Rita Cosby has filed her “Disclosure 26 witness list” but NOT in the New York Federal Court where she has been able to get the court to agree to a gag order on almost anything Hachette Books and she feels is going to expose her to embarrassment or public ridicule. The court did issue a new “Consent Amended HIGHLY Confidential Order” as the lawsuit goes forward and while asking some witnesses to, now after the fact of the book, give Rita Cosby and Hachette Books very sensitive and personal information as the objection filed in California by Larry Birkhead’s lawyer, Michael Trope shows. The Order also allows Howard K. Stern to play by the same rules. Again, I would add it would have been nice if Cosby had tried to vet her sources before the book instead of after the book, in what now appears allegedly as an attempt of saving her Azz so to say.

We had to dig to come up with the papers in California but come up with them we did, as well as a subpoena served on CNN in Atlanta Georgia by Howard K. Stern. Yes, we have to prowl through the national databases occasionally but as with these papers we found filed in California it is well worth it.

Now what does the witness list tell us about Rita Cosby’s defense? First, we noticed she has many of the same witnesses as Howard K. Stern. However, Cosby now tells us that Bruce Littlefield of New York, alleged friend of Cosby’s good pal; James Edstrom was her “ghost writer”. James Edstrom, whom by the way is NOT on the witness list, I wonder why when he brags about being Cosby’s official photographer for years. Perhaps he will be added to the gang of Cosby’s defenders, as the trial gets closer, isn’t that what good friends are for? Perhaps James Edstrom was never a long time good friend and like so many others in this tragic tale, just hung onto the coat tails of Cosby for a bit to get his own publicity. Any of you know how long Edstrom has been Cosby’s “good buddy”? I continue to say this book read so bad that you have to wonder who wrote it and how quickly, you would think an “award winning journalist” would have taken some writing classes to get her degree. Who is Bruce Littlefield anyway, did he do some garage sale shopping books?

Back to the witness list and who are on it and who is NOT on it which can be, I predict very telling about this blond ambitious “who dunnit” novel passed as fact to readers, in my opinion. We now know that many of the allegations of sure fire, yeppers we know it, stand behind it 120% no 200% is not quite there, it now appears.

Looking at the witness list we see that “grouping of people” we have suspected will tie this up with a Los Angeles, Houston, Florida and into New York of people with similar interests and agendas, in my opinion. After you read it be sure and give us your opinion on this “grouping of people” and if you think they were “reliable” sources for Cosby’s ambitious book. You can do that here on the blog or on the new forums, named “Stern Vs Rita Cosby, Hachette Books, et al”.

Let’s start with the Texas connection: We have some that both Rita Cosby and Howard K Stern listed including, Virgie Arthur, Don Clark a private investigator for the O’Quinn law firm and the biggest surprise, per Cosby list, once again Wilma Vicedomine listed as a PRIVATE INVESTIGATOR. She is listed on Stern’s list as just a “witness”, not as a private investigator as she ranks on Cosby’s list. So all of you out there that said, she is not important and never passed herself off as a private investigator when we interviewed Pol’ Atteu and Patrik Simpson, they seem to be vindicated here. Why might you ask, simply because Cosby and Hachette both have listed Wilma as just that, a private investigator? I did not know Wilma had a Texas PI license, they are hard to come by. However, per Cosby and Hachette’ list we now know that in fact she claims to be just that, a private investigator; however as the O’Quinn law firm continued to state in December 2007 only for the cases of Virgie Arthur. Can one now get a P.I. license in Texas by the mere fact of knowing a “real” P. I.? Of course, she could be a “P. I.” in training “studying under” Don Clark. I bet some of you can check into the requirements in Texas to claim that special title and get back with us on when Vice accomplished this feat. However, it does appear Wilma is in fact a Private Investigator if Cosby is to be believed.

Then we have a surprise witness on Cosby’s and Hachette’s list, John O’Quinn, was he a source or did he only loan Cosby Wilma and Clark as sources? Is Cosby going to hang these Texas people out to dry so to say if it comes down to “outing” them as prime sources for her book? Did John O’Quinn ever meet Anna Nicole Smith or Daniel Smith? What could he have been a source for in Cosby’s book, other than then what he now claims? If you believe Rita’s past now cancelled show, just like Greta’s On the Record, you have to know that is not real news, and no one believes what is on those shows, called “infotainment. Wonder if he told Cosby that no one watching her now cancelled show on MSNBC would ever accept that as anything but “infotainment”. O’Quinn has gone on to continue to say that Greta and Cosby should never be believed, that has to make both women feel warm, snuggly and loved, NOT. If you doubt that about John O’Quinn’s opinion of Cosby just read the latest filings in the federal court in Florida. None of Anna Nicole Smith’s other family members or friends are listed on Cosby’s list, although some are listed on Howard K. Stern’s list filed publicly with the New York court back in November 2007. Which by the way is when Cosby filed this list, she just chose not to make it public, must have been one of those “confidential documents”.

Then let’s swing out to California, and we have Mark Speer (only now we “think” his name is Spears, or Speers, or Spear), he was “the security person”, working for Debra Opri, the long time good friend of Rita Cosby. Then as we peruse the list we see, some more interesting people on Cosby’s list, some that did and some that didn’t make it on Stern’s list. Cosby and Stern both agree that Mark and Jackie Hatten as well as Jack Harding are all important to this case. I wonder what Jackie Hatten said in her deposition and watching her in court during the trial should be great entertainment. We have all now had a good look at jailhouse Mark Hatten; did Cosby ever look into who this guy really was before interviewing him via phone in prison for her book? You would think that “award winning journalism” might have caused her to stop for a second or two to determine his “believability scale”.

Now getting back to the ever changing tales of Jack Harding the P. I. who did talk to Daniel Smith but only briefly met him for coffee at Starbucks with Ray Martino; Jack Haring whom as the weeks following Anna Nicole’s death “story” grew and evolved kind of like Pinocchio’s nose. Jack Harding, remember him, the P. I., whom we were able to debunk on this site, using his multitude of ever changing interviews. Jack went from saying there was “one brief” meeting to having “several meetings”, from being told Daniel Smith had a previous prescription problem to saying that Don Clark had contacted him and offered to pay his expenses to the Bahamas for the Inquest. Which brings up the question, why didn’t someone as important as Jack Harding not make it on the Bahamas officials “main” people who needed to testify list, but did make it on Don Clark’s list? Jack Harding ended up, it appears, being a major source of information for Cosby’s book, did she not pick up that this guy’s story kept changing? She based almost a whole chapter on what Jack Harding had to say, including having to save John Nazarian from being treed, ah I mean fenced by Harding’s dogs.

Both Cosby and Stern continue to agree in California that Ray Martino is important; Larry Birkhead whose lawyer is trying to reign in the broad reaching subpoena with Cosby and Hachette’s lawyers to see if the new “Consent Amended Order” is enough for Cosby to be able to go through all things concerning Larry Birkhead. If I had the money to make a bet, I bet that “fishing expedition” into Birkhead’s life will be severely limited by the federal court in California if Birkhead and Cosby’s lawyers cannot reach an agreement. I might add here that Cosby and Hachette are “beefing” up their list of Pro Hac Vice lawyers to appear if a court hearing is needed in California.

Stern and Cosby both have Anna Nicole’s ex-assistant, Kim Walther on this list; as well as Ron Rale, Anna’s lawyer and ex-law partner of Howard K. Stern and still friends with Howard K. Stern. On Cosby’s list he is just listed as a friend to Howard K. Stern. Is Ron Rale the attorney close to Stern and Birkhead that Rita said in interviews that she had several conversations with before and during her writing of the book? Everyone in all lawsuits, in all states wants the ET employees, especially Bonnie Tiegel and Mark Steines; it appears they are listed in this lawsuit as well as the Houston Texas federal suit and the Florida federal suit. Am I the only one here seeing overlapping players in all three federal suits?

Both lists have Dr. Kapor and Dr. Khris listed. However, with Cosby bragging about how her book got all of the investigations kicked back into high gear, Florida and the Inquest in particular, I wonder if she can get either doctor to appear. I know we continue to lose our Constitutional Rights, but last I heard if these doctors are still being investigated by anyone then I doubt Cosby is going to get any “good and spicy” testimony from them to back up her and Littlefield’s books claims.

