We also have Rita Cosby’s Reply to the Response Howard K. Stern filed in regards to Cosby’s Motion for the Court to Reconsider it’s ruling. The pretrial hearing for this case is still set for Friday September 11 at 12 noon.

September 8, 2009 Rita Cosby’s Reply to Howard K. Stern’s Response to her Motion to Reconsider Summary Judgment on number 1 and 2 of the court’s previous decision.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2406.

We have a number of papers that were filed Friday in the Texas Court of Appeals, didn’t I predict the Texas case would be won in the Appellate Court and not the trial court? There is one housekeeping Motion from Teresa Stephens asking the Court of Appeals to dismiss a duplicate filing in that court.

We have the August 28, 2009 transcript hearing in the State District 280th Court Harris County Texas of Art Harris Motion to Reconsider the appointment of Craig Ball as the Special Master and independent forensic expert for the court in this case. I found it interesting reading and will point to some of the high points in my opinion. We have it broke down for ease of downloading into three parts

August 28, 2009 transcript hearing in the State District 280th Court Harris County Texas

August 28, 2009 Hearing Transcript part 1 of 3 in the Texas District 280th Court Harris County Texas of the Motion for Reconsideration appointment of Special Master Craig Ball.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2407.

August 28, 2009 Hearing Transcript part 2 of 3 in the Texas District 280th Court Harris County Texas of the Motion for Reconsideration appointment of Special Master Craig Ball.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2408.

August 28, 2009 Hearing Transcript part 3 of 3 in the Texas District 280th Court Harris County Texas of the Motion for Reconsideration appointment of Special Master Craig Ball.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2409.

September 8, 2009 Virgie Arthur’s Response to Howard K. Stern’s Supplemental Briefing to the Court on Appeals about the recent Texas Supreme Court Decision In RE. To Weekley.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2404.

September 8, 2009 Virgie Arthur’s Response to Art Harris’ Motion for Emergency Temporary Relief and Injunction to Stay all proceedings of the Special Master Craig Ball and not to have to answer those 11 pesky question by this Friday, September 11, 2009 but only for him, let the “games” continue for his co-defendants.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2402.

September 8, 2009 Virgie Arthur’s Tab A-K filed with her Response to Art Harris’ Motion for Emergency Temporary Relief and Injunction to Stay all proceedings of the Special Master Craig Ball and not to have to answer those 11 pesky question by this Friday, September 11, 2009 but only for him, let the “games” continue for his co-defendants.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2403.

September 8, 2009 Teresa Stephens filed a Motion to Dismiss the duplicate filing with the Texas Appeals Court with no objection from any of the parties.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2405.

September 9, 2009 Filed by Art Harris with the Court of Appeals is his Reply to Virgie Arthur’s Response to Harris’ Request for an Emergency Order to Stay proceedings in the Texas 280th District Court and that he not have to answer those 11 questions.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2411.

I have simplified the eleven questions Craig Ball asked for Art Harris to answer, and the hard ware (hard drives, laptops, jump drives etc.) are already listed in the previous article. My question AGAIN is why file a $6k-15k appeal when answering the questions would be easy and so much more cost efficient. Remember most appeals before a final judgment are denied, that said I think Howard K. Stern has the best chance of winning because he is a lawyer, and their computers should be off limits in my opinion.

Reading the transcript today of the August 28, 2009 hearing other then not removing Craig Ball as the Court’s Special Master and independent forensic specialist, Art Harris’ lawyers got everything they asked for and the judge was prepared this time. I found it funny how she wanted NO part of the inches of exhibits many filed before in her Court, she did want to read just the Motions pending before her on August 28, and she used the judges jacket (think cliff notes in college) to refresh her memory about this case all the way back to why she appointed Craig Ball. She was not asleep during that hearing however McCabe made it clear he felt that with the number of attorneys there representing Harris, McCabe felt that the August 28th hearing was a “walk through” to establish the record for an appeal.

It will take a bit to get the transcript scanned and up for all of you but Ken is working on it.

Here again without imaginary answers if the eleven questions for Art Harris:

1. Respecting any of the media holding data subject to the Court’s examination orders, can you please advise what course of action was agreed upon between Mr. Harris and Mr. Jeffrey Lee in any late night call on December 11 or in the early hours of December 12, 2008? This is the call sought by an e-mail from Mr. Harris titled, “got a minute to talk off record?” on or about 8:56 PM on December 11.

