www.justiceforchandra.com

[rd]

I love it. This is great, maggie. It'll be interesting to see whether AMI thought their settlement with Carolyn covered Condit, and of course Condit is a public figure that has far higher hurdles for libel. Still, AMI manages to exceed any reasonability with their hallucinatory fabrications.

But I honestly don't see the stories that I'm aware of exceeding First Amendment rights to discuss a public official. He is hoping for a settlement to become a millionare but AMI should not give him a penny.

To be honest with you, it's hard for anyone else to have done more than Condit did to expose himself to "public hatred, contempt and ridicule."

I also didn't see the book mentioned. Not sure if that's supposed to be another lawsuit. :) Last time, Condit got himself removed from the case early. This time, let's hope something is dragged out of his miserly acknowledgement of what happened to Chandra.

rd

[benn]

Hello maggie and rd. I just posted on the new lawsuits at Crimenews2000. Well at least I got a Chandra Levy discussion started up again there. Most of their Chandra Levy is read only. Thanks for the compliment about my posting there, rd.

I don't look for anyone rolling over here and playing dead, except maybe Dunne, but I don't think he can afford to do that either.

I wonder what the court is going to say about so many lawsuits being filed? Agressive attorneys attempt to stir up as much trouble as they can.

Maybe we will see some discovery in the Dunne case, if there is a Dunne case. The same is true of all these new cases, if they get to court there is going to be some discovery. I don't think Condit is going to get to pick and choose the questions by the opposing attorneys that he wants to answer. Hopefully before then there is some action on the criminal investigation. These lawsuits may stir up the media a little to do some more investigating.

benn

[rd]

They may very well. Let's hope so, benn. We saw AMI try to do some discovery last time on the phone call records and there was a rather quick settlement then. Also, Condit got himself out of discovery quick. This time he can't.

The discovery for everything AMI ever printed about Condit is pretty extensive. I personally think Condit thinks he is buying a ticket in a lottery with the thought that a couple of million is chump change for AMI to get him off their back. I say AMI should run article after article on Condit ducking and weaving from answering questions. He thinks he's despised now? Just wait till people know more about him.

rd

[rd]

from an earlier post from maggie:

Carolyn Condit, Enquirer settle suit
Ex-congressman's wife accused tabloid of libel in article on Levy case.
By Jerry Bier
The Fresno Bee
(Published Thursday, July 10, 2003, 5:01 AM)

Carolyn Condit settled her $10 million libel lawsuit against the National Enquirer on Wednesday, but details of the settlement were not revealed.
"The matter has been resolved to the satisfaction of both parties," said attorney Neville Johnson, one of the lawyers representing Condit.

The announcement followed a marathon closed-door negotiating session presided over by U.S. Magistrate Judge Lawrence J. O'Neill that began shortly after 8:30 a.m. and concluded just before 4 p.m.

The case had been headed for trial Sept. 30.

A smiling Condit, the wife of former Rep. Gary Condit, declined to comment as she left the federal courthouse in downtown Fresno, but she hugged Johnson and told him, "You did a good job. Thank you."

Thomas B. Kelly of Denver, the lead lawyer representing the National Enquirer, also declined to comment, but confirmed that the lawsuit was settled.

Neither Kelly nor Johnson would discuss details of the settlement, including financial amounts.

Both sides said the agreement also applies to a $15 million complaint filed by Condit against Enquirer's sister publication, Star Editorial Inc., and American Media Inc.


You guys were tracking these suits pretty close. Is the $15 million suit referred to here also from Carolyn only? I was thinking one from Carolyn and one from Gary against AMI.

rd

[benn]

rd, here are the lawsuits listed for the Condits at Legalcasedocs.com

GARY CONDIT v DOMINICK DUNNE 100%*********_
2. CAROLYN CONDIT v NATIONAL ENQUIRER INC 100%*********_
3. STATE OF CALIFORNIA v GARY CONDIT 100%*********_
4. CALIFORNIA v GARY CONDIT MIKE LYNCH and DON THORNTON

I think that 100% refers to the amount of the case that Legalcasedocs.com has to send to its subscribers.

benn

[benn]

This is the only suit I turned up in a search for AMI at Legalcase.

This is what can be seen without logging in.

ARETHA FRANKLIN v AMERICAN MEDIA INC
To purchase access to the documents for this case, simply click the "Add to Cart" button; then follow the directions on the corresponding e-commerce screens.

Keywords & Phrases
CaseNo: AFVAMI171974, Plaintiff: ARETHA FRANKLIN, State: MI Michigan, UniqueCaseRef: LCD>AFVAMI171974, California State Bar, Michigan, Star, Franklin, Laws, Defamatory, Alcohol Abuse, Delaware, Publication, Tabloid Star, Matter, Abuse, Ill, Disregard, Falsity, Damage, Retraction, Stroock, Los, Florida, Mizrahi, Individual Residing, Entertainer, Arethafrankun, Drinking, Iti, Hue, Hereto , ContentID: 120249956

benn

[benn]

I found no lawsuits for Star Editorial Inc. Of course if something is settled out of court that does not show up, but if there is a complaint that does show up.