Now we have some interesting developments in all of this: First Pol’ Atteu and Patrik Simpson, they are listed on Stern’s witness list but NOT on Cosby’s witness list. However, we might note that making a full disclosure to us for their deposition that stated they had dinner with Cosby, her lawyer and her lawyer’s assistant in New York in mid-March and then received a subpoena in April by Cosby’s people. Remember that Pol’ and Patrik swears to us in their “full disclosure” that they only talked about raising children, and Pol’ and Patrik were “curious” about Rita so decided to take her and her lawyer up on an offer for dinner. Second, during our interview with Nathan Collins, he said up front that Hachette’s private investigators had interviewed him; he is on Stern’s list as possibly having information about Cosby’s book but not on Cosby’s list.

Then we have two surprises on Cosby’s list, John Nazarian, again why didn’t she talk to him while writing her book she put his email addy in the book so we all could email Mr. Nazarian? By the way, thanks Rita for doing that, after your book came out we emailed him and he ended up writing about the Anthony Pellicano trial for us. However, I have to wonder how many idiots emailed him thanks to you putting his email address in your book. Bottom line is that Cosby really could have contacted him if she had wanted. He would not have talked to you about any clients, like Birkhead and Stern, but I bet he could have talked to you about being treed (ah fenced) by Harding’s dogs and then saved by Harding himself. However, if Cosby had done that homework about vetting her sources that “intimidation chapter” about Mr. Nazarian would have probably had to end up on the editor’s floor.

Drum roll here, we then have Debra Opri listed as a witness. Am I the only one seeing a pattern of lawyers or ex-lawyers as key players end up on Cosby’s list of people who can vouch for her “who dunnit” book? Can Opri discuss an ex-client like Birkhead? I mean she did that June 6, 2007 filing that became almost the entire bases for chapter 12 of Cosby’s book. It is just a “minor fact” that the June 6, 2007 filing by Opri had been stricken by the California Court before the book was published, perhaps she can testify as to why she filed that in the first place. I am willing to bet that little filing has cost Ms. Opri some television appearances, some clients, but she did get a new Hollyweird term named after her, the “I’ve been Opried”.

The South Carolina, Florida and the Bahamas list of people are also overlapping in the lawsuits. However, Cosby gives us two surprises here, it appears we now know the name of the boat handyman she based so much of her book on, Todd Smith. The other person that seems to be very absent from Cosby’s list is the “male employee confidante” from the Bahamas that so much of Cosby’s book about Stern mistreatment of Anna Nicole was based on. Which brings up my next question, is it cool to put a character who is perhaps fictitious into a “non-fiction book” even though it reads like a “who dunnit” novel? Perhaps L. Lin Wood and Howard K. Stern were right in their interviews about saying this guy never existed.

I suggest you pull Stern’s witness list and the Cosby and Hachette witness lists and compare them side by side. For me it was all of the same people gathering in all of the different jurisdictions from sea to sea and to foreign countries. It seems to be a close-knit circle of “friends-enemies”, and a lot of “who dunnit” alleged theorists.

©Rose Turner
June 9, 2008
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

On July 7 the lawyer for Larry Birkhead, Michael Trope and the lawyers for Rita Cosby and Hachette books, Elizabeth McNamara and Douglas Maynard will be dancing together in a Federal Court in Los Angeles. Will it be a tango? I doubt so it seems they are squared off for a showdown. My question is wouldn’t it have been better if Cosby had talked to Larry Birkhead BEFORE the book was published and not in court through lawyers?

The original Larry Birkhead on January 28, 2008.

Cosby and Hachette alleges that Larry Birkhead does not intend to comply with the subpoena, avoid service and was only served on January 28, 2008 after the “defendants were able to effect service by incurring the expense of 24 hour surveillance on Birkhead’s residence.” The defendants go on to complain that “Mr. Birkhead’s counsel requested two extensions of Mr. Birkhead’s time to respond to the Subpoena so that Mr. Birkhead, who apparently left the country shortly after the Subpoena was serve, would have sufficient time to return to California and conduct a search of his records. After Defendants granted the extensions, Mr. Birkhead served Defendants with objections to the Subpoena that asserted the same “rote objections” to each and every one of the Subpoena’s requests, and refused to produce a single document responsive thereto.”

Cosby and Hachette’s lawyers go on to allege that; “Mr. Trope subsequently refused to respond to Defendants’ request that Mr. Birkhead provide them with key categories of documents or, alternatively, certify that no such documents exist, by June 15, 2008 or to provide them with documents that could be obtained by Mr. Birkhead prior to his purported June return to California, such as emails that can be electronically accessed and litigation documents, (many of which Defendants have not been unable to obtain), maintained by Mr. Birkhead’s attorneys.” Mr. Trope also refused to provide Defendants with dates when Mr. Birkhead is available for a deposition or to accept service of a deposition subpoena on Mr. Birkhead’s behalf. In fact, since April 11, 2008, Mr. Trope has refused even to respond to Defendants’ numerous emails and voice mails.

The lawyers for Cosby and Hachette go on to complain to the court that they need permission “to serve Mr. Birkhead with a deposition subpoena by sending the subpoena to Mr. Birkhead and his counsel, Trope and DeCarolis, LLP, via pre-paid First Class Mail, Return Receipt Requested”, so they can save money. HUH??? Wouldn’t they have saved a LOT of money by vetting Ms. Cosby’s sources before the book was published?

Larry Birkhead fires back in his opening part of the joint stipulations through his lawyer that, “Defendants served Larry Birkhead-a-nonparty-with a wildly overbroad subpoena that purports to require him to divulge documents concerning his sexual history, his finances, and his personal and business relationships with others.” Birkhead’s lawyer goes on to allege, “The subpoena also commands Birkhead to search through thousands upon thousands of email to determine which ones contain the salacious information that Defendants seek.” Birkhead lawyer goes on to state, “that he [Birkhead] has not had the opportunity to return to Los Angeles with enough time to comb through his belongings to search for the records among potentially thousands of documents. Doing so would conceivable require weeks of nonstop searching. He [Birkhead] would have to cease working and stop carrying on his normal life. Requiring this nonparty to fly to Los Angeles to search for needles in a haystack…”

Birkhead’s lawyer, Michael Trope ends with a thought provoking argument in my opinion of, “The protective order [New York agreed protective order entered into by all parties], would not help Birkhead to the extent that a party referred to a protected document at trial, in which case the information would be divulged for publicly. A party could mention confidential information, for instance, during closing argument with impunity.” Birkhead’s lawyer goes on to point to Paragraph 9 of the protective order to state, “That witness could then leak the confidential information to the press or anyone else. Nor would a protective order undo the injury that Birkhead would suffer by having to produce documents-if they existed-that are highly personal and private, for the mere production would inure his interest in privacy.

Mr. Michael L. Trope concludes, “Despite the overbroad, invasive subpoena has met and conferred in good faith with Defendants’ lawyers in an attempt to resolve these discovery disputes. Birkhead does not have any documents in most of the subpoena’s categories, and counsels have agreed to eliminate certain categories.” Would that be a possible BINGO, perhaps even alleging they know some of what Ms. Cosby wrote cannot be substantiated factually?

Birkhead’s lawyer ends with the statement of, “True, Birkhead has repeated many of the same objections in response to each category, but, again, that is only because the subpoena keeps making the same kind of unwarranted intrusions. Those objections remain valid, and Defendants must bear the burden of showing that they have the right not only to obtain the records from this nonparty but also to compel him to drop everything else in his life to go on a scavenger hunt.”

Mr. Trope puts out that he “confirmed” that “Birkhead remains willing to search for and produce non-privileged, non-confidential responsive documents that he knows to be easily accessible and in his possession or control. But Birkhead simply does not possess or control any documents in most categories”.

At this point, you need to emails and letters between Michael Trope and Deborah Newman in regards to each of these requests and objections, as well as the excerpts of transcripts of the Florida hearing.