2. After many hours of painstaking review of the data, I stand by my focus on December 16, 2008 as a significant date respecting the Dell laptop hard drive furnished to me for examination. The system registry indicates that the date the replacement 160 GB Western Digital drive is first seen by the Dell laptop is December 16, 2008 at 20:35 (UTC). Is it your client’s position that there was no installation or re-imaging of a hard drive on December 16, 2008, and that any seeming indication of same resulted instead from, e.g., someone’s installation of XP Service Pack 3 on the machine on December 16? Or do you or Mr. Harris have another explanation to share please?

3. Would I be correct in concluding that, on Christmas Day 2008, two weeks after the Court’s 12/11/08 orders from the bench, Mr. Harris (purchased for $39.90), installed and ran an application called RegCure (along with another application called “Privacy Controls”) for the purpose of cleaning the system registry on the Dell laptop?

4. Would it be accurate to state that, on January 11, 2009, Mr. Harris personally deleted some 7,000 e-mails from his deleted items folder? If so, were copies of all of these deleted e-mails somehow retained and otherwise furnished to me? Please identify the 7,000 deleted mails, perhaps by an MD5 hash value or by simply furnishing them to me for cross-correlation (a PST, MSG or EML format will suffice).

5. Would it be accurate to state that on April Fools Day 2008, Mr. Harris obtained a Zip file containing a software program called CCleaner from Duane Derrick and that Mr. Harris personally unzipped, installed and ran the program on both his Dell laptop (installed 4/1/09) and on his Dell Dimension desktop (installed 4/2/09)?

6. Would it be accurate and fair for me to characterize CCleaner in this manner: “CCleaner allows the user to remove unused temporary files from Internet browsers and other supported applications along with browsing history, cookies, recycle bin, and AutoComplete form history. It allows for the cleaning of the recycle bin, memory dumps, file fragments, log files, system caches, application data, and various other data.” This is taken from Wikipedia.

7. Would it be fair and accurate to characterize CCleaner as an “antiforensic” tool when used in the manner described above, in anticipation of a forensic examination?

8. Would it be accurate to state that Mr. Harris consulted with Jeffrey Lee about CCleaner before running CCleaner and clearly understood that it was a “system cleaner” application?

9. Because on April 1, 2009, Mr. Harris twice inquires of Mr. Lee about erasing history from his computers, may I fairly conclude that the erasures of same I see on the machines occurred as a direct result of Mr. Harris acting intentionally to effect such erasures?

10. Would it be correct to state that Mr. Harris paid Carceron Systems Group to “clean” and “defrag” his Dell Dimension desktop on April 13, 2009 and paid Carceron to “clean out” temporary files and file caches on May 1, 2009?

11. Would it be correct to state that, on May 8, 2008, Mr. Jeffrey Lee deleted the contents of Mr. Harris’ deleted items folder and that Mr. Harris thought this was “Great!!!” and thanked Mr. Lee?

Again reading through these it seems simple and to the point, so why not have Jeffrey Lee and Art Harris just answer and do an Affidavit if it came to that for the court. It could be just answering the questions will put the whole dilemma and subsequent Motions, Responses and Hearing to bed so to say.

©Rose Turner
September 8, 2009
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 Rose Turner or our featured authors, 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.

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

Tags: "Chip" Babcock Esq., Amanda Bush Esq., Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith Estate, Art Harris, Art Harris - Bald Truth website, Art Harris Exclusives, Art Harris Scoops, Bonnie Stern, Bryan Cave LLP, CBS-ET, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Diana Marshall Esq., Elizabeth McNamara, Entertainment Tonight, Harry Susman Esq., Harvey Levin, High Profile Trials, Howard K Stern, Jackson and Walker LLP, John "Jay" Patton Esq., L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Lyndal Harrington, Nancy Hamilton Esq., Neil McCabe, Nicole Jennings Wade, Rita Cosby, Rose Speaks, Rose Turner, Susman and Godfrey LLP, Teresa Stephens, The O'Quinn Law Firm, TMZ.com, Tom Bednarek, Virgie Arthur

As we wait for the papers, or at least the Order unsealing the papers in New York, a solid source contacted me about all of this, a source who had contacted one of the people facing a Preliminary hearing legal team and whom they felt was very rude to this person.

This sounds like the old song for some reason “Leroy Brown”, dunno why it just does.

As we await all of the papers today, why would Tom Bednarek not want anyone to know he had the “ear” of AG Jerry Brown? It could not possibly have to do with Rita Cosby?

Why did Bednarek tell this source from 2005 to the spring of 2009, I can help and did in fact help? Why would Rita Cosby need Bednarek to call in a “favor” from his old at least has the ear of “AG soon to be gubernatorial candidate Jerry Brown? Why would helping this source/friend with Brown hurt the Howard K. Stern prosecution?

