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

[DMRick]

she could go to the store while they're at school.

Yes, now she could, and prob even in the couple of hours the little ones were in school last year if she hurried (if it took me an hour or more for a family of five, I imagine it takes her longer, plus driving there and back in time for the bus if she needs to meet it). I'm no longer sure what time frame we were talking about. I thought it was back when Jon was working. I would prefer to shop during the day anyway, when all the counters, (fish, meat, bread) all still open, so that would work now. By the time nighttime comes, and dinner was finished I used to be wiped.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

IIRC, she doesn't say much about Jon. It was her actions in the day-to-day that were less than flattering than what she said.

I agree.

I think the opinions of those who are pro-Jon/pro-Kate diverge after that though as to the reasons she treated him that way (not necessarily that her conduct was appropriate--but what he did that elicited those responses from her.)

There are so many dynamics in a relationship that it is difficult to judge a book by its cover.

For years in my relationship, it appeared we need marital counseling. However--we both have serious independent issues that were discovered. The marriage improved by treating those independently instead of us as a couple. The flaw was not in our marriage, but some issues that were deeply ingrained within us that needed to be treated on their own. All the marriage counseling in the world would not have solved the root problem. (It would be like treating appendicitis like a tummy ache.)

I have no idea what J&K's issues are--but sometimes it isn't what you see that is the problem. It is what you don't see that often is the root isuse.

Likely we will never know the truth b/c clearly neither party wants to look within them at what caused the issue but blame the other person

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I have to admit that I'm not up on everything so that may be why I'm confused.

How could he have stopped the filming with TLC? If he refused to sign the contract but Kate did, would that mean that the kids could no longer be filmed?

Do we know when the contract was signed? If it was before the divorce filing, maybe it was part of trying to save the marriage because clearly Kate had no intention of stopping the show.

When did he get the twins filmed?

On your last point re: the twins, I was hoping that someone could clear that up. I was so sick that week and lost interest. But ET was following Jon getting the Cake and then him driving to pick up the girls (remember the streaming video?). I didn't hear anything more.

The following day, I thought someone posted a link that said they had a camera in Jon's car filming the girls after he picked them up.

I do not know if this is true and was hoping someoen could shed light on that.

But even if he didn't do that, for someone who essentially cancelled TLC filming the birthday--it was very odd for him to allow another entity to film him fully picking up a cake and then a 2 hour drive to their house.


*************

As for the rest, I'm hoping that TanyaLovesPooh will provide a date the contract was sign. For him to sign a new contract pretty much nullifies his position. If they were on the outs anyway, he could have gotten out at that point of the show.

His contract now is active from what I understand, he was just essentially "excused" from filming.

The active contract did not prevent him from pulling permission for the children--which tells me he could have done this before.

It seems more like a stunt to me and the children won't be off film for long.

We don't have a copy of the contract, so it really is all just speculation.

A contract would be null and void though if the felt the conditions for the children were unsafe and exploitive. A good attorney could have sought an injunction at any time if he wanted to pull the children.

I think it was a ploy to control Kate and in the end it likely will not matter. With some savvy PR folks and a good agent, I think Kate can navigate her way to an income.

And as it stands, Jon cannot prohibit her from writing about the kids either. That would be unconstitutional.



*****

As for his refusal to sign and whether the children can be filmed, it would not directly prohibit the children from being filmed.

But I admit to not knowing the legal requirements for a child to be on film and whether both parents have to explicitly provide permission for filming.

My kids were in a student film and I was the only one who signed the waiver.

 

[DMRick]

I'm not sure if it's already been discussed here or not but why doesn't Kate have to account for the $30,000 in cash withdrawals that she made?

Her lawyer said she did, and that the money was accounted for that she took out and was used to pay their bills. I assume mortgage, rent on the NYC condo, whereever she lives when she's gone, utilities, car payments, etc.

