Jon and Kate Plus 8, Official Thread--Part 7

Status
Not open for further replies.
I am so glad that you came back! It's refreshing to hear from someone who is truly able to offer a balanced opinion..:goodvibes

I missed you guys too much :flower3:



I was going to avoid this topic altogether, but it was such an easy call for me. If people want to believe this story, then ceteris parabis they also have to believe that Mady saw Kate kissing Steve (because a former nanny might have said so)

But most people won't - because either Kate's behavior is above reproach - OR she's smart enough to be very, very discreet..;)


The Enquirer has covered themselves very well on this one -- the entire article is written as Stephanie says this, Stephanie says that. And that is the truth. The only one hanging out there in the wind is Stephanie (and I've noted before that the cost of going after her is likely not worth the lawsuit -- Jon actually can't stop her from talking about anything, and his legal team likely figures she'll eventually discredit herself)

It's interesting when you read through the numerous threads on J&K.. If the National Enquirer publishes something about Kate, they're a rag mag and a totally unreliable source.. If they write about Jon, it's the 100% truth and a totally reliable source..:laughing:


Sadly, I do -- former jobs. Many prescription medications, especially anti-depressants could cause some of the symptoms you are talking about, including weight gain. This is especially true if a person has to try different medications to get to the right one. Whether his behaviour is really what has been relayed to us by the tabloids is a whole other topic.

I'm SO glad you brought this up.. Not only could this be the cause of his erratic behavior and weight gain, but if he's also mixing alcohol with these medications his behavior could be totally bizarre.. His marriage was in shambles - for a lot longer than any of us knew - so what are the odds that he may have been suffering from depression and anxiety, went to a physician, and was prescribed medications for these problems? Very high..

I have seen what these medications can do when the wrong ones are prescribed - when the dose is incorrect - when a person has to be weaned off of one med before starting another.. Very odd behavior - everything from manic behavior to appearing as though one has had a stroke.. But this is Jon - therefore it must be cocaine use..


As for custody, it may have a bearing on how the custody dispute plays out ie. if Kate's team wants to use that in court. I wouldn't be surprised to find that they have asked for him to be drug-tested, or that his legal team has already begun regular testing at an independent lab to be proactive (if they are any good at all, they should do this)

Someone mentioned the possibility that this was the reason that Kate "suddenly" filed for divorce - to protect her children.. If there was even a hint that Jon was using cocaine, does anyone here think she would leave him alone with those kids? The responsible thing would have been to file an emergency hearing regarding the safety of the children and request only "supervised" visitation until it could be determined whether or not the children were in danger.. Didn't happen - so that pretty much kills that theory..

The other thing is that the counter-claim was a necessary step in order to broaden the scope of the case, otherwise it would only be about whether Jon did/didn't do what TLC alleged, and whether those actions would violate the terms of the contract (or more precisely, the parts of the contract that TLC was willing to open up to the scrutiny of the court). The effect of the counter-claim is to allow Jon's team to prove that either the contract was void given the illegality of specific sections of it, or that any actions which might have been considered breach were reasonable given TLC's behaviour ie. the best defense is a good offense. It also makes it more likely that the case will be settled, if only because TLC does not want everything about the show, the contract, the family, etc to be made public.

I think the bolded part of your post is more likely than not..

Hopefully there will be no "settling" that results in the children being allowed to be filmed again..:thumbsup2
 
Did you all see this:

http://omg.yahoo.com/news/jon-and-kate-gosselin-to-discuss-what-the-future-holds/31181

Looks like J&K will be having a sit down on the last official J&K+8. Weird.

And it looks like Kate+8 is a no-go but TLC is forming some new show for Kate? :confused3

Looks like TLC is bound and determined to squeeze the last bit of mileage out of these two that they can.. Last week was such a dismal failure (ratings wise) and it's all over the internet that sponsors are NOT happy with TLC in regards to the Gosselin's..

The ship is sinking..

By the way, I was watching Paula Dean on Bonnie Hunt this morning and I can't imagine how her and Kate could possibly do a show together.. Talk about a "bad" fit! :eek:
 
How strange. :confused3

Will we be subjected to watching them mud wrestle at some point? :rotfl:

I think it's very bizarre that they're going to be together for a sit-down on tv. Poor taste if you ask me considering how nasty this divorce has been. Yet another video for the kids to see one day, sigh. What I'm wondering is how on earth did they manage to get Jon to agree?? I guess money does talk then. I'm so tired of this circus. Poor kids, they didn't choose to have these 2 boneheads for parents.