Why tell someone you had been working with that as this source said to Bednarek in an email, “I told him that you know Attorney General Jerry Brown so you may get a phone call.” In another email just two months before the indictments this source wrote to Bednarek, “I want to thank you for helping, [name omitted], by contacting Attorney General Jerry Brown.” Why in an email did he request this source to always refer to Rita Cosby as “R” saying, “Would appreciate it if from now on… in all of our correspondence…? THAT we only refer to one another ONLY as K and T… AND my gal as R… Okay?! This IS very important…” In another email Tom Bednarek said in part, “Again, should you ever want to discuss this with me, we can certainly do so, so long as it is CAREFUL HANDLED over the TELEPHONE.” In yet another email about offering help he stated; “Additionally, other than “Tom” … there will be no need to include my name within any letter you enclose. He will be aware of the package…”

In another email about the pillow talk while Rita Cosby was fast hammering out her future best selling book and shopping it around why did Tom Bednarek wanted to brag about his closeness to Cosby and exactly how close that pillow talk is as he states; “Although she is heavily committed on a number of major initiatives at this time, she is always very interested to learn more about a story such as this… I know… we’ve been together for well over seven years now, and I know her heart. She would be a phenominal ally to have, BUT I can tell you first hand… that she is extremely engaged right now… and has a number of prior works she is deeply involved with. On the other hand … she is an amazing “multi-tasker!!! HA! But seriously, as mentioned, I will see what either she can do to help AND get this into the right hands for you.”

Finally just less than two WEEKS after the indictment of Stern Bednarek called this source and said “I can’t help you with AG Jerry Brown, and please don’t contact me again”. Following that was the last email exchange of four years of working together on ONE project with Bednarek and Cosby:

“Hello Tomaczek, It’s sad you decided not to keep in touch with me after you told me you would send the documents I sent you … to Jerry Brown. It’s been 8 months since …I’m asking you again to send the information I sent you and Rita …to Jerry Brown. I remember you telling me that you had a direct phone number for him. I can’t understand how you think sending this information could hurt the Stern case. You reasoning just doesn’t make sense to me. Thank you,”

Yea Tom why would helping with the ear of “feel good AG Jerry Brown” hurt the pending Stern case? Did you use up all of your “favors” keeping “R” or Rita Cosby as most of us know and call her by out of the deep fat frying pan? Why did you and Cosby want to make sure the indictment was announced before the Summary Judgment was ruled on in New York? How long had you been sharing pillow talk with “R”, [Rita Cosby], with AG Jerry Brown?

All good questions I think, what about ya’ll? My source has snail mailed me a ton of information on this project that we will begin to explore in the new year in greater detail right before the gubernatorial candidates, including Brown, began their major fund raising? By the way the “project” that is discussed with promises to help by Tom Bednarek is about a non-profit foundation of which there are allegation of “money for favors”, isn’t Brown in charge of those? Could AG Jerry Brown’s friend Bednarek with over four years of documentation sink feel good Brown’s bid for that brass ring called the governorship? A brass ring that Brown wants so badly in what some say is a hope for the blissfulness and power he once held as the prince and the rising star in the Democratic Party way, way back in the 70’s as a young “cool feel good” Brown.

I have told my source to print out the hard copies of all of the documentation and send them to me, put them in a bank vault and at least in two other people’s hands so Bednarek cannot undo the damage to his beloved “R”, known to us as Rita Cosby.

Tom, Tom, Tom, you tried so hard to not leave much of a paper trail in all of this, but in trying it rings of nanny gate in my ears.

We will be bringing you more of what this source has to say, including the way they were treated by one of the legal teams of one of the people facing the preliminary hearings in October of this year.

Now for today, we await the Court’s Order releasing the papers, could “exhibit J” be Bednarek deposition about nanny gate? Who knows only the unsealing of all of these promising delicious documents will tell us.

To keep up with the papers to be unsealed keep this list handy, and remember ALL of Howard K. Stern’s deposition and all of Rita Cosby’s deposition is included in the documents. I don’t know about all of you but I await the release with excitement that a lot of the pieces will begin to make more sense and like a haze in the morning light will become the bright sun of daylight and the telling of all of those secrets, including pillow talk of nanny gate.

We will be linking the below list with documents as those doucuments are released by Court Order.

The list filed under seal by Elizabeth A. McNamara, the second filing on Dec. 19, 2009 by Elizabeth A McNamara is identical to this one for Rita Cosby Dec. 15, 2008:
Her declaration starts right off with “redacted”.