Request 1:
This deals with everything, in my opinion, relating to Anna Nicole Smith’s pregnancy, what Anna had said about her desire to become pregnant, Anna Nicole’s drug use. It goes on to want Birkhead to provide all documents relating to any testimony Birkhead provided regarding to Anna Nicole drug use. Everything Birkhead might have relating to Anna Nicole’s death including the Seminole Police dept. and/or Broward County Medical Examiner’s investigation into Anna Nicole’s death. This state, “including affidavits, witness statements, documents filed in court on your behalf, or sworn testimony (including any drafts) from January 1, 2004 through the present”.

My take is part of this is public to all via that Florida is the “Sunshine state” and what is not available in public records or transcripts from Florida, is probably covered by work product, attorney client privilege, and that famous “right to privacy” that Cosby demands but appears to not want to give others, in my opinion.

I have to chuckle at the part of “truth is an absolute defense against libel”, yea and doing your homework to make sure you have the “truth” before publication might have avoid the whole lawsuit Ms. Cosby now finds herself embroiled in.

Part of this goes to “any emails to or from Ms. Smith, or any emails relating to Ms. Smith, including deleted emails… Defendants also requested that Mr. Birkhead conduct a search of the hard drives of any computers used by him to access his email by June 15, 2008, in order to retrieve deleted emails not previously produced, and that such emails be produced by that date. I found this part of particular interest; “[i]n light of Defendants inability to obtain documents filed in the probate proceedings relating to Ms. Smith in Los Angeles Court, and the Florida proceedings relating to custody of Ms. Smith’s body…”

I thought the Florida proceedings were open to all and Cosby had a front row seat, she had no problem reporting on the Will and it being faxed 5 days before Anna Nicole’s death, did she forget to get the other things she needed for the book? Also if they want emails, have they thought of asking Ford Shelley for these since he openly bragged on Geraldo On March 31, 2007 that copies of Anna Nicole Smith’s hard drives had been copied and kept or given to someone for safe keeping and Howard K. Stern’s lawyer via a forensic expert confirmed that in deed copies were made. I thought Ford Shelley and Cosby were “close friends now”, or is there a problem with “possible stolen computers copied” being used in the New York proceedings as well as it was a problem in Florida. Using alleged stolen things seems to be getting many people in a potential checkmate in this entire web of who dunnit as I like to describe Cosby, the real blond ambition. Let’s also remember how close friends Debra Opri and Cosby is, Mmmmmmmmm could that be a potential problem in all of this?

Birkhead’s lawyer makes a good point, in my opinion, of why is Cosby, AFTER THE FACT, now demanding documents about Anna Nicole’s pregnancy and drug use. Hello, Ms. Cosby, Dannielynn is going to read all of this one day, isn’t she as Anna Nicole’s sole heir entitled for her father to protect sensitive documents, or at least the ones that are not already out there for the world to view?

It appears from what I am reading here that Mr. Birkhead’s lawyer is saying, “The California Constitution has elevated the right to privacy to an inalienable right, one that extends to a person’s confidential financial affairs as well as to details of his personal life.” There is that tacky “right to privacy” that Cosby appears, in my opinion, to holler the loudest about while saying others are not entitled to that same “right to privacy”.

“Similarly, the California Constitution’s “right to privacy” protects a party’s sexual practices”. I like that Constitution; it has that tacky “right to privacy” statement in it; by the way did Cosby ever answer that “gay question” yet? Not to mention what Pol’ and Patrik said about their own deposition and some of those nagging embarrassing issues coming out about some non-parties in that room.

Request Number 2:
Which is asking for, “All documents or communications relating to Daniel Smith, including without limitation videotape, audiotape or photographs, and documents or communications, including Mr. Smith’s death and affidavits of witness statements, documents filed in court on your behalf, or sworn testimony (including any drafts)”.

In part, Birkhead objects that this invades the “right of privacy” of Larry Birkhead and of third parties including but not limited to Anna Nicole Smith and Daniel Smith. Birkhead also appears, in my opinion, to be attempting to protect Dannielynn’s rights, God bless him for that.

Which brings up a question, I thought Cosby was bragging everywhere in particular on two internet radio shows that her book ALONE forced an Inquest into Daniel’s death, so if that giant bragging right is true, then she should have all of this already, right?

Cosby and Hachette’s lawyers say, “By all accounts, Daniel was very close with his mother and lived with her during the majority of her relationship with Plaintiff. Daniel is described in Blonde Ambition as having grave concerns regarding Plaintiff’s treatment of his mother, including that Plaintiff accepted money in exchange for allowing men into Ms. Smith’s bedroom and “purposely kept his mother out of it”. Here you need to download the April 1, 2008 interview with Greta On the Record about Larry Birkhead’s testimony at the Inquest.

Doesn’t Cosby stand by her sources 120% no 200% in her book so why come to Larry Birkhead now if he was not needed to write and publish the book? She has Jackie Hatten, Mark Hatten and Jack Harding (chuckles) I think Cosby and company should allow these persons credibility stand alone before a jury of her peers, after all she is an “award wining journalist” and “best selling author”. She had no problem offering up those “sources in the book”; why not use them now?

Birkhead has a simple statement in response to Cosby and Hachette’s “request here”, “Birkhead does not believe he has any documents which are responsive to this request.”

So it looks to me at least, like Cosby is stuck with the Hattens and Harding, right? I so want to be at this trial in New York to cover it for Rose Speaks.com, I must begin to look up friends in that area of the country.

Request Number 3:
“All documents or communications relating to Howard K. Stern and all things about Howard K. Stern, including the Estate of Anna Nicole.” It also is including all media deals including “referrals” or anyone acting on behalf of Howard K. Stern for any reason what so ever is the short version of this request. It goes on including travel, gifts, or expenses, Mr. Stern, or any entity in which Mr. Stern has an interest, has received from media organizations, such as television show and magazines. Or that Mr. Stern received or taken from Anna Nicole and/or Anna Nicole Estate. This request goes on to want ALL things about Howard K. Stern and any sexual relationship Mr. Stern has had with anyone. Of course we end with Anna Nicole drug use, let the woman rest in peace folks. That being said this is a WOW; didn’t Cosby do her basic homework on Howard K. Stern before writing this “best selling book”?

Birkhead keeps his objection simple here, but also gives us some specific information and so my question is since Cosby insists on all things about her be filed under seal for “her right to privacy”, why didn’t Cosby and Hachette’s lawyers offer that same option to Larry Birkhead? Birkhead objects in part to the” right of privacy”, to Birkhead, Howard and Anna, that it might be covered by confidentiality agreements because of Dannielynn. However, he does tell us that Howard K. Stern made a deal with ET for $300k and put the full sum in a trust account for Dannielynn and that Larry Birkhead might have requested and received $20k from Mr. Milstein from the Trust account for his daughter, Dannielynn. The rest of it goes to that public record in multiple jurisdictions that perhaps Cosby should have check before doing the book. For a lot of this Cosby is going to have to hope that Mark Spears (previously known to us as Mark Speer), the Hattens, and Harding come through for her on the witness stand. Perhaps she can throw Debra Opri into the mix since they are such great friends. Wonder who will throw whom under the bus first in that group?

Request Number 4:
“All documents or communications, including emails, relating to Dannielynn’s paternity or custody.” Now this request is simple and to the point until you read the lawyers argument back and forth in the filing.”

Michael Trope on behalf of his client cites the “Right to privacy of Larry Birkhead, Anna Nicole Smith and Dannielynn”.

Cosby and Hachette then goes on to say they need this to prove witnesses who witnessed offers to Birkhead from Stern (that would be Mark Spears and Ford Shelley) really saw and witnessed what Ms. Cosby stated as fact in her book.

I keep saying and here I do it once again go to the witnesses, if Larry Birkhead was not important before the book was put out there allegedly to destroy a lot of lives for the sake of revenge and/or money, in my opinion, then Larry Birkhead should not be important now for Cosby to prove her claims.

Request Number 5:
Removed from seeking discovery of this question by Cosby and Hachette.

Request Number 6:
All documents or communications including emails, relating to Mark Speer (also spelled as “Spear”, “Speers”, or “Spears”) BINGO now we have Mark Spears name, or is that 4 names?