 

[newtodis]

Here's the link again to the TLC vs. Jonathan Gosselin court docs - hopefully that will help dispell some of the contract information

http://www.aolcdn.com/tmz_documents/1016_gosselin_wm.pdf

 

[lattemomof3]

Hi all, I've just read a few of the most recent pages of this thread. My dd10 and I had followed the show up until their marriage started unraveling, now we think it is too sad to watch. (fascinating, yes, but also sad). Out of the mouth of my dd10 "mom, if Jon and Kate really wanted to be good parents they would stop being on tv so their kids could have normal kid lives. They are greedy to be famous and greedy for money, but mostly to be famous." I believe if the 2 of them decided to just pull the plug on any and all interviews, shows, etc. that the media would follow them around for quite a while (and a few tenacious ones would still photograph them graduating from kindergarten, high school and beyond, but the majority of people would go on with their lives and forget about the Gosselins and the kids could have some sort of normalcy return (or should I say, begin). Kate has a degree in nursing, she could be like every other single mom in the world, slogging away with hard, decent work and money worries, but knowing that she is truly doing right by her kids. When she says she is doing all of this media circus for her kids, all I can say to that is WHATEVER. If a sweet little ten year old girl can see the right and wrong in this family, why oh why can't the parents?

 

[madge]

Yes, now she could, and prob even in the couple of hours the little ones were in school last year if she hurried (if it took me an hour or more for a family of five, I imagine it takes her longer, plus driving there and back in time for the bus if she needs to meet it). I'm no longer sure what time frame we were talking about. I thought it was back when Jon was working.

they were in school part-time last year, as well. but like you, I have no idea what time frame we're talking about.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Here's the link again to the TLC vs. Jonathan Gosselin court docs - hopefully that will help dispell some of the contract information

http://www.aolcdn.com/tmz_documents/1016_gosselin_wm.pdf

Reading it right now.

Important to note that options to exercise future seasons--do not mean that the Gosselines are compelled to do those seasons. It's like a teaser that there is a possibility, but that TLC does not have to guarantee a future season.

 

[DMRick]

Admittedly, I did not read it all, but just picked this out.
September 18th, TLC asked Jon to appear to film on Sept 24th and to let them know if he would be showing up by the 22nd.
They got no response and they did not film on the 24th.

On the 29th, a new program was announced, and while Jon would be in it, it would be a focus on the single mom.
On the 29th TLC was given one hour to respond to Jon's request to be released or he would reverse his comments to the contrary, and say filming was detrimental to the kids.

So, did he use the kids to try to get his release? I thought someone said no, that he acted first. Yeah, yeah, I know it's good for those who wanted the kids to not be filming no matter what the reason. But I'm curious as to what the reason was.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Admittedly, I did not read it all, but just picked this out.
September 18th, TLC asked Jon to appear to film on Sept 24th and to let them know if he would be showing up by the 22nd.
They got no response and they did not film on the 24th.

On the 29th, a new program was announced, and while Jon would be in it, it would be a focus on the single mom.
On the 29th TLC was given one hour to respond to Jon's request to be released or he would reverse his comments to the contrary, and say filming was detrimental to the kids.

So, did he use the kids to try to get his release? I thought someone said no, that he acted first. Yeah, yeah, I know it's good for those who wanted the kids to not be filming no matter what the reason. But I'm curious as to what the reason was.

If you look ahead of that, Defendent Gosseline (no idea why that cracks me up, but it does )--said something that the show was good for the kids or whatever.

#18
Reached an interim joint custody agreement in which they each agreed that the continuation of J&K+8 was in the best interest of the children.


That coupled with the omission of Jon ever mentioning anything to the program about the show being detrimental to their well being....

Something smells rotten in Pennsylvania and it's not the bleach from Kate's
'do.


We must remember though that this is a petition and not a court finding. We need Jon's response to know the scoop and it will be up to a jury to decide which party is telling the truth. I gotta say it isn't looking good for Jon at all.

 

[whitneyNC]

Jon had a job outside of the home ... for a while, he also had an hour commute each way, IIRC. If Kate had helpers in the house during the day, why wouldn't she take advantage of that?

but to answer your question, he could have watched them in the evenings or on Saturdays when he wasn't at work. I can't see any reason why he couldn't.