Partial depositions:
Exhibit A Larry Birkhead (we have)
Exhibit B Patrik Simpson (we have)
Exhibit C Pol’ Atteu (we have)
Exhibit D Wilma Vicedomine (we don’t have)
Exhibit E Mark Speer (we don’t have yet)
Exhibit F Howard K. Stern (we have)
Exhibit G Jack Harding (we don’t have)
Exhibit H. Bruce Littlefield (we don’t have yet)
Exhibit I Rusty Hardin’s filing in the Florida case (we have)
Exhibit J even the name is redacted.
Exhibit K Larry Birkhead’s declarations in family court in California. (we don’t have)
Exhibit L Lori Payne (we have and she flaunted it on Geraldo)
Exhibit M and N affidavits by Ben Thompson (we have but will not put up for Dannielynn’s right to privacy)
Exhibit O Ford Shelly statement to Royal Bahamas Police (we have)
Exhibit P Howard K. Stern’s statement to Royal Bahamas Police (we have the first page)
Exhibit Q all of the transcript of the Florida proceedings (most of us probably have)
Exhibit R PEJ Report on Stern’s Affidavit in the Inquest (redacted and we don’t have)
Exhibit S Debra Opri’s original filing in California against Birkhead (we have)
Exhibit T Howard K. Stern’s petition from Florida suing O’Quinn (we have)
Exhibits U and V media contracts for Anna Nicole Smith and Howard K. Stern (redacted)
Exhibit X (one page from the great big beautiful doll (filed under seal for copyright reasons, however we have a copy)
Exhibit Y and Z media coverage on Anna Nicole Smith marrying J. Howard Marshall (we have)
Exhibits AA and BB is media coverage of Larry Birkhead (we have)
Exhibit CC tabloid media coverage pointing to Stern being involved in Daniel Smith death (we have)
Exhibits DD, EE and FF Jack Harding’s coverage in media (we have)
Exhibits DD the whole thing is redacted (we don’t’ have)
Exhibit HH media coverage of the Britney Spears defamation claim (we have)

The list filed under seal by Debra Neumann Hachette Books Dec. 15, 2008

Exhibit A excerpts deposition Evan Boorstyn (we don’t have)
Exhibit B excerpts deposition Leslie Pockell (we don’t have)
Exhibit C excerpts deposition Jamie Raab
Exhibit D excerpts deposition Howard K. Stern

The list filed under seal with Amy Einhorn’s declaration dated Dec. 15, 2008

Exhibit B of Amy Einhorn is a copy of the book proposal
Exhibit C copy of contract with Rita Cosby

The list filed under seal by L. Lin Wood for Howard K. Stern February 12, 2009

Exhibit 1 deposition Howard K. Stern dated Sept. 15 and 16 2008 (full deposition, 3 days worth)
Exhibit 2 deposition Rita Cosby Nov. 15, 2007 (full deposition 3 days worth)
Exhibit 3 deposition Rita Cosby Sep. 22-23 and 26 2008 with exhibits 4, 5, 8, 9, 29
Exhibit 4 excerpts of Larry Birkhead July 22, 2008
Exhibit 5 excerpts of Bruce Littlefield, dated July 29, 2009 with exhibit 13
Exhibit 6 excerpts of Raymond Martino dated Sept. 2, 2009
Exhibit 7 excerpts Pol’ Atteu dated May 28, 2009
Exhibit 8 excerpts Patrik Simpson dated May 27, 2008
Exhibit 9 excerpts Don Clark dated Oct. 14, 2008
Exhibit 10 pages of Don Clark deposition from Florida (we have)
Exhibit 11 excerpts of Wilma Vicedomine dated Oct. 13, 2008 exhibits 6 and 7
Exhibit 12 excerpts of Amy Einhorn dated Sept. 9, 2008 Exhibits 1, 3, 8, 9, 10 and 12
Exhibit 13 excerpts of Mitchell Hoffman dated Sept. 10, 2008 exhibits 22, 27 and 27
Exhibit 14 excerpts Les Pockell dated Oct. 7, 2008
Exhibit 15 excerpts Evan Boorstyn dated Oct. 7, 2008
Exhibit 16 excerpts Jamie Raab dated Oct. 7, 2008
Exhibit 17 excerpts Dan Wakeford dated Dec. 15, 2007
Exhibit 18 excerpts Mark Speer dated Oct. 23, 2008
Exhibit 19 excerpts Jack Harding dated Feb. 21, 2008
Exhibit 20 excerpts Broncha Stern dated Sept 3, 2008
Exhibit 21 excerpts Virgie Arthur from Houston case dated Oct. 28, 2008
Exhibit 22 Declaration Howard K. Stern Feb. 5, 2009 partially filed under seal
Exhibit 29 notes by Rita Cosby
Exhibits 31, 32, 33, and 34 all filed under seal

The list filed under seal by Debra Neumann for Hachette Books March 13, 2009

Exhibit A excerpts Amy Einhorn dated Sept. 9, 2008
Exhibit B excerpts Mitchell D. Hoffman dated Sept. 10, 2008

