbolt on her bedroom door was to keep Jon away from snooping prior to the divorce. It made sense to me because this would be the time a spouse would be looking for evidence ( a friend of mine discovered her husband was hiding a secret cash account from her prior to their divorce while going through his desk).
********************************************
Exactly! She WAS hiding money. Jon's said it before.
Admin said:
Remember Breaking Bad when he moved back in against Skyler's wishes and she called the cops? The cops said sorry ma'am, you're married, and he's on the mortgage. He can be here.
******
Exactly, I thought the same thing. So if at the time, Jon and Kate were still legally married but she was pushing him out of the house, he could still take things, including back up disks to their shared computer.
Stuff like this is what makes me scratch my head and wonder why any attorney would take on this case. However, times are tough all over, even for attorneys. Perhaps this particular attorney realizes this is a dog of a case, but he figured, "well, if this lady wants to pay my hefty retainer and hourly fee, who am I to argue?" After all, he can present the case with whatever flimsy evidence Kate's provided him, a good defense attorney can make mincemeat of the allegations, and hopefully the judge makes some pointed remarks about frivolous lawsuits clogging up the courts.
She knows this lawsuit will go on for years and most likely neither Jon nor Robert has the funds to see it through to the end and they'll buckle and agree to settle.
************************************************
I am so wishing that this book makes tons and tons of money. I hope their attorneys are postponing being paid until there is a verdict and/or the book flies off the shelves. I hope they have attorneys who are sick of the double standard regarding mom vs. dad custody or are willing to fight for victims of parent alienation. I hope she gets her well deserved karma FINALLY!
SLAPP said... 144
Perez is reporting exclusively that his source says this is a SLAPP suit to stop Hoffman's book and draw attention to her cookbook.
====
Let her draw attention to her charity cookbook. See where that gets her. Does she think it's a culinary masterpiece? Food critics don't even have to read the entire thing, they can pan it from the preview on Amazon.
She'll be a laughing stock. Bon appétit, Kate.
"Draw attention to her cookbook"
"Yeah, I want to buy a cookbook from an child/animal abusing, ex-husband hating bitch who can't cook her way out of a paperbag,"...said no Mom ever.
She is such a joke. And like that DWTS judge said, "No self-awareness," if she thinks this will get her full custody so she can move to LA. She just doesn't get that Hollywood doesn't want her.
Comment on the Hilton site from someone who thinks Jon is releasing this book, implores him to think about what he might be doing to the mother of his children. You cannot make up this stuff. Oh sure Kate, this SLAPP suit will sell cookbooks, put you on the talk show circuit and get you a media job. She reads too much Milo.
Long Time Reader here:
What about residuals? Do reality tv participants get residuals? Is Jon entitled to them from Jon & Kate Plus 8? If so, maybe TFW is going after those assets.
Anybody know?
TFW is angry because she doesn't have a man that will love her and accept her for who she is. I believe she did or does love Steve and that relationship didn't pan out the way she wanted, i.e., having him divorce his wife and committing to a relationship with her. He won't divorce his wife and marry her and she hasn't moved on to any other relationships since her divorce of nearly 3 years. Jon has. She hates him because he's moved on and can find love with another woman regardless of his financial situation, an angry, devious ex wife and eight kids. TFW needs a man who loves her regardless of who or what she is, and apparently this isn't happening. Hence, this lawsuit against Jon. I don't believe this is about the money, but her own loneliness and not having a loving relationship in her real life. She hates Jon because he has that.
Can anyone answer a question I have? If this suit ever sees the inside of a court room do all of those confidentiality agreements go out the window. I always thought that when it comes to a court of law you can't use those as a reason not to testify truthfully.
Wow, this is getting interesting. I think most of us here calling one of theses take your pick>1. trying to stay relevant, 2. trying to get full custody, 3. publicity stunt,(figuring people will buy her picture book/cookbook , feeling sorry for her) 4. pulling the I've changed bit, cause the poor me act is not working anymore, 5. I've got 8 count them 8 struggling act, while going out and buying brand new car, and taking a trip to the Kentucky Derby, 6. can't go to the beach this year> nobody grifted us a beach house. 7. People mag article(cause everybody still loves me and TLC, won't do a follow up-date on their most famous star), 8. the ultra> sueing ex hubby for possibly leaking daming info(she has never denied), not that she herself or friends ever leaked info to the media rags. ALL BACKFIRING!
Interesting, didn't someone say or some article, say that Kate was shopping around for any lawyer to take/make this case? Cause, her lawyers said there was no case? As the one recent article said, get the popcorn out!
Silimon:
The only reason for the delay IMO is that RH claims he is not a writer and it must have taken a lot of time away from his own life to go through all the material and compile it. As is, it was not well-organized, repetitive and had errors. Not criticizing, just that it must have been difficult for him to complete.
Now what about Jon's book?
Statute of Limitation under Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) is 2 years from either the event or discovery of the damage.
Kate is going to throw every law they can find at Robert and Jon, but winning anything under CFAA seems unlikely.
What will be really more telling is the response that will be filed by Jon and Robert's teams.
but her own loneliness and not having a loving relationship in her real life. She hates Jon because he has that.
******
I tend to believe that, too. Kate's reaction every time she's been asked if she cares that Jon is dating is so over the top that she's just trying way too hard to be convincing.
Her face contorts, her shoulders shrug, the big "pffffft" with hand flicking tells me that she's lying.
I think she does care.
I've said before that Kate reminds me of C.J. Craig on The West Wing. CJ was very busy in the Bartlett administration and for 8 years, never had a real, committed relationship because she got all her testosterone supply and attention from men at work. All day, every day.