And redrose, I'm very glad to see you're back!! :hug: We were all lost without you when Jon's counter-suit hit the internet, at least I was anyway!:laughing: So what does 'Public Policy' mean? In Jon's counter claim he states the TLC contract is against public policy. :confused3
 
If they actually do put Cake Boss in their old time slot, I might just go back to TLC. :goodvibes

I like Cake Boss too.:thumbsup2 His accent is hilarious, reminds me of a character from Good Fellas!:laughing: Did you see the one where that crazy bride-zilla hated her cake so she squirted colored icing all over it?? I would so have delivered that cake that she ruined to her wedding!:lmao:

And to keep this OT, maybe one of the Kate+8 specials will be the kids traveling to New Jersey to make a cake with the Cake Boss!:rolleyes:
 
The Enquirer has covered themselves very well on this one -- the entire article is written as Stephanie says this, Stephanie says that. And that is the truth. The only one hanging out there in the wind is Stephanie (and I've noted before that the cost of going after her is likely not worth the lawsuit -- Jon actually can't stop her from talking about anything, and his legal team likely figures she'll eventually discredit herself)

It's interesting when you read through the numerous threads on J&K.. If the National Enquirer publishes something about Kate, they're a rag mag and a totally unreliable source.. If they write about Jon, it's the 100% truth and a totally reliable source..
[/B]

And it is interesting that when my quote is quoted and responded to and then that quote is quoted and responded to that some people that that me pointing out a legal issue meant that I believed the Enquirer.

No idea about Mady and Steve, I wasn't there and I wasn't talking about that.

But when someone is presently in 2 legal battles, publishing something so disparaging can be extremely damaging. It would behoove Jon to deny it and demand a retraction and then sue if it were not true.

If he remains silent, there may be some validity to the allegations which are harmful in and of themselves.

It is each citizens duty to clear their name if warranted or suffer the consequences if the story is true.

All citizens have the right to not be slandered or libeled.

As for Kate and the bodyguard, she did indeed at least refute all that. Whether or not people believe it is up to them.

However being accused of a Federal crime (drug usage) is a bit more damaging than an alleged affair.


Please stop your blanket statements about the opposing point of view. We get that you feel that we are all irrational and want the kids imprisoned in their filming heck forever. However, those people are not this thread and it would be lovely if you could respect that we do all have some level of intelligence that allows us to make formed opinions--certainly none that come close to the broad brush that you paint with.


I don't paint you with a broad brush as the rest of the haters out in the world. It would be unkind, given that I don't know you and that I do respect the opinions of the opposition.

Yes we know there are people out there who find no fault with Kate, yada yada yada--

I haven't found one in this discussion since I have been on the thread, myself included.

I'm just asking for a little respect, that's all.

I called one person out on it several pages ago and they were on MY side of the opinion ocean.

I'd like the thread to stay open, but it can't if we don't respect each other.
 
:thumbsup2 Well said. There are plenty if not most on this board, that sees the good and the bad on both sides.


I don't paint you with a broad brush as the rest of the haters out in the world. It would be unkind, given that I don't know you and that I do respect the opinions of the opposition.

Yes we know there are people out there who find no fault with Kate, yada yada yada--

I haven't found one in this discussion since I have been on the thread, myself included..
 
And redrose, I'm very glad to see you're back!! :hug: We were all lost without you when Jon's counter-suit hit the internet, at least I was anyway!:laughing: So what does 'Public Policy' mean? In Jon's counter claim he states the TLC contract is against public policy. :confused3

Thank you :hug: But remember, I'm in Canada -- this is all common law, but in most of the US states it is more codified so there will be some instances where precedent is trumped by prevailing statutes eg. the Coogan law. But this is totally relevant to your question, too.

First, I'm going to repost both of the relevant links, since it is so darn hard to find them in the thread:

TLC's original claim:
http://www.tmz.com/2009/10/16/jon-gosselin-kate-jon-and-kate-plus-eight-lawsuit-tlc/

Jon's counter-claim:
http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2009/11/exclusive-documents-read-jon-gosselin%E2%80%99s-5-million-lawsuit-against-tlc

The section you're referring to is point #45 in Jon's counter-claim (I think) which states that the contract is null and void because it is against Public Policy -- they are likely referring to the child labour laws in the state of PA, ie. not saying that TLC failed to obtain the required permits, but saying that based on the terms of the contract the permits would not have been issued. This is totally different than saying that the contract is void because the kids weren't compensated properly, etc, that would make the contract void based on precedent.

It's pretty obvious that the new lawyer wrote the counter-claim -- it's so different than Jon's response to Kate's petition re the money issue. So, I looked up this guy -- he works alone, but he has a very interesting resume. It seems like his hobby is fighting against big clients:
http://pview.findlaw.com/view/3893869_1

:lmao: I think I'm looking forward to the first court day than I am to the last J&K show -- might be more of a battle in the courtroom.

On another note, here's a link to a whole other J&K blog -- the article is written by a US lawyer:
http://gosselindivorce.blogspot.com/2009/10/why-tlc-wont-win-their-lawsuit.html
 
Yes welcome back Redrose--

When you get a chance, please help us a bit on that lawsuit.

Also--is it common to have spelling and grammar errors?

Sadly, it is. And sometimes it makes the documents completely void, such as when a person's name is spelled incorrectly in a POA. Good reason not to always assume the lawyer has everything correct -- although you would be covered by their malpractice insurance, it can make for a huge inconvenience.

Thanks for the welcome :goodvibes
 
This was posted earlier, and I think most of us thought it was pretty funny, and took it like it was prob meant. I loved it.