The list filed under seal by Elizabeth McNamara for Rita Cosby March 13, 2009

Exhibit 1 excerpts Raymond Martino
Exhibit 2 excerpts Don Clark
Exhibit 3 complete deposition Wilma Vicedomine
Exhibit 4 excerpts Mark Speer
Exhibit 5 excerpts Jack Harding
Exhibit 6 excerpts Larry Birkhead
Exhibit 7 excerpts Pol’ Atteu
Exhibit 8 excerpts Patrik Simpson
Exhibit 10 email between Birkhead and ANS dated Sept. 22, 2006
Exhibit 11 email between Stella Lockhard to Stern attorney Krista Barth dated April 13, 2007
Exhibit 12 updated document by Rita Cosby
Exhibit 14 excerpts book by Cyril H. Wecht published Jan. 6, 2009 (should have been filed under seal we have removed them from the web site.)
Exhibit 15 Big Beautiful Doll filed under seal

LATEST FILINGS BY RITA COSBY IN THE NEW YORK CASE ON SEX TAPE AND ORAL SEX AT A PARTY WITH JACKIE HATTEN STILL NO WHERE TO BE FOUND

August 18, 2009 Rita Cosby’s Notice to the Southern District Federal Court before Judge Chin that she is filing a Memorandum of Law of reconsideration of the sex tape and the “party” where missing Jackie Hatten “says” she saw Birkhead and Stern having oral sex.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2353.

August 18, 2009 Rita Cosby Memorandum of Law Support Reconsideration to the Southern District Federal Court before Judge Chin that she is filing a Memorandum of Law of reconsideration of the sex tape and the “party” where missing Jackie Hatten “says” she saw Birkhead and Stern having oral sex.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2354.

Latest paperwork in Texas State Case

August 11, 2009 Court Order passing on the County attorney’s office filing a “boilerplate” Motion without the facts the court needs on one of the parties filing of an indigence Affidavit.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2352.

©Rose Turner, an Editorial Opinion
August 2o, 2009
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 Rose Turner or our featured authors, 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.

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

Tags: AG Jerry Brown, Amy Einhorn, Amy Stewart, Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith's Estate, Anna Nicole Smith's Will, Attorney General Jerry Brown, Britney Spears, Broncha Stern, Bruce Littlefield, Bryan Cave LLP, Celebrity Trials, Dan Wakeford, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Debra Neumann, Debra Opri Esq., Don Clark, Don Clark ex-FBI, Douglas Maynard, Dr. Khris, Dr. Khristine Eroshevich, Dr. Sandeep Kapoor, Elizabeth McNamara, Elizabeth Thompson, Evan Boorstyn, Exclusive Rose Speaks, Feel Good Jerry Brown, Ford Shelley, G Ben Thompson, Geraldo Rivera, Greta Van Sustern, Hachette Books, High Profile Trials, Howard K Stern, J. Christopher Smith Esq., J. Howard Marshall, Jack Harding, Jackie Hatten, Jamie Raab, John "Jay" Patton, L. Lin Wood, Leslie Pockell, Lin Wood, Lori Payne, Luke Lantta, Mark Speer, Micahel Trope, Mitchell Hoffman, Nanny Gate, Neil McCabe, Nicole Jennings Wade, Pol' Atteu and Patrik Simpson, Raymond Martino, Rita Cosby, Stella Lockhard, Steve Sadow Esq., The O'Quinn Law Firm, Tom Bednarek, Tomaczek, Tomaczek Bednarek, Virgie Arthur

From Ford Shelley filing to extend all of the deadline and court dates in Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate vs. G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley for the alleged break in, theft and profiting from any alleged stolen items from Horizons taken the day after Anna Nicole Smith died.

The Ninth Circuit of Appeals has confirmed the date and time for oral arguments in from of it in the Anna Nicole Smith Estate vs. the Estate of Pierce Marshall. There has also been two Amici Curia Brief’s filed in support of Elaine Marshall, the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith is to file their answer by June 1.

May 18, 2009 Ford Shelley “First” Request to Extend all deadlines involving the trial of Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate vs. G. Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley for possession of and allegedly profiting from stolen items from Horizons taken the day after Anna Nicole Smith’s death.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2065.

May 12. 2009 The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has set the date of June 25, 2009 and the time at 1:30 PM in Seattle for the Oral Arguments of both Anna Nicole Smith’s Estate as well as the Estate of Pierce Marshall, each side shall have 30 minutes.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2066.

May 12, 2009 the filing of an Amici Curia Brief by Professors of Law in Support of Elaine Marshall the executrix for the Estate of Pierce Marshall.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2067.