Michael Trope on behalf of his client cites the, “Right of privacy of Larry Birkhead and third parties, including but not limited to Mark Speer, a.k.a. Mark Spear, Mark Speers, and Mark Spears”.

Cosby and Hachette quotes Mark Spears as what alleges to me it appears as a major source for Cosby’s book, and wants Birkhead to prove it for her. That goes back to the question of; wouldn’t it have been better to interview Larry Birkhead about what Mark Spears said before she wrote the book?

However, Mr. Trope does answer with, “Birkhead does not believe any documents responsive to this request are in his possession, unless the name of Mr. Spears appears in pleadings in connection with Birkhead’s litigation with Debra Opri.”

This leads to my question as to why a “highly decorated retired officer of the L. A. Police Department have 4 aliases? Another question would be why did he not file his sworn statement in the Opri suit under his real name of “Spears”?

Request number 7:
“All documents or communications, including emails, relating to the person referred to as “Byron” in Debra Opri’s Petition and Supporting Motion to Compel Binding Arbitration dated June 6, 2007.”

You can pick that up in our download section open to members. I remember I believe that most of chapter 12 the “sex chapter named DNA” was based on this filing. It is interesting to note that the California court had stricken this filing before the release of Ms. Cosby’s book I believe, but will go back and get the exact date unless one of you have that handy. This goes to the question since Opri’s filing at the time looked more like a woman scorn and slashing out then an attorney filing a legitimate Motion, in my opinion, could Opri allegedly filed that as a favor for her good friend Cosby to give her some “cover” from the fall out of the book?

Michael Trope on behalf of his client cites in part that this, “Invades the Right of privacy of Larry Birkhead and of third parties, including, but not limited to “Byron” (assuming that he exists).”

Defendants’ lawyers say that need this from Larry Birkhead because of the part of the book about Larry Birkhead being “gay” as related to Cosby by Virgie Arthur and Debra Opri’s June 6, 2007 filing.

Michael Trope answers that, ”The document that Debra Opri filed on June 6, 2007 which was filed in that action by Ms. Opri [and stricken by the court], is the only document responsive to the request which Birkhead believes he might have.”

Wonder if Mark Spears, Don Clark, Wilma Vicedomine or Jack Harding have found Byron and if so that should be enough to cover Cosby on all of this or most of it except for the “she said” of Ms. Arthur unless there was someone present with Ms. Arthur at the time allegedly Larry Birkhead made the comment to Ms. Arthur. Are any of you seeing a pattern here?

Request Number 8:
“All documents or communications, including emails, relating to Jackie Hatten.”

Michael Trope on behalf of his client cites, “…In part the privacy of Larry Birkhead and Jackie Hatten…”

Cosby and Hachette’s lawyer needs this from Larry Birkhead and I am going to paraphrase here, to prove that what Cosby put in her book that she claims Jackie Hatten told her, Cosby now needs Larry Birkhead to prove that what Jackie Hatten said was true.

Can we all say like “yea, didn’t Ms. Cosby ever think that Jackie Hatten might be capable of a tiny or not so tiny lie since she loved her brother who was in jail? Nothing like perhaps the need for looking for a motive for a source on a book is there? Now remember Rita Cosby is not like you and me, she is an “award-winning journalist” and a “best seller author”, oh what a tangle web we weave….

Mr. Birkhead answer to this via his lawyer Michael Trope is, “Unless her name is mentioned in a pleading in some courtroom somewhere, Birkhead is not aware of any documents he has relating to the person identified in this request.”

Request Number 9:
“All documents or communications, including emails, relating to Virgie Arthur.”

Michael Trope on behalf of his client cites, “…In part the privacy of Larry Birkhead and Virgie Arthur…”

Cosby and Hachette’s lawyer needs this from Larry Birkhead and I am going to paraphrase here, to prove that what Cosby put in her book that she claims Virgie Arthur told her, Cosby now needs Larry Birkhead to prove that what Virgie Arthur said was true.

Mr. Birkhead answer to this via his lawyer Michael Trope is, “Unless her name is mentioned in a pleading in some courtroom somewhere, Birkhead is not aware of any documents he has relating to the person identified in this request.”

Can we all say like “yea, didn’t Ms. Cosby ever think there may have been an interest that could be conflicting with Virgie Arthur since she was in a battle with Larry Birkhead for control of any money Dannielynn might get? Now remember Rita Cosby is not like you and me, she is an “award-winning journalist” and a “bestseller author”, oh what a tangle web we weave….

Request Number 10:
“All documents or communications, including emails, related to payments or compensation of any kind, that you or Dannielynn, or any foundation or other entity in which you or Dannielynn have an interest, have received since January 1, 2006 from television shows, magazines or other media outlets, or people employed by or related to television shows, magazines or other media outlets. This request shall include without limitation, payments made in consideration of photographs, videotapes or interviews.”

Michael Trope on behalf of his client cites, “…In part the privacy of Larry Birkhead and Dannielynn…as well that it might be covered by confidentiality agreements because of Dannielynn.”

Defendants state they need this to back up Cosby’s source Mark Spears (Speer). However, they also say they are entitled to this because Howard K. Stern is the executor of Anna Nicole Smith’s “estate, and, as such, controls the intellectual property rights associated with Ms. Smith’s name and likeness, payments Mr. Birkhead or Dannielynn have received or expect to receive from media outlets could shed light on consideration paid by Plaintiff [Howard K. Stern], to Mr. Birkhead in connection with any agreement regarding Mr. Stern’s role as executor”.

Defendants go on to say, they have stated “they would be willing to modify Request 10, to change the date to February 2007 where Plaintiff [Howard K. Stern] was involved, in any way, in negotiating, arranging, or facilitating such payment or compensation, or in arranging or facilitating an introduction that led to such payment or compensation.

Mr. Birkhead answer to this via his lawyer Michael Trope is, “Obviously, Birkhead has documents which are responsive to this request; however, he will not produce them subject to objections previously asserted.”

My question is do we even know if Mr. Stern has the SOLE say in how the likeness of Anna Nicole Smith is used to generate revenue for Dannielynn? Somehow, I have never got the feeling from Mr. Birkhead he would not be hands on as the co-trustee for any trust fund for Dannielynn that the Estate is able to generate revenue for at a later date. Isn’t the Estate in California still insolvent and the Estate in the Bahamas has not been opened yet because of filings allegedly by Virgie Arthur or G. Ben Thompson?

Request Number 11:
Removed from seeking discovery of this question by Cosby and Hachette.

Request Number 12:
“All documents or communications, including emails, relating to payments you, Dannielynn, or any entity in which you or Dannielynn have an interest, have received or expect to receive from Anna Nicole Smith’s estate.”

Michael Trope on behalf of his client cites, “…In part the privacy of Larry Birkhead, and other third parties including but not limited to Anna Nicole Smith and Dannielynn…”

Defendants state they need this to back up Cosby’s source Mark Spears (Speer). However, they also say they are entitled to this because Howard K. Stern is the executor of Anna Nicole Smith’s “estate”, and, as such, controls the intellectual property rights associated with Ms. Smith’s name and likeness, payments Mr. Birkhead or Dannielynn have received or expect to receive from media outlets could shed light on consideration paid by Plaintiff [Howard K. Stern], to Mr. Birkhead in connection with any agreement regarding Mr. Stern’s role as executor”. …Furthermore the defendants point out that, “Moreover, Mr. Birkhead and Dannielynn currently reside in a house owned by Ms. Smith’s estate, and it is thus reasonable to expect that Mr. Birkhead has documents or communications relating to an agreement regarding to ownership or occupation of the house or payments relating thereto.”

Mr. Birkhead answer to this via his lawyer Michael Trope is, “Any documents, if they exist, would be in the hands/possession of probate attorneys of the probate court pleadings in the Los Angeles court”.

My question here is Ms. Cosby alleging that Dannielynn with her father Larry Birkhead should not be living in Anna Nicole Smith’s home or that Anna Nicole Smith would not want her daughter to live in her home? Is Ms. Cosby alleging that Mr. Birkhead and Dannielynn should live in that small apartment and allow this home to set vacant?