Welcome back :flower3: As I've said in PM's, we may be on oposite sides of Kate and Jon (when either of us are even on sides), but it's still interesting and fun, to banter back and forth. You have made me see stuff I might have missed and what a dull world, if we all had only one opinion.

I understand you are looking at this from Canada, but it's been interesting having your take on the court cases.

As for if the newest Jon rumors would have any bearing on custody, boy, what I see in my city, I doubt it. If you took away parents rights on everyone who either did a 'dirty' tape or did drugs (and I haven't seen any proof of that) we'd have to construct a larger orphanage to house all these kids. When I work at some of the volunteer places I'm just shocked at the lack of care the kids get. J & K's kids are well taken care of, at least from what I see in my armchair. And just like I say when the garbage comes out about Kate..these are rag mags, and although they may all have a bit of truth somewhere, it could be as simple as Jon rented an R rated movie last week, which as turned into a sex tape LOL. It'sll all come out in the wash, if it's true...hard to hide something like that. And even if he has one..it's not like he's still married. He's a grown up.

I hesitate to post this. Anybody who hates Jon will definitely find fault -- most others will just find it funny.
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/82ee1f0bd5/jon-gosselin-goes-back-in-time

BTW, I think this is probably his response to all of Kate's comments about "the old Jon". If so, good on him for not being nasty about it :lmao:
 
And it is interesting that when my quote is quoted and responded to and then that quote is quoted and responded to that some people that that me pointing out a legal issue meant that I believed the Enquirer.

No idea about Mady and Steve, I wasn't there and I wasn't talking about that.

But when someone is presently in 2 legal battles, publishing something so disparaging can be extremely damaging. It would behoove Jon to deny it and demand a retraction and then sue if it were not true.

If he remains silent, there may be some validity to the allegations which are harmful in and of themselves.

It is each citizens duty to clear their name if warranted or suffer the consequences if the story is true.

All citizens have the right to not be slandered or libeled.

As for Kate and the bodyguard, she did indeed at least refute all that. Whether or not people believe it is up to them.

However being accused of a Federal crime (drug usage) is a bit more damaging than an alleged affair.


Please stop your blanket statements about the opposing point of view. We get that you feel that we are all irrational and want the kids imprisoned in their filming heck forever. However, those people are not this thread and it would be lovely if you could respect that we do all have some level of intelligence that allows us to make formed opinions--certainly none that come close to the broad brush that you paint with.


I don't paint you with a broad brush as the rest of the haters out in the world. It would be unkind, given that I don't know you and that I do respect the opinions of the opposition.

Yes we know there are people out there who find no fault with Kate, yada yada yada--

I haven't found one in this discussion since I have been on the thread, myself included.

I'm just asking for a little respect, that's all.

I called one person out on it several pages ago and they were on MY side of the opinion ocean.

I'd like the thread to stay open, but it can't if we don't respect each other.

Since it was me that originally quoted you, I'll reiterate that you never said in your post that you believed Stephanie's allegations. I made the comment about Kate and Steve, since it was basically the same kind of evidence, but that was in response to another post.

BTW, I thought that Jon had refuted Stephanie's claims (on one of the earlier versions of her story) through a statement made by Mark Heller.

You might be right though -- since she doesn't seem to want to go away ie. she likes getting paid to talk, it might be time to go after her. Even if TLC hires her a lawyer to make it look like Jon is picking on a poor single mother. The cocaine use issue has probably crossed the line (interesting how she upped the ante from marijuana use to cocaine use)

Good post -- you changed my mind :goodvibes:
 
On another note, here's a link to a whole other J&K blog -- the article is written by a US lawyer:
http://gosselindivorce.blogspot.com/2009/10/why-tlc-wont-win-their-lawsuit.html
Is this written by Mark Heller (although it says 'her' so it can't be? Is is someone in his office?). I'm feeling blind, I can't find who wrote it, other than if you go back to Radar, from the link at the top, it goes to Hellers letter written Oct 17th.
It's prob right in front of me. Thanks.
 
Is this written by Mark Heller (although it says 'her' so it can't be? Is is someone in his office?). I'm feeling blind, I can't find who wrote it, other than if you go back to Radar, from the link at the top, it goes to Hellers letter written Oct 17th.
It's prob right in front of me. Thanks.

I don't think that it says...I was looking too! :goodvibes

Your Administrator is a licensed (not in PA), practicing attorney, who has spent her career in family law, with experience in high-stakes divorce law. She is very familiar with custody orders, restraining orders, visitation orders, etc., and has been chief counsel for hundreds of trials and mediations. She has worked on legal matters with several high-profile families.

She can analyze legal procedings, documents, statements, etc. from the Gosselin divorce, but cannot and will not provide legal advice....so don't ask!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

GET A DISNEY VACATION QUOTE

Dreams Unlimited Travel is committed to providing you with the very best vacation planning experience possible. Our Vacation Planners are experts and will share their honest advice to help you have a magical vacation.

Let us help you with your next Disney Vacation!











facebook twitter
Top