That is if Legalcase has that particular case. Legalcase does not have all cases. Legalcase says they will acquire cases requested. Who has all cases, Lexus-Nexus? Some people with library priveleges to certain libraries can probably access Lexus-Nexus for free.

benn

[benn]

Well, the newspapers are doing their job, trying to keep the facts straight. ......:)

This AP report gives a different dollar amount on the lawsuit.

http://www.sacbee.com/state_wire/story/7978092p-8914844c.html

Gary Condit sues tabloids over Chandra Levy stories
By JILL BARTON, Associated Press Writer
Last Updated 6:10 a.m. PST Saturday, December 20, 2003
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) - Former U.S. Rep. Gary Condit sued The National Enquirer and other tabloids for $38 million on Friday, alleging they falsely connected him with the 2001 murder of federal intern Chandra Levy. (snip)

benn

[rd]

AMI says in that article that they look forward to deposing him, benn. So do we.

rd

[jane]

from the Modesto Bee

Condit files $209 million lawsuit against tabloids

BEE STAFF REPORTS
AND NEWS SERVICES

Last Updated: December 20, 2003, 04:22:14 AM PST

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. -- Former Rep. Gary Condit sued The National Enquirer and other tabloids for $209 million on Friday, alleging they falsely connected him with the 2001 murder of former federal intern Chandra Levy.
The California Democrat alleges that the Enquirer, Globe and Star Magazine tabloids, along with parent company American Media Inc., maliciously published defamatory statements that Condit "was involved in deviant and perverted sexual conduct, which directly or indirectly led to the kidnapping and-or murder of Ms. Levy," according to the suit filed in Palm Beach County circuit court.

Michael Kahane, AMI general counsel, said in a statement that the Boca Raton-based company "will vigorously defend any suit filed by Mr. Condit" and that he expects it to be dismissed.

"We fully stand behind the editorial integrity of what we have published," the statement said.

Condit's lawsuit details 45 pages of headlines he alleges were false and defamatory, such as "Congressman & the intern. Chandra killed in kinky sex game!"

The lawsuit claims the tabloids failed to reasonably investigate the stories and paid sources for the false statements "in a calculated effort" to boost profits.

Condit is asking for $19 million in actual damages, plus $190 million in punitive damages.

Susan Levy, Chandra Levy's mother, said Friday that she was not making any comments. "There are no comments to be made."

Chandra Levy, 24, disappeared in May 2001. The Modesto woman had just concluded an internship with the U.S. Bureau of Prisons and was due back in California for graduation from a master's degree program at the University of Southern California.

Her disappearance became media fodder as the details of her friendship with Condit came to light. On May 22, 2002, a man walking his dog came across some of Levy's bones in Washington's Rock Creek Park.

During the yearlong investigation into Levy's disappearance, Condit told police he had had a romance with Levy but knew nothing of her disappearance. He is not considered a suspect in her unsolved death, which was ruled a homicide.

The case drew months of negative publicity and was cited as the main cause of Condit's re-election defeat in the March 2002 primary.

His wife, Carolyn, settled a lawsuit with the Enquirer for an undisclosed amount in July.

Condit has another lawsuit pending, an $11 million defamation complaint against Dominick Dunne, a 77-year-old columnist for Vanity Fair magazine who has discussed several theories about Levy's disappearance.
_________________
"There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ

[fallout]

Maggie!

Thanks for the link to the lawsuit.

I read it and was surprised to see that the Condit lawyers did not mention the fact that the Enquirer, Star and Globe would raise the price of their rags everytime there was a Chandra or Condit headline by as much as a dollar. I'd love to see the accounting on this.

I'm almost tempted to send a fax to L. Lin Wood and advise him to check the extra profit generated by these headlines.

To be fair I should send any stuff I have that would help American Media to defend themselves by showing reasonable 'proof' that some of what they were saying was true.

Will the subject of the dogwalker come up? Will they subpoena the dog-walker?

or
Darryl, Anne Marie Smith, Ingmar Guandique, Chip Langman, etc.

and how about some people that haven't been mentioned:
Did Condit have a housekeeper who came in once a week to clean up? What did she see?

and for RD
Does the defense get to ask Condit-
"What were you doing in Luray, Va. on May 17-18, 2001?"

This is great. Thanks Gary!!!!!!!!!!

James

[jane]

fallout, don't you dare help L. Lin Wood!! The tabloids are classy compared to Wood and Condit, and don't you forget it!
_________________
"There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ

[rd]

lol We're not going to be able to help much when it comes to Arab sheiks and Jamaican biker gangs. Still, it's going to be tough to prove National Enquirer didn't try hard enough to disclaim the sources it used for the stories when Condit had been acting like a CIA operative. Pretty much anything said about Condit is reasonable based on what was revealed about him by scared women. They're all scared for a good reason.

rd

[fallout]

Sorry, I must have hit the return button and re-posted. (This is a re-write)

Condit's lawsuit makes a good outline of the AMI articles on the case although I think they left a few out.

I'm still interested in James Robinson's story about the "Political Pals" who aided and abetted the murder. They said that a Governor and a politician who once ran for President were the two 'pals'. The names Daschle and Kerry come to mind for the one-time candidates. That's Bob Kerry, by the way-recently appointed to replace Max Cleland on the 9/11 commission.

James

[blondie]

fallout - Why Dashle and Kerry? I've never heard of this possibility.