Request Number 13:
“All documents or communications, including emails, relating to any keepsakes, mementos or baby books created, made, or put together in relation to Dannielynn prior to February 8, 2007, including the “baby book” referenced by you while providing testimony in the hearing held in Broward County, Florida, in relation to determining custody of Anna Nicole Smith’s body.”

Michael Trope on behalf of his client states, “…In part the privacy of Larry Birkhead, and other third parties including but not limited to Anna Nicole Smith and Dannielynn…”

Defendants’ lawyers make this one easy, they just say read above Numbers 1 and 4 and they mean it again here.

Mr. Birkhead answer to this via his lawyer Michael Trope is, “…Birkhead is not in the possession of the baby book.”

This brings up another question or two, did Anna Nicole Smith’s good friend, Ford Shelley, take the baby book for safe keeping the way he did Dannielynn’s birth certificate and the computers and pictures… etc. Perhaps Cosby and Hachette’s lawyers might should contact Ford Shelley, G. Ben Thompson, Gaither Thompson II, and ask what they have or told Cosby as one of her alleged sources.

Request Number 14:
“All documents or communications, including emails, relating to Rita Cosby.”

Michael Trope on behalf of his client states in the joint stipulation pending before the court on July 7, “…invades the privacy of Larry Birkhead…”

Among other legalese Cosby and Hachette’s lawyers states, “… The Relevance of documents or communications relating to Rita Cosby, the author of Blonde Ambition, upon Plaintiff’s Complaint is based, is self evident.”

Birkhead’s response via Michael Trope is, “There might be one or two emails which Birkhead has which are responsive to this request.”

One thing, I want to say in my most caustic sense of humor is, “YOU THINK”? There maybe several emails between Mr. Birkhead and his family and friends that are very private in which they express what they think of Rita Cosby and her writing this book for “Dannielynn”, yea right! (Editorial comment by Rose based on my opinion only).

Request Number 15:
All documents or communications, including emails, relating to the book titled “BLONDE AMBITION: The Untold Story Behind Anna Nicole Smith’s Death,” by Rita Cosby.”

Michael Trope on behalf of his client states in the joint stipulation pending before the court on July 7, “…invades the privacy of Larry Birkhead…”

Among other legalese Cosby and Hachette’s lawyers states, “… The Relevance of documents or communications relating to Rita Cosby, the author of Blonde Ambition, upon Plaintiff’s Complaint is based, is self evident.”

Birkhead’s lawyer, Michael Trope responds with, “Among other things, Birkhead does not believe he has any documents responsive to this request other than letters by his attorneys to the publishers of the book.”

I bet there are a couple of personal protected emails I would think under that “right to privacy” that Cosby uses so often, but also applies to Mr. Birkhead here. I would wager that there perhaps were a couple of emails going something like “WTF”, and why didn’t she call someone before she put this cr— out?? If it had been me, I would have written a few things similar to friends and family if someone of Ms. Cosby’s stature, who Mr. Birkhead has said on interviews, had his personal phone number and NEVER once call him to ask him about the creditability or reliability of her sources. Remember her answer to this question on interviews went something like, “She did not because she knew Larry Birkhead would deny it and try to stop the publishing of the book.” YOU THINK???

Request Number 16:
“All documents or communications, including emails, relating to Paul Baressi.”

Michael Trope on behalf of his client states, “…In part the privacy of Larry Birkhead and Paul Baressi…”

In part, “Defendants are entitled to documents or communications relating to Paul Baressi, as Mr. Baressi has been served with a document subpoena by Plaintiff [Howard K. Stern].”

Birkhead’s lawyer, Michael Trope responds with, “Birkhead has no documents responsive to this category”.

Didn’t Paul Baressi work for Rita Cosby, Geraldo, or someone to carry the nannies tapes to the AG Jerry Brown? Wonder if he is on the witness list? I must dig up my article on Paul Baressi and update it before the fireworks of this trial starts in New York.

Request Number 17:
“All documents or communications, including emails, relating to John Nazarian.”

Michael Trope on behalf of his client states, ““…In part the privacy of Larry Birkhead and John Nazarian…”

Defendants get into that “Blonde Ambition states that Mr. Nazarian is a private investigator who was hired by Plaintiff, and that Jack Harding, a private investigator who met with Daniel Smith prior to his death, has stated that Mr. Nazarian attempted t intimidate Mr. Harding so that Mr. Harding would not reveal Daniel’s allegations regarding Plaintiff. … further that Mr. Nazarian also threatened Mr. Birkhead’s former attorney, Debra Opri, who is credited in [the book] as corroborating the theory that Plaintiff and Mr. Birkhead entered into a deal regarding Dannielynn’s custody and Ms. Smith’s estate. As such, Defendants are entitled to discover documents or communications relating to Mr. Nazarian in Mr. Birkhead’s possession, custody, or control in order to ascertain whether Mr. Nazarian has attempted to intimidate or silence potential witnesses in the New York Action.”.

Birkhead’s lawyer, Michael Trope responds with, “Birkhead has no documents responsive to this category”.

Oh Lord, I need to find the chapter that goes into Mr. Harding’s dogs “fencing or treeing” John Nazarian, Mr. Harding had to come outside, and “save John Nazarian” so Mr. Nazarian could safely get down off that fence. I have never met Mr. Nazarian, but I just don’t see him needing saving by Mr. Harding or ever being “treed or fenced”. In a previous article debunking the blonde ambitious Rita Cosby, I do recall Mr. Nazarian saying that Rita Cosby never contacted him about any of Harding’s or Opri’s “allegations”, you would think that might have been a tad important, after all Cosby had no problem putting an email address for Mr. Nazarian in her book. I bet she could have interviewed him, or at least got a quote on the record for her book, but then she would probably have had to remove that whole chapter of the “who dunnit and the big bad John Nazarian having to be rescued by elderly Jack Harding.

Another observation here, “Debra Opri, who is credited in [the book] as corroborating the theory that Plaintiff and Mr. Birkhead entered into a deal regarding Dannielynn’s custody and Ms. Smith’s estate.” Last time I checked a dictionary the meaning of “theory” was not “fact”.

Request Number 18:
“All documents or communications relating to communications with L. Lin Wood, Powell Goldstein LLP, Krista Barth, Eric M. Sauerberg, P.A., Ron Rale, Trope & Trope, Bruce S. Ross, Vivian Thorean, or Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps LLP, or agents or representatives of any of them or any other attorneys acting or purporting to act on behalf of Howard K. Stern or the estate of Anna Nicole Smith.”

Michael Trope on behalf of his client states in part, “… invades the privacy of Larry Birkhead, and other third persons… Anna Nicole Smith, Howard K. Stern, L. Lin Wood, Powell Goldstein LLP, Krista Barth, Eric M. Sauerberg, P.A., Ron Rale, Trope & Trope, Bruce S. Ross, Vivian Thorean, or Luce, Forward, Hamilton & Scripps LLP, or agents or representatives of any of them or any other attorneys acting or purporting to act on behalf of Howard K. Stern or the estate of Anna Nicole Smith.”

Defendants’ state that, “The individuals named above are all current or former counsel to Plaintiff or the estate of Anna Nicole Smith, also see Requests 1, 3, 10 and 12 for defendants positions on this.”

Birkhead says, via his lawyer to, “…see his Position as stated in number 1. … The only documents that Birkhead might have possession or custody over would be court pleadings in which the names of these individuals might appear on the pleadings as attorneys of record for someone, but Birkhead does not know whether he has any of those documents.”

This brings up an interested point does Howard K. Stern get access to all communications between Rita Cosby and Elizabeth McNamara? In the alternative since he is a party could he asked another fact witness, say Wilma Vicedomine for all of her communications with Cosby and her lawyer?

Request number 19:
Removed from seeking discovery of this question by Cosby and Hachette.

Request Number 20:
All emails Anna Nicole smith or Howard K. Stern sent or received, regardless of whether such emails were sent from or to you.

Michael Trope on behalf of his client states in part, “… invades the privacy of Larry Birkhead and of third parties including …Anna Nicole Smith and Howard K. Stern. …”

Defendants basically say read their position regarding Request Number 1 and 3.