May 12, 2009 the filing of an Amici Curia Brief by the Washington Legal Foundation in Support of Elaine Marshall the executrix for the Estate of Pierce Marshall.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2068.

I have also received emails asking me to clarify that Craig Ball the Texas District Court’s Special Master and forensic computer expert is not the same man or company that is Virgie Arthur’s Expert. I can assure you they are not the same man or even company and from what I have read Mr. Ball is the more respected neutral forensic expert in the state of Texas. I am sure being an attorney also helps him when he is appointed a Special Master by courts state wide. You can download the Court Order Quashing the Subpoena linked below to clarify this misunderstanding appearing around the internet for yourself.

April 1, 2009 Court Order Quashing the Subpoena of BKD, LLP computer forensic experts because they have also worked for Virgie Arthur in her cases.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=1908.

The Forum link for comments and a listing of the documents and open for your discussion is below.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/public-forums/showthread.php?tid=62.

May 29, 2009 the Court issued the Extended Dates requested by Ford Shelley on May 18. See our calendar for new dates or download this Court Document.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2069.

NEW FILINGS IN THE TEXAS STATE COURT

May 29, 2009 Arthur’s Motion for Contempt of Court against Teresa Stephens for not complying with the Court’s May 11, 2009 Order to have her computers imaged.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2070.

May 29, 2009 Notice of Contempt Hearing on Teresa Stephens on June 12, 2009 at 9 AM for failing to follow the Court Order of May 11 to have her computer imaged.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2071.

May 29, 2009 Art Harris Request for an Oral Hearing on the Motion to Designate Third Parties that was filed by Nelda “Rose” Turner on May 18, 2009 and is set on the Submission docket for June 15. An Oral Hearing would cause the Motion to have to be rescheduled possibly.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2072.

NEWEST FILINGS IN CALIFORNIA ON JUNE 1, 2009

June 1, 2009 Bonnie Stern’s Answer to Virgie Arthur’s Adversarial suit in the California Bankruptcy Court.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2073.

June 1, 2009 Howard K. Stern as the Executor of the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith filed his Supplemental Brief for Review by the Ninth Circuit Court.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2074.

June 1, 2009 Howard K. Stern as the Executor of the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith filed his Motion to Take Judicial Notice by the Ninth Circuit Court.

http://www.rosespeaks.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=2075.

©Rose Turner
May 29, 2009
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 Rose Turner or our featured authors, 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.

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

Tags: Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith - Ninth Circuit of Appeals, Anna Nicole Smith Estate, Art Harris, Celebrity Trials, Charles "Chip" Babcock, Craig Ball - forensic computer, Dannielynn, Elaine Marshall, Estate of Pierce Marshall, Ford Shelley, G Ben Thompson, High Profile Trials, Horizons - Bahamas, Howard K Stern, John "Jay" Patton, Judge Tony Lindsay, L. Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Nancy Hamilton, Nicole Jennings Wade, Rose Turner, Stancil "Ford" Shelley, Teresa Stephens

In the four “accidentally” for nine hours filed excerpts of deposition and documents released to the public by Rita Cosby’s lawyer, Elizabeth McNamara via PACER, two of the people have now reviewed the parts filed in regards to them. That have stated, “We don’t think this was an accident, we think it was a brilliant move by Cosby’s lawyer. We want you to release the excerpts of our deposition and put those up on your blog”.

We have contacted representatives of the other two people whose deposition excerpts and exhibits were filed “accidentally” to let them know that in all fairness we feel we need to put those up as well.

When Rita Cosby’s 14 pages were put up with Court filings in November 2007, we purchased those through PACER as we did these. We also as two other sites put those up and let the lawyers and the judge battled out who was blamed if anyone and what to do about that.

In fairness to Cosby, we have struggled as we have stated since December 15 with the right of the public to know versus the right of privacy. Once we received the permission of two of the four people affected and being always a transparent site, no matter who the paperwork might make look bad, we are going to be putting up all of the paperwork with an editorial opinion about it later today.

Stay tuned, the paperwork is breath taking, stunning and guaranteed to cause thought provoking conversations around the blogosphere.

©Rose Turner
January 15, 2009
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.

Tags: Anna Nicole Smith, Ben Thompson, Bryan Cave LLP, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Debra Opri, Elizabeth McNamara, G Ben Thompson, Howard K Stern, John "Jay" Patton, John Patton, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Nicole Jennings Wade, Pol' Atteu and Patrik Simpson, Rita Cosby

In the Howard K. Stern vs. Rita Cosby and Hachette Books, on December 11, 2008, there was a letter addressed to Judge Denny Chin from Elizabeth A. McNamara requesting the Court for permission to file Motion for Summary Judgment for Rita Cosby and Hachette Books under seal. The Court DENIED the request to file the papers under seal “except that the parties may file a set of papers publicly, with confidential exhibits omitted and references to any confidential matters redacted, with a second complete and unredacted set that will be filed under sealed”.