He did. Kate worked a double, 7am-11pm, on Saturdays at a dialysis center and Jon was with all eight kids. It was said that he was alone with all eight kids before she was. He also got the twins ready each morning (or they were left on their own) while Kate slept in and the tups stayed in their cribs. She didn't work labor and delivery after the tups were born, just the weekend shift near their home. Which of course sounds logical. When the tups were less than a year old, they told most of the volunteers to scram. This is when Kate was lobbying for the state provided nurse to continue after their first birthday. For a short time between the volunteers and the nurse leaving, and the show starting, they seemed to have done it mostly alone. This is when Carla (old family friend) and her daughter Ashley helped out. I think that is when Beth and her two older girls (Brittany and Kayla) introduced themselves and began helping with the kids. They along with the two Nana's are the ones Kate "could tolerate in her home."
By the time the tups were turning two, the show was becoming a series instead of specials and they moved out of the little house. Beverly and Janet seemed to have helped a lot the first three years of the tups lives. One of them (not the laundry folding one) use to come while the tups were taking their 3 hour nap and the twins were at school (they went to pm Kindergarten) so Kate could grocery shop.
As soon as the idea for a series was sold, Kate quit the nursing job and they moved into the big house (which isn't big anymore, by their standards!) by Jodi and Kevin. Jon was gone (as said above) about 12 hours a day until he began "working for Bob" because of his commute. I get the time mixed up, it has really flown. I can't believe the sextuplets are 5 1/2. I remember following the story and seeing their website when Kate was pregnant.

 

[kidshop]

If you look ahead of that, Defendent Gosseline (no idea why that cracks me up, but it does )--said something that the show was good for the kids or whatever.

#18
Reached an interim joint custody agreement in which they each agreed that the continuation of J&K+8 was in the best interest of the children.


That coupled with the omission of Jon ever mentioning anything to the program about the show being detrimental to their well being....

Something smells rotten in Pennsylvania and it's not the bleach from Kate's
'do.


We must remember though that this is a petition and not a court finding. We need Jon's response to know the scoop and it will be up to a jury to decide which party is telling the truth. I gotta say it isn't looking good for Jon at all.

So just b/c he thought filming was ok in the past that means he can NEVER change his mind or speak up about it? It also says they can not speak about their own children to anyone without prior written permission (or something to that effect). Jon is allowed to stop filming at any time if he has concerns. He had concerns....he stopped the filming and it is within his rights to do so. TLC has not challenged him on resuming filming other that to say that he thought it was fine for 4 years. I think that is a kind of cry-baby response.

 

[DMRick]

So just b/c he thought filming was ok in the past that means he can NEVER change his mind or speak up about it? It also says they can not speak about their own children to anyone without prior written permission (or something to that effect).

Nope, in my post at least, it didn't mean that at all. I just found it interesting, that they gave TLC one hour to release Jon, or he was going to stop the kids from being filmed. I wondered about his motives to stop the filming. So I asked..was he using the kids to get his release and it didn't work?

I don't have the post anymore (and I'm too busy to go get it right now). It actually said he couldn't speak about his children to anyone without permission, or about his children as it pertains to the show. I would never have signed something that said I couldn't talk about my own children.

 

[walden]

Here's the link again to the TLC vs. Jonathan Gosselin court docs - hopefully that will help dispell some of the contract information

http://www.aolcdn.com/tmz_documents/1016_gosselin_wm.pdf

Thanks!

That is TLC vs Jon. Interesting reading. I do not necessarily take TLC's version though. Take it from a cynic -- just more lawyering and definitely subject to countersuit.

You know what makes me feel really sad about all of this? Having read PA's child labor law it seems clear that TLC (and to a lesser extent J & K because they have the excuse of being very dumb bunnies) deliberately saw and exploited the "loopholes." Yep, those loopholes are there.

I fail to understand why the appropriate permits were apparently not pulled by TLC.

I fail to understand why J and K did not see the PA Child Labor Law as protection for their children and did not comply (obviously and with bells on) with all applicable Statute and Regulations. Let me just say, Statute and regs are usually enacted in dreadful circumstances and are usually very conservative in their scope.

Most of all, I fail to understand why so many good parents, and presumably good citizens, do not criticise J & K and TLC for apparently skirting the PA Child Labor Law which was enacted for the protection of all working children, including those in entertainment.

Heck, we can argue the fine print as much as we want, and the lawyers will do it much better.

Can we agree on these items? The Gosselin children have been filmed a lot. The Gosselin children have been filmed in situations that Child Actors in other states are protected from. The Gosselin children have not been compensated as individuals. The Gosselin children have to live with that and with the supposedly "healthy" (please define healthy) amount that has (per Kate) been set aside for their collective futures.

And now one of their parents wants to film their reactions during a nasty divorce.

Those poor kids.

I guess one of those parents has seen the light and wants to discontinue filming for the duration. I think that is good, regardless of his (possibly) ulterior motives.

 

[LoraJ]

Extra tonight will show Mario with Kate yesterday and Maria Shriver defending her.

I can't watch though. I only get to see the promos.