Birkhead’s lawyers says see his “…Position regarding Category 1… Birkhead cannot respond to this request without making a further search of his records, and such a search would be unduly burdensome, costly and oppressive.”

Maybe Cosby can get these faster off of the computers and hard drives Ford Shelley admits taking, copying, and distributing to others, or is that pesky, it might be considered “stolen property” thus not able to be used like the Broward County M.E. faced during the autopsy.

Request Number 21:
“Documents sufficient to show all entities that provided you with telephone service for the period of February 1, 2007 through April 9, 2007.”

Birkhead’s lawyer recants, “… invades the privacy of Larry Birkhead …”

Defendants’ state that, “See their Position regarding Request Number 1. Documents that enable defendants to review records of Mr. Birkhead’s telephone calls with Plaintiff during the period when they were purportedly adverse over Dannielynn’s paternity and custody plainly bear on Defendants’ ability to ascertain whether Plaintiff “did not make a secret deal through which Stern would give Dannielynn to Birkhead if Birkhead would not contest [Plaintiff] being named executor of the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith.”

Birkhead’s lawyer says see his Position regarding Category Number 1. … Birkhead responds: Birkhead does not have possession or custody of any documents responsive to this category; if they exist, they would be with the phone company.”

I will have some observation after we get through all of the telephone record requests.

Request Number 22:
“Documents sufficient to show all telephone numbers used by you for the period of September 1, 2006 through the present.”

Birkhead’s lawyer repeats, “… invades the privacy of Larry Birkhead …”

Defendants say read their, “Position Regarding Request 1 and 21″.

Birkhead’s lawyer says see his Position regarding Category Number 1. … Birkhead responds: Birkhead does not have possession or custody of any documents responsive to this category; if they exist, they would be with the phone company.”

Request Number 23:
“Telephone records for all telephones numbers used by you for the period February 1, 2007 through the present. (This request was modified by Defendants’ letter to Mr. Birkhead pursuant to Central District of California Local Rule 37-1).

Birkhead’s lawyer repeats, “… invades the privacy of Larry Birkhead …”

Defendants say read their, “Position Regarding Request 1 and 21″.

Birkhead’s lawyer says see his Position regarding Category Number 1. “… Birkhead responds: Birkhead does not have possession or custody of any documents responsive to this category; if they exist, they would be with the phone company.”

I find some of the telephone records request interesting since Cosby claims in her blonde ambitious book that Larry Birkhead borrowed Mark Spears phone during this time and had ran up a huge bill, that to date Cosby claimed Birkhead never paid Spears back for any of this. Based on that, wouldn’t Spears be a better person to get this from?

Request Number 24:
“Documents or communications, including emails, relating to Hot Smoochie Lips Inc., including without limitations of documents or communications relating to 1. payments or compensation of any kind, including without limitation payments in kind, travel, gifts, or expenses, you have received from Hot Smoochie Lips Inc., and 2 Hot Smoochie Lips Inc.’s ownership of interest in 3646 Arenita Del Sol, Studio City, California, 91614.”

Birkhead’s lawyer once again says “…invades the privacy of Larry Birkhead and of third parties, including… Anna Nicole Smith, Howard K. Stern, and Hot Smoochie Lips Inc.;…”

.Defendants lawyers say they need all of the information on Hot Smoochie Lips Inc., because it “might” back up the source of Mark Spears (Speer) and what he told Rita Cosby about Larry Birkhead making a deal with Howard K. Stern and that Spears overheard that off of a deal from Stern to Birkhead. Defendants go on to state “…Documents or communications related to Hot Smoochie Lips Inc., a corporation for which Plaintiff is or was the registered agent and in which he may have an interest, could shed light on consideration paid by Plaintiff [Howard K. Stern] to Mr. Birkhead in connection with any such agreement regarding Mr. Stern’s role as executor, as Mr. Stern may be making payments to Mr. Birkhead through Hot Smoochie Lips Inc.

Birkhead’s lawyer says see his Position regarding Category Number 1. “…The house is owned by Anna Nicole Smith and may be owned by Hot Smoochie Lips, but the deed information is a matter of public record, which Defendants can access from their computers without burdening Birkhead.”

I have to share a moment of amusement here that in our debunking of Cosby’s book and the allegations made by Cosby, we did use our computers and phones, it is back to that saying of, “let google and public record data bases be your friend”.

Privilege Log:
Then we have Larry Birkhead’s log of items he is claiming are privileged and thus exempt from probing eyes, like Cosby and Hachette’s lawyers.

The Defendants complain that the “Privilege Log” that Birkhead lawyer produces saying that, “Mr. Birkhead asserted in his objections that he withheld documents from production on grounds of attorney-client privilege, work product protection, privacy and confidentiality. Mr. Birkhead’s privilege log failed, however to provide any information whatsoever about the allegedly privileged documents being withheld. Further Objections to Subpoena Duce Tecum p. 14. Specifically, Mr. Birkhead’s privilege log stated the following.

Then although this is serious stuff, we have what appears to me to be Cosby and Hachette’s lawyer saying that, “Mr. Birkhead’s privacy and confidentiality objections do NOT warrant his refusal to produce documents that are responsive to the Subpoena, and thus Mr. Birkhead should be ordered to produce the documents being withheld on those grounds… You can find the rest of what they want, part two of the joint stipulation, page 6. Defendants’ lawyers go on to say that they [Defendants Cosby and Hachette], want how those privileges are stated in detail so they can have the right to then “contest the claim” as the demanding party.

Michael Trope on behalf of his client states in part the following about the privilege log provided, see Birkhead’s “authorities articulated in his Position regarding Category Number 1, emphasizing this portion: …Birkhead has done just that: his privilege log proceeds by category of privileged and protected documents. Compelling him to read every email, sift through every file, and recover every bit on his hard drive (even the deleted ones) to determine which specific documents fall under which privilege would visit upon him the very evil that the rules’ various protection seek to avoid.”

Then we move along to the Defendants’ choice of service on Mr. Birkhead for an oral deposition as follows:

SERVICE OF A DEPOSITION SUBPOENA ON MR. BIRKHEAD

Defendants’ Position:
Defendants should be permitted to serve Mr. Birkhead with a deposition Subpoena by Sending the Subpoena to Mr. Birkhead and his Counsel via Pre-paid First Class Mail, Return Receipt Requested.

Defendants then go back to the beginning of all of this to complain that Mr. Birkhead’s refusal to cooperate with Defendants in connection with a document subpoena, and the difficulty encountered by Defendants in attempting to effect service on him…

One note of interest is Defendants say, “On January 29, 2008, Mr. Birkhead was personally served with the Subpoena as he was exiting his car outside the gat surrounding his house. …Accordingly, on May 1, 2008, Defendants provided notice to subpoena on or after that date. Unfortunately, Defendants have been unable to locate Mr. Birkhead so that personal service of the deposition may be effected. …Moreover, Defendants have been told by their process server that effecting personal service on Mr. Birkhead will be difficult and expensive even once Mr. Birkhead is in California, as Mr. Birkhead has an electric gate that prevents the process server from approaching his house.”

We are talking about a very wealthy mega corporation and an “award winning journalist”, are they appear to me to be saying that between the two of them, they can’t serve Mr. Birkhead? The paparazzi appear as if they can find Mr. Birkhead all over the U. S. Perhaps they should ask Cosby’s long time friend and confidant James Edstrom, paparazzi and personal photographer, to Cosby for help in thinking like paparazzi to serve Birkhead, or just look at the picture on this page of Cosby stopping a car, or attempting too, now this folks, in my opinion, is humorous.

The bottom line they don’t want to be out any extra expense to serve the subpoena but is asking the court to make it easy for them. Are they running low on money or just want the easy way out of all of this, or is Mr. Birkhead really avoided them at all “costs”. The court will decide that question on July 7 when the attorneys for the Defendants and the attorney for Mr. Birkhead meet in court to dance. Do you thing it will be a tango, a waltz or which type of dance?

In closing, I would like to say that we need to remember that Rita Cosby is “an award winning ‘real’ journalist and a “best seller ‘real’ author, nor like us mere mortal armchair critics. But if we here at Rose Speaks.com could debunk most of her book by letting google be our friend, then should Ms. Cosby be held to a “higher” standard cause she be trained really good with a high price education and all of those “years of experience to boot?