That's what Kate got from Steve and perhaps to some extent, the crew. She was the center of attention and maybe, perhaps, there was a physical relationship somewhere in there, but now it's all over. Done. Gone.
If this case goes forward, I can't see Steve and possible infidelity NOT being brought into the fray, simply because Jon would have been looking for proof of an affair.
Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said... 105
I forwarded the damning article to both Jon and Robert. What they and their attorneys do with it is up to them.
That article basically buries her lawsuit as far as I'm concerned. You don't get to go around blabbing in 2009 you knew all about this alleged "hacking" then finally get around to suing in 2013. Law doesn't work that way.
******
Boy wouldn't that be a come-uppance. It seems to clearly show Kate had knowledge of this alleged hacking way back in 2009.
LOL - I would not want to be her attorney. Can you imagine trying to work with this woman? First of all, she's nuts. Second of all, she's a liar. Third of all, anyone who does business with her gets burned somehow, and that's going to include this attorney, when she stiffs him on his fees. Not to mention, looking like a fool to the Court for alleging that discovery of this alleged hacking was "recent," when Kate gives an interview in 2009 discussed this supposed hacking! No one likes to be made a fool of, and I imagine Kate's attorney will not be appreciative.
This is BACKFIRING big time. Cause, people will be more interested in Robert's book than Kates picture book-cookbook. Publicity went wrong way. Kate will blame yet another of her failures on Jon. Kate will never admit it's all her fault. Kate has been given more opportunities, than most people, get in a lifetime(people are lucky to get one opportunity, in a lifetime) , and she blew every one of them. She is a trip!
If this case gets far enough, the discovery phase should be quite interesting. Maybe TFMJG doesn't realize discovery is a two-way street??
MsGoody2Shoes21 @msgoody2shoes21 42m
@Kateplusmy8 You might as well get child support from Jon. I don't care if it's $25 week per child. Make Jon pay child support for HIS kids.
**********
So Goody thinks that TFW, out of the goodness of her heart, relived Jon of CS but is suing him for millions? Huh? Obviously she would be getting CS if she could. He must not be legally required to pay it.
getofftwitter said... 184
Interesting, didn't someone say or some article, say that Kate was shopping around for any lawyer to take/make this case? Cause, her lawyers said there was no case?
__________________
Yes, it was an ROL article. I don't have time to search for it now, but I remember reading it and commenting on it at the time. It may have been in April.
How will Kate be able to prove that Jon had to hack into her computer, her e-mails, etc.? What if Jon claims that he knew Kate's passwords, and that she knew he knew.
I am not married, but don't spouses sometimes share that sort of information with each other?
I also believe Kate is not very tech savvy (take a look at her website if you need any convincing of that!), and that while they were married, Jon was probably the one who handled many of the computer issues.
Admin - I agree with your assessment of the complaint. It's sloppy work, looks like it was thrown together hastily with little proof-reading, and weak on its allegations. I would like to see Jon and/or Robert hire a competent attorney, who will rip the many holes in this complaint to shreds.
My answer to all the allegations would be Defendant neither admits nor denies and leaves Plaintiff to its proofs.
Millicent said...
Exactly, I thought the same thing. So if at the time, Jon and Kate were still legally married but she was pushing him out of the house, he could still take things, including back up disks to their shared computer.
----------
I was thinking that was the reason she couldn't get criminal charges--because they were still legally married, although separated -- Much harder bar to prove than a civil suit. Also, wouldn't the intent figure into this? If he was just checking online accounts to uncover money stashes, that is on thing. But, maybe accessing her email accounts with the intent to embarrass, expose, profit from damage or harm is something more serious.
The hacking story was everywhere in 2009. I had just started following stories then, and I remember it.
The Perez Hilton article confirmed what I was wondering about. It seems that she got wind of Robert's intention of re-releasing the book so she filed a lawsuit to try and stop it. I think it really is all smoke and mirrors. I hope for Jon's sake that the Judge who eventually throws this case out will make her pay all of his legal costs.
Marie
Millicent said... 174
Realitytvkids.com (Administrator) said... 132
5,000 is only what she's valued the computer at. She
*****
That alone is hilarious. Was the computer plated in 14K gold? New computers are like new cars - the minute you "drive them off the lot," they decrease substantially in value. You can easily buy a brand new computer for $1,000 or less these days, desktop or laptop. Of course, there are more expensive models, but I really doubt they had some sort of super computer in their home at that time. The value is very off (just like Kate, I might add!)
She didn't value the computer at $5,000. Read the complaint for yourself rather than relying on the blog's administrator to interpret it for you. Item 47. The claim is that they caused in excess of $5,000 damage by accessing the computer and computer services, not that the computer itself was valued at 5K.
Just started reading through the comments, but isn't TFW really opening herself up to a lot of questioning. What about all the former nannies, assistants, housekeepers, tv crew that had signed confidentiality agreements. If they are brought to the witness stand, and questioned about her abuse of the kids, does she think a jury is going to look favorably at her? I have not seen very many pro Kate comments regarding this latest more. Most say, her again, thought she was gone, running out of money looking for a fast buck. And it's done nothing for her book sales, she back to 1-3 per day.
If this case gets far enough, the discovery phase should be quite interesting. Maybe TFMJG doesn't realize discovery is a two-way street??
_____________________
Yes, indeed. Depositions can be brutal. They can take days and days, and even weeks. I would think that Kate would know that, having been the defendant in Sylvia's lawsuit.
New comments are not allowed.