Looks like the New York Court is going to allow us to see publicly some of the information that Cosby and Hachette is attempting to show in the Motions for Summary Judgment due to the Court by December 15.

What do you think we will be allowed to see and gleam for the filings due on Monday? Debunking chapter 13 will be up this weekend, lot’s to discuss in this case as well as several others we are following.

Remember that ALL documents filed in this case are in our download section, opened to ALL not just members of Rose Speaks.com.

©Rose Turner
December 13, 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.

Tags: Anna Nicole Smith, Bryan Cave LLP, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Douglas Maynard, Elizabeth McNamara, Howard K Stern, Jack Harding, Jackie Hatten, Jay Patton, John Patton, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Nicole Jennings Wade, Rita Cosby, Tom Bednarek

This article will be enlarged tonight with more of my thoughts about these Motions coming up and what we will be allowed to see.

We now have the rules for the Motion for Summary Judgment to be filed by Rita Cosby and Hachette Books and the Reply of Howard K. Stern to those Motions. Wonder if this is why we have those seven pages released from the Florida suit on Don Clark.

On December 2, 2008, New York Southern District Federal Court sets page limits on Rita Cosby’s Motion for Summary to 50 from the normal 25 Judgment and then Howard K. Stern’s reply can be 75 pages; Hachette intends to use the 25-page limit per the Civil Rules of Procedures.

So now, our attention shifts in part to the New York as Florida is officially closed even on PACER as of today.

I think now is a time to debunk the rest of chapter 13 of the real blond ambitious, Rita Cosby.

You can find all of the documents in our download section, opened to all not just members of Rose Speaks.com.

©Rose Turner
December 2, 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.

Tags: Anna Nicole Smith, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Don Clark, Don Clark ex-FBI, Douglas Manynard, Elizabeth McNamara, Howard K Stern, Jack Harding, John Patton, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Mark Speer, Nicole Jennings Wade, O'Quinn's Don Clark Ex-FBI, Randy Scott Zelin, Rita Cosby, Tom Bednarek

G. Ben Thompson missed the filing date the Court set of November 3 for his mandatory filing of the Rule 26 f of initial disclosures, also Howard K. Stern’s attorney pointed out that due to Thompson’s attorney being ill they had not been able to hold the required conference via phone.

The Court approved Susan Brown to represent Ben Thompson. Howard K. Stern has attorneys approved for Pro Hac Vice status, including Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Nicole Jennings Wade of Powell Goldstein as well as his South Carolina attorneys.

The best reading in my opinion is the Rule 26f filings required by the Court of which to date Ben Thompson has not answered. Ford Shelley lists only 3 witnesses, himself, his wife Gina Shelley and Howard K. Stern. However, in Shelley’s rule 26-3-a local rule filings, he lists only himself and his wife Gina Shelly as witnesses or persons that have information relevant to these allegations.

What caught my eye was the list of people who have possessions of some of the items alleged to have been taken out of Horizons the day after Anna Nicole Smith’s death.

1. Defendant Shelley has possession of a copy of a clown video.
2. All documents and tangible items related to litigation in the Bahamas which are in possession of the Bahamian authorities.
3. All documents and tangible items in possession of the California Department of Justice as to any investigation relating to Ms. Smith.
4. All documents and tangible items in possession of co-defendant Ben Thompson and/or his agents.
5. All documents and tangible items in possession of Larry Birkhead and/or his agents.

Which leaves the question of who has the ORIGINAL copy of the infamous Clown Video?

Howard K. Stern’s filing is a tad more revealing about where Stern’s team is going. In his required Rule 26-f list of the following witnesses.

(1) Howard K. Stern
(2) Larry Birkhead
(3) Pol’ Atteau
(4) Rita Cosby
(5) Don Clark
(6) Wilma Vicedomine
(7) Stancil “Ford” Shelley
(8) G. Ben Thompson
(9) Tom Pirtle, on of Virgie Arthur’s Texas lawyer at the burial hearing
(10) Tracy Ferguson an attorney that is part of Callendar’s in the Bahamas that G. Ben Thompson is suing.
(11) Gaither Thompson
(12) Melanie Thompson
(13) Gina Shelley
(14) Representatives of Fox News
(15) Representatives of Biscayne Professional Associates (possibly the company that imaged Anna Nicole Smith’s computers and hard drives when the Estate recovered them)

Howard K. Stern lists several Counts that make the basis of the Estate’s case against Ford Shelly and Ben Thompson and a couple caught my attention.