That brings up to mind two things to me. The S.O.S moment translated to “Stuck on Stupid”, and the T-shirt being proposed as a best seller of “I’m not with Stupid”, which has a special meaning here in Texas at this point in our history.

You can pick up the documents referred to in this article and filed with the California U. S. Court in Los Angeles in our download section of Howard K. Stern vs. Rita Cosby and Hachette Books.

The other documents you need for this article is the stipulation 1 and stipulation 2 filed jointly by the Defendants’ lawyers and Mr. Birkhead’s lawyer. You also need the Declaration of Deborah Newman filed with the court for the hearing with Larry Birkhead’s lawyer for July 7.

©Rose Turner
June 30, 2008
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

This is the longest chapter in the book so I am going to break it down into two parts because there is just too much to cover in one article. Following this article and part 2 of the debunking of this final chapter of Rita Cosby’s book, we will be adding a couple of articles to sum up what, in my opinion, are glaring inconsistencies throughout each chapter of the book. With that said here is part 1 of 2, we call,”The Blond Ambitious” Rita Cosby debunking the myths chapter 13.

One of my questions in this last chapter of Rita Cosby’s book is who gave Ms. Cosby the cell phone records that this chapter is based on. I asked that because the Seminole Nation has filed a Motion to Quash all Record Subpoenas in the Howard K. Stern vs. John O’Quinn and the associates of the O’Quinn law firm lawsuit, based on being a sovereign nation. So how did Ms. Cosby come into possession of those records? They seem to be “accurate” right down to the minute and length of the calls as well the hotel surveillance tapes, however we will probably never have the question of “who” gave them to Ms. Cosby answered.

There are a few different views I would like to present based on what we have learned in the public records and court filings before and after Ms. Cosby’s book was published in September 2007. With all of this in mind here goes.

“From the night before her death to the night after her death, there were numerous calls and frenetic activity that are now confirmed that raise new questions. The facts I have discovered in my investigation show a broad series of inconsistencies – outright untruths and questionable circumstances –, which add to the mysterious death of Anna Nicole Smith. …..according to official documents and records, court transcripts, eyewitness accounts, and the participants’ own words, here is the chain of events of what definitely [emphasis added in book to the word definitely] happened during the key hours surrounding the death of Broward County Decedent No: 07-0223 Vickie Lynn Marshall.”

Ms. Cosby uses and emphasis “definitely” as an absolute statement and therefore to the reader must be accurate. This is the lead in from Ms. Cosby to name what she claims are all of the calls made to and from cell phones. All of the “calls” made to and from different parts and parties of the hotel staff. The calls made to and from the Seminole Police; the paramedics called; and some parts taken from the scene reports included in the Broward County M. E. records. So where do we start to untangle absolute truths to hypothesis, and once we include the hypothesis, then is Ms. Cosby’s version the absolute truth? Is Ms. Cosby as an award winning journalist and best seller author on the New York Times list, responsible for doing any further investigations before putting her name to this or not?

On February 7 and 8, 2007, Ms. Cosby’s refers to calls made by Howard K. Stern or received by Howard K. Stern on his cell phone. There is an implication this is all from the parties’ cell phone records, but does not really say if it was just cell phone records are perhaps some hotel records that Ms. Cosby came into possession of.

On the afternoon and night of February 7, we have a seven minute call from Dr. Khris Eroshevich to Howard K. Stern at 5:13 PM because “she had left to catch an evening flight to California”. Could this call be as simple as a friend calling to check on Anna Nicole Smith and how she was feeling? Ms. Cosby really does not tell us what her thoughts or sources said about this call. Then we have “at least 5 calls” in the afternoon that Mr. Stern made to “his longtime friend”, Ron Rale, with the last of those calls occurring at 6:38 PM. Ah wasn’t Ron Rale the attorney representing Anna Nicole Smith in the DNA paternity suit in California? If there had been recent court hearings, decisions, filings, you know stuff lawyers do is Ms. Cosby trying to imply clients don’t call their lawyers and lawyers don’t call their clients after normal business hours. That would go to why then is Ms. Cosby having dinner with Pol’ Atteu and Patrik Simpson with her lawyer in March 2008? If calls to Ron Rale are implied, in my opinion, as sinister then what is a dinner? I feel both the calls that day of February 7 and the dinner in March 2008 were innocent or about legal things. Is Ms. Cosby saying none of her friends call to check on her, nor does her lawyer ever call her during the day or evening during Ms. Cosby’s current legal woes?

We then have one call described by Rita Cosby as, “Howard K. Stern’s FINAL call of that day/evening/night at 6:41 PM from Alex Goen to Mr. Stern’s cell phone”. Ms. Cosby does not tell us how long the call lasted but does admit that it was during the litigation of the Trimspa class action suit.

Therefore, to me we have one call from a friend to check on her friend, five calls that day about litigation in California and probably as a friend asking how Anna Nicole Smith was feeling and one call from Alex Goen probably about litigation in the Trimspa lawsuit. So seven phone calls made to and from Howard K. Stern on February 7 establishes that day and evening part of the “frenetic activity”. In case you are like me and had to look up “frenetic” here is the meaning. Frenetic is “excessively agitated; transported with rage or other violent emotion; “frantic with anger and frustration”; “frenetic screams followed …” per wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn on line dictionary.

We have something I found far more interesting, per Ms. Cosby, the Hotel surveillance tape at 11:01 PM shows a Melodie Delancy entered Moe’s room and stayed until 8:03 AM the next morning. Can we all say that Moe probably had a girlfriend? That with breakfast at 9:00 AM with Mrs. Moe, there must have been a hustle to get the girlfriend out before the wife arrived. Ms. Cosby also quotes from the medical examiner report here where Moe “woke up and “checked on Anna Nicole Smith at about 4 AM because he had seen her earlier in the evening watching T. V. but she had gone to her bedroom by 4 AM.”

Between 9:00 AM to about 9:30 AM Moe “checked on Anna and thought he saw her moving, but later was not certain”, and then Moe was off to have breakfast with his wife. Did Moe tell his wife that there had been another woman that had stayed in the suite with Moe the night before? You know wives have a way of just knowing those things, no wonder Tas has always been in a bad mood about that day. Left to baby sit Anna Nicole Smith, a woman by Tas’ own admission she had met once for 30 minutes. Now Tas was going to be stuck with watching over a sick and recuperating Anna Nicole while her husband Moe was out gallivanting around town.

Ms. Cosby takes one minor dig at Howard K. Stern here saying, “Howard was now left alone in the suite with Anna”. Yea and ?? Wasn’t Howard alone in that part of the suite with Anna Nicole Smith the whole night before, from the last phone call at 6:41 PM on February 7?

Then we have detailed records about Howard K. Stern’s cell phone records and calls and again I ask who gave Rita Cosby these records? Ms. Cosby says Mr. Stern “checked his voice mail for messages once between 10:00 and 10:03 AM that last morning of Anna Nicole Smith’s life”.

We skip forward to King Eric calling at 10:42 AM to say he was at the airport with his first mate and Brigitte and that he needed someone to pick them up. Then we have the question would Howard K. Stern go pick them up or would Moe and Tas go pick them up so Howard could stay with a still recovering Anna Nicole. In the end, it was Moe and Tas that cut their breakfast short. Remember Tas telling Greta Van Susteren, On The Record, on Fox last summer, the number of phone calls Moe got while breakfasting with his lovely wife from Howard K. Stern asking if Moe could pick up the arriving guests. In the end, it was “Moe and Tas that went to pick up King Eric and his group between 10:56 and 11:19 AM with Moe and Tas getting back to the hotel with the company at 11:50 AM”. I just have to ask if the Seminole Indians as a sovereign nation did not have to turn over any records for this lawsuit of Howard K. Stern vs. Rita Cosby and Hachette Books, how did Ms. Cosby get both multiple phone records and access to the video tape of the hotel. Alternatively, did she get these second or third hand records from the “private investigators” that we now know work for John O’Quinn?