 

[TanyaLovesPooh]

On your last point re: the twins, I was hoping that someone could clear that up. I was so sick that week and lost interest. But ET was following Jon getting the Cake and then him driving to pick up the girls (remember the streaming video?). I didn't hear anything more.

The following day, I thought someone posted a link that said they had a camera in Jon's car filming the girls after he picked them up.

I do not know if this is true and was hoping someoen could shed light on that.

But even if he didn't do that, for someone who essentially cancelled TLC filming the birthday--it was very odd for him to allow another entity to film him fully picking up a cake and then a 2 hour drive to their house.

Jon negotiated with ET to film everything from him picking up Cara & Mady's cake to the birthday party. ET was to provide live streaming video of the event and was sitting outside the home doing that before the party started. They filmed Jon picking up the twins from school and one pap stuck his camera in the car (just the camera, he did not get in) right after Mady sat in the back. The whole scene was awful. Anyway the live streaming video of the birthday never ended up happening. A reason was not given that I know of by either party.

The contract dates and such are in the court documents of the suit that TLC filed.

Here's the link again to the TLC vs. Jonathan Gosselin court docs - hopefully that will help dispell some of the contract information

http://www.aolcdn.com/tmz_documents/1016_gosselin_wm.pdf

Thank you, Newtodis. I was curious to the exact date of the last contract signing myself. I didn't read it all but it appears that April of 08 was the last contract and 4 additional amendments were added by either party since then.
So it looks like they signed the last contract before Jon just wanted to be Jon. So I was mistaken with that, sorry all.

On the 29th TLC was given one hour to respond to Jon's request to be released or he would reverse his comments to the contrary, and say filming was detrimental to the kids.

So, did he use the kids to try to get his release?

That sounds like the tactic of a lawyer (Mark Heller) that has been suspended from practicing law before. Nothing like blackmail to get out of a contract.

So just b/c he thought filming was ok in the past that means he can NEVER change his mind or speak up about it? It also says they can not speak about their own children to anyone without prior written permission (or something to that effect). Jon is allowed to stop filming at any time if he has concerns. He had concerns....he stopped the filming and it is within his rights to do so.

It certainly was within his rights to do so. However, his concerns seem to have more to do with wanting to be part of Michael Lohan's "Divorced Dads" show than his children being harmed.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

So just b/c he thought filming was ok in the past that means he can NEVER change his mind or speak up about it? It also says they can not speak about their own children to anyone without prior written permission (or something to that effect). Jon is allowed to stop filming at any time if he has concerns. He had concerns....he stopped the filming and it is within his rights to do so. TLC has not challenged him on resuming filming other that to say that he thought it was fine for 4 years. I think that is a kind of cry-baby response.

Doesn't mean he can't change his mind--but you have to admit his timing is extremely suspect considering only weeks prior continued filming was in their "best interest".

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Extra tonight will show Mario with Kate yesterday and Maria Shriver defending her.

I can't watch though. I only get to see the promos.

Who is Mario?

 

[DMRick]

I fail to understand why the appropriate permits were apparently not pulled by TLC.

Do we know that they didn't pull permits that there were suppose to have? I don't understand..why, with all the years they have been filming, didn't PA prosecute them, if they broke the law?

Can we agree on these items? The Gosselin children have been filmed a lot. The Gosselin children have been filmed in situations that Child Actors in other states are protected from. The Gosselin children have not been compensated as individuals. The Gosselin children have to live with that and with the supposedly "healthy" (please define healthy) amount that has (per Kate) been set aside for their collective futures..

I don't know the answers to any of the above. Before, Jon said they were not over filmed, and TLC listed very limited hours compared to the Child Actors in other states (and I don't know this first hand, just want a previous poster posted). Now he changed his mind, so which was the truth? Is he saying that to boost his chances of getting custody over the kids and their accounts? I don't know if they have been filmed in situations that the Child Actors in other states are protected from..didn't someone just post that nothing would have changed? I don't know how much is in their accounts and I have no idea if they got the 15% they should have gotten if they were in the child actors (the amount that had to be saved). So I guess, unless I get those answers I can't agree yet.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I guess one of those parents has seen the light and wants to discontinue filming for the duration. I think that is good, regardless of his (possibly) ulterior motives.

I can't call someone who pulls the plug after a 1 hour ultimatum and then coordinates with ET and paparazzi the following week to have his kids filmed on their birthday not to be someone who has seen the light.