Count Three: Statutory and common law commercial appropriation of right of publicity:

Under California law, the right of publicity survives the death of a celebrity. Thus, any person who uses a deceased person’s name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness, in any manner . . . without prior consent from the executor of the deceased person’s estate commercially misappropriates the deceased person’s right of publicity. Cal. Civ. Code § 3344.1.

There can be no dispute that Ms. Smith held a fully descendible right of publicity
in her Estate property. See Cal. Civ. Code § 3344.1. Further, Shelley has admitted to removing documents and materials from Horizons after Ms. Smith’s death. There is no question that these documents and materials are owned by the Estate. Further, there is no dispute that these items removed by Shelley contained Ms. Smith’s name, voice, signature, and photograph. Shelley used the property by, among other things, distributing it to third parties, including media entities. Shelley had no prior consent from the Executor to use the property he stole from Horizons.

Count Six: Violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act:

Whoever knowingly causes transmission of a program, information, code, or command, and as a result of such conduct, intentionally causes damage without authorization, to a protected computer; intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct, recklessly causes damage; or intentionally accesses a protected computer without authorization, and as a result of such conduct causes damage and Forensic analyses confirm that Shelley copied and deleted files contained on the password protected computers and external hard drives owned by the Estate, which Shelley unlawfully removed from Horizons. Shelley lacked authorization to access the computers and external hard drives. Shelley’s conduct caused damage and losses in excess of $5,000 in a one-year period. causes losses of at least $5,000 in a one-year period, violates federal statute. 18 U.S.C. §1030(a)(5).

Forensic analyses confirm that Shelley copied and deleted files contained on the
password protected computers and external hard drives owned by the Estate, which Shelley unlawfully removed from Horizons. Shelley lacked authorization to access the computers and external hard drives. Shelley’s conduct caused damage and losses in excess of $5,000 in a one-year period.

Stern’s Local Rule 26-3-a, lists most of the same witnesses with the exception of Wilma Vicedomine which leads to ask when and why did she become involved with Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley?

Howard K. Stern’s lists the following evidence and documents in the same disclosure that he and/or the Estate (Dannielynn Birkhead as the sole heir) might use to prove the claims.

The following categories of documents in the Executor’s possession, custody, or control may be used to support his claims:

(1) All documents referred to in the Complaint.
(2) Documents relating to the investigation into Defendants’ unlawful conduct in the Bahamas.
(3) Media interviews of Defendants.
(4) Communications between Defendants and third parties regarding the factual circumstances that form the basis for the allegations in the Complaint.
(5) Deposition transcripts of third parties in other litigation regarding the factual circumstances that form the basis for the allegations in the Complaint.
(6) Forensic analyses of Ms. Smith’s computers.
(7) Communications from counsel for Defendants which support the factual basis for the allegations in the Complaint.

So folks why did Ben Thompson miss the date of November 3 and has not notified the court or ask for an extension due to one of his lawyers being ill? Who edited the Clown Video and who has the original now? Why is Tom Pirtle listed, but the rest of Virgie Arthur’s legal team in Florida are not? Then we have Don Clark on both disclosures but Wilma Vicedomine as the lone separate person missing in one of the filings.

Could the Clark/Vicedomine investigation lead us from California, to Florida, to New York to South Carolina in the alleged attempts to have Howard K. Stern arrested and tried for something, anything it appears if the filings are to be believed.

Remember you can pick up all of the documents related to the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith suing Ben Thompson and Ford Shelley, opened to ALL, not just members of Rose Speaks.com.

In other news on November 4, 2008 Court Order from Florida that Postpones the Requirement of John O’Quinn and the O’Quinn Law Firm financials until November 10, 2008 the deadline for the two sides to file a Joint Motion to Dismiss with Prejudice.

©Rose Turner
November 5, 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.

Tags: Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith's Will, Ben Thompson, Biscayne Professional Associates, California Department of Justice, Clark/Vice investigation, Daniel Smith, Dannielynn, Don Clark, Don Clark ex-FBI, Ford Shelley, FOX News, G Ben Thompson, Gaither Thompson, Gina Shelley, Horizons, Horizons in the Bahamas, Horizons lawsuit, Howard K Stern, John "Jay" Patton, John Patton, L. Lin Wood, Lin Wood, Luke Lantta, Melanie Thompson, Nicole Jennings Wade, O'Quinn's Don Clark Ex-FBI, Pol' Atteu, Rita Cosby, Stancil "Ford" Shelley, Tom Pirtle, Tracy Ferguson of Callendar's in the Bahamas