We then have Ms. Cosby’s book giving us a run down of Howard K. Stern’s cell phone records, 10:45 AM, Howard called Moe while he was still having breakfast with Tas, that would now be an hour and forty-five minute breakfast, at 10:46 and again at 10:49 AM Howard checked his voice mail. At 10:51 AM, Howard called Alex of Trimspa, had to be about one minute or no more than 90 seconds because at 10:53 AM Howard called Ron Rale. Here Ms. Cosby’s gives us a little intrigue to this “who dunnit” by saying “It is perhaps interesting to note it was still early in California, 7:53 AM, where Rale lives”. Well yea, usually attorneys are on their way to court or their office near 8 AM no matter where they live, so for a lawyer wouldn’t this be typical?

At 10:54 AM we have Moe calling Alex of Trimspa so that would have been about 4 minutes after Howard had talked to Alex, could Mr. Goen had asked Howard K. Stern to have Moe call him or perhaps asked why Moe had not called him?

From 10:56 to 11:19 AM, we have “several calls back and forth between Howard, King Eric, and Moe during Moe and Tas’ drive to the airport to pick up King Eric”. Do any of you remember Tas on Greta’s On the Record, talking about Howard calling Moe several times during that breakfast from 9:00 AM until 10:45 AM bugging them about would Moe pick up the guests and what time could Moe leave since the guests were sitting at the airport? Anyone have that transcript for all us to read?

Then we have the sinister part of they all got back to the hotel at 11:50 AM and met Howard K. Stern coming out of the elevator. Ms. Cosby goes on to state that; “According to both Tas and Moe’s statements to private investigators, Howard was acting strange. He was very fidgety; Howard said rather peculiarly that he had to come to the lobby because his cell phone wasn’t working in the room. Then he turned around quickly and headed back up to the room with the newly arrived visitors.”

So we know this part of the book came from the “private investigators” getting statements from Moe and Tas, remember Moe saying that G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley had offered him a cool $500k for access to Horizons during a trip where Howard and Anna would not be there, saying it was for a DNA sample? So with all of the money playing merry go round in this sordid tale, was Moe and Tas compensated for their statements by anyone?

The hotel surveillance footage showed that the group of people entered the suite at 11:54 AM, that Anna was “not feeling well and according to his visitors Howard shouted, “Anna, we have guests. Brigitte then said, “Don’t wake her up”.

Ms. Cosby continues about that Howard K. Stern’s phone did not work in the room at 11: 50 AM per “statements made by Moe and Tas to the private investigators” but by 11:59 AM Howard was able to use the phone just fine in the suite. Ms. Cosby goes on to state, “…that Howard then made three phone calls on his cell phone. …The first was calling the hotel liaison – twice—“, so that would be 2 of the three phone calls right? Then Ms. Cosby does not tell us whom Howard called with the third phone call at 12:02 PM, noting the time because that was when the hotel liaison called Howard back and he was on the phone. Howard and the hotel liaison were missing each other by playing telephone tag. Something I will note here that this appeared to also happen during the frantic calls later that day as Howard was driving back to the hotel and making call after call trying to check on the condition of Anna Nicole, after getting the worse call anyone could receive at 1:24 PM that day; which would forever change so many lives.

Ms. Cosby then tells us what a Hotel liaison does and that this one was close to Anna Nicole because of Anna’s other stays at the hotel the last being in January 2007. We then have Ms. Cosby spice this part of the chapter up with, “She was called many times during these critical minutes”. Ms. Cosby does not tell us what was critical at noon though, so we will probably never know why Ms. Cosby felt that those calls were critical, could they have perhaps been just making sure there was rooms available for the guests to check into later in the day for their stay?

At noon, “Howard called boat broker Mark Dekema, the gentleman who had sold Anna the boat the month before. According to both Dekema and the boat handyman, Howard had a 1 PM appointment scheduled and confirmed.” So this is the third call perhaps that Ms. Cosby is referring to in the “three calls” she mentions earlier in this chapter. Ms Cosby tells us that call lasted ten minutes at which time, “Howard immediately announced to his guests that he had to do something between 12 and 1 PM”.

Noting it was noon then, Brigitte on the record remembers; “…he asked me if I could stay, because they were going to the boat. And I said no problem”.

“Moe did not like the idea that of Brigitte staying alone with Anna when she was so sick, so he asked Tas if she would mind hanging back too. Just stay for a little while baby, he asked. Do you mind?”

“Tas unenthusiastically agreed to stay.”

The next part of this chapter will be from 12:14PM to the end of this day. This will be including Ms. Cosby’s excerpts from the M. E. report from the hotel suite, the hospital, and the findings of the autopsy. However, this time we have the same pieces of information that all of the public had access to in order to ask some very important questions of why. Why did Ms. Cosby decide to go down one road of assumptions when in fact there are several unanswered and very important even critical questions, in my opinion, that Ms. Cosby failed to ask and follow through on.

Before we get to the second part of the debunking of chapter 13, I suggest all of you download the documents in our download section of the reports issued by the M. E. as they become critical to the last few hours of Anna Nicole Smith’s life. These downloads are open to ALL, not just the members of Rose Speaks.com.

As you get ready for the next part of our debunking of “The Blond Ambitious, Ms. Cosby’s book”, remember two things, a Melodie Delancy spent the night in Moe’s room the night before this fateful day and that, “Tas unenthusiastically agreed to stay.”

©Rose Turner
June 12, 2008
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

This article is the sole property of Rose Speaks unless otherwise stated. This article as with other articles is based on the opinion of Rose Turner, or our guest authors if so indicated. Please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this article are the opinions and sole property of the site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.

Please also read our Terms of Use they have changed and our Privacy Policy.

The old expression when it rains it pours was alive and well in Judge Dale Fischer’s courtroom today! Again Desperateexes.com is as relevant in this trial as I ever thought it could be. I have never seen so many desperate women in my life! Divorce is tough, and it is very important to have a team in place. But some of these very wealthy women were badly represented — and badly mistreated — by their lawyers!

Today we have Ms. Sarit Shafir, and it is my opinion that she had the money to get herself in trouble. She attracted two grifters in the form of two brothers, Abner and Daniel Nicherie, who as she tells the court befriended her, and what are people in the throes of divorce looking for? Friends! I am one of the best friends money can buy, and I admit that it is a part of what I do. When I get involved in a client’s life, I am getting paid and well, and I have to be a friend at times too, and it is not easy! Not only is it not easy, it is dangerous as many of my clients through the years were, let’s just say a “little unstable.” But here comes Mr. Abner Nicherie and he can smell money — money that he and his brother will become in charge of, and things get even worse from there!

Ms. Shafir claims that it was Abner who hired Pellicano…I missed how that happened, but it did. We get to hear the usual about listening to wiretapped phone calls, and all the rest. This woman also has not been arrested and was not charged! But on the other hand, she is as much a victim here as any of the others. She was wealthy at one time, and I am sure she will survive! She and her husband Ami made a fortune with phone sex and phone astrology …

….At some point she was represented by Trope and Trope, so you know that she had money to burn! And was in front of my friend, Ken Black — that is Superior Court Judge Ken Black, who is now retired. Now I am 100% sure that neither Trope and Trope nor Judge Black would ever have any dealings with Mr. Pellicano. But then she fell under the spell of the “Brothers Grim,” and it was no fairy tale.

…Nicherie is a guy who paid Pellicano a small fortune ($150,000) to go after Mrs. Shafir’s husband and tape his calls with his girlfriend, but wouldn’t pay for parking so he had his driver (Mrs. Shafir!) take him instead. Are you telling me that the Pelican does not validate?! Perhaps he could sell another diamond to provide that service. Excuse me, I am sure that was Mrs. Shafir’s money that he gave to the P.I. to the Stars. Many of them are seeing stars as this trial continues!

Mrs. Shafir was vulnerable and was taken advantage of by these two clowns (not to mention the Pelican)…but where is the money now?

For the rest of John Nazarian’s one of a kind coverage of the Pellicano Trial visit the link below:

http://desperateexes.com/2008/04/07/pellicano-trial-lil-abner-nicherie/

©John Nazarian
April 8, 2008
Used with the permission of John Nazarian
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of our featured author, John Nazarian, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.