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

[redrosesix]

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 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.

Thanks - ITA with your entire post

This whole thing reminded me of all the sex tape scandals that really happened -- Bleck! Ick!

One of the issues we have here which doesn't get enough attention is the number of parents who send their kids out in the winter with insufficient clothing. It's so sad to see them crying when they're cold. There were many occasions when a daycare teacher would ask if they could borrow my DD's extra mittens, hat, coat or even boots (unbelievable ) for a kid who was sent to daycare in the dead of winter wearing basically summer clothing. I also once had to deal with suspected frostbite in a 1 yo because their drug addicted mother hadn't put mittens or a blanket on the kid and had walked her to the foodbank in the stroller (the milk in her bottle was frozen ) -- before you have any sympathy for the woman, I should let you know she was actually selling the food from the foodbank to buy drugs.

Some of the people who comment on the blogs that Jon should never be allowed to see his kids again (and this was happening long before the most recent story) really need a dose of reality.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Thanks

I thought maybe the lawsuit would be something we could discuss without venom -- maybe the word is debate. Rather than debating each other's views.

Do you think they would have to wait for the outcome of the Dept of Labor investigation to have merit.

Yes they were reported, but that doesn't mean there is wrongdoing, so I would not suspect that it would provide any leverage without any findings which would provide a difficulty in the merit of their counterclaim.

I mean--I could have reported my labor dispute with my company several decades ago with something that was clearly an illegal act in the making. In that case, I had to wait to report it until the act occurred (which would have been after my maternity leave--they actually kicked me out of a position for a less qualified employee permanently when she was only to be my fill in on leave.) Anyway--My act of reporting would not have meant that they did anything illegal until an investigation sorted all that out.

Same deal in my state with DCF--just b/c something has been reported and is being investigative is not indicative of guilt (or innocence). That's what the investigation is for--to find that out.

 

[DMRick]

before you have any sympathy for the woman, I should let you know she was actually selling the food from the foodbank to buy drugs.

Dont you hate that? Yet, we are told when we volunteer and are not to judge, until we have walked in there shoes. But it's hard not to, when you see them selling it right outside of the food kitchen.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Some of the people who comment on the blogs that Jon should never be allowed to see his kids again (and this was happening long before the most recent story) really need a dose of reality.

I always felt it very harsh to make such rash opinions when we do not personally know either parent.

I know there are those out in blogland who feel the same about KAte (not here though!) and it just seems very sad to me.

Compared to what I grew up with in youth, depsite their antics, the children are indeed in a very loving home from all that we see. If it weren't, I would suspect that Jon and Kate would have both come forward by now with accusations that the children were in harms way by either parent and they would have not agreed to their present custody arrangement. Especially if they thought the other parent was unfit.

 

[redrosesix]

Do you think they would have to wait for the outcome of the Dept of Labor investigation to have merit.

Yes they were reported, but that doesn't mean there is wrongdoing, so I would not suspect that it would provide any leverage without any findings which would provide a difficulty in the merit of their counterclaim.

I mean--I could have reported my labor dispute with my company several decades ago with something that was clearly an illegal act in the making. In that case, I had to wait to report it until the act occurred (which would have been after my maternity leave--they actually kicked me out of a position for a less qualified employee permanently when she was only to be my fill in on leave.) Anyway--My act of reporting would not have meant that they did anything illegal until an investigation sorted all that out.

Same deal in my state with DCF--just b/c something has been reported and is being investigative is not indicative of guilt (or innocence). That's what the investigation is for--to find that out.

Yes, I do. The judge can defer the case until the report is completed, or assume that by the time the depositions are completed and the jury chosen the report will be done (and the report can just be submitted as evidence). But here the judge could allow the investigators to be deposed regarding their preliminary findings -- it's possible that the report is only being held up while they are considering recommendations for changes to the laws (which is a whole lot more work than simply reporting whether something is/isn't a violation of existing laws)

I'm very interested to see which parts of each petition are dismissed by the judge before the jury ever hears about them.

 

[MAKmom]

Is there anyone here with "experience" able to determine if that can explain maybe how Jon has looked or behaved in the past 6-9 months.

To me he appears quite different than when he was with Kate--even when he didn't enjoy being with Kate. And I don't mean different in a good way.

Sadly if any of this is true, this will damage his potential for custody as well.

If it is true it would be very hard to prove I do not think it will affect his custody at all even if it could be proven.

Can this explain how Jon has been acting? IMO yes.

I have seen it first hand with people in my life & it is what I have thought all along. Other things can also explain what has been going on with Jon.

He could be bi polar. He could be mentally ill & be using.

Maybe he did just find himself & this is how he rolls now. But if he is drug free he is a jerk.

Others on this thread think he is so damaged from abuse that he acts this way.

If he is using and gets clean & sobar there can be a happy ending for him.

 

[kidshop]

How strange.

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

Shhhhh! You know they read here for ideas. If it gets ratings they'll do it!

 

[DMRick]

Shhhhh! You know they read here for ideas. If it gets ratings they'll do it!

 

[redrosesix]

Shhhhh! You know they read here for ideas. If it gets ratings they'll do it!

OMG! I nearly spit out my tea!

 

[C.Ann]

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.


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.

Are you speaking to me? Since you're quoting me in post 3671, I can only assume you are..

You were not the person that I was referring to - look back a few pages and you will see where someone immediately "implied" that because this information was reported by the National Enquirer, then it must be true.. Truth be told, I barely skimmed over your posts on the legal issues because legal mumbo jumbo is too difficult to understand without someone here to translate..

I did not paint you personally with a broad brush - nor did I make a "blanket statement" about everyone on this thread..

If it's not me you're speaking to, that's fine - it's all good.. If it is, you're mistaken..

I don't want to see this thread closed either - at least not until these people fade into the sunset - but please take the time to make sure your comments and accusations are correct in the future (if in fact I am the one you are speaking to or quoting)..

That would be very helpful and avoid future misunderstandings..

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

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 :

Well--not sure if I should have changed your mind.

I looked up the Carol Burnett Lawsuit agains the National Enquirer. Took me a bit and the DIS was slow as molasses--so I gave up.

In any case, the actual article was VERY short and was not attributed to anyone. I don't know why or if they made it up, but they did print a retraction and ultimately did not have a defense I suppose for why they printed it. The Carol Burnett case had no statements from any witnesses and was written as an observation (I would suspect of the columnist since it was a gossip column). Which is different than reporting that someone said something about someone else.

Interestingly enough, at the time, it was extremely difficult for celebs to win libel cases, b/c it was though they would have to take it. (If I can find the aritcle again, I will pass it along--it was a very neat article on the background of "tabloid laws".)

In any case--she went forward with it and did not care if "she only got her car fare" in exchange for what they caused. She did end up winning the case and the enquirier changed its practices. I believe that on appeal, they setteld for $200,000 and she donated the money to a school for an journalism ethics course which I thought was very cool.

I apologize for no citations, no link, and typing this from memory, but I did research mutliple CREDIBLE resources on the www.

*********
Anyway, you may be right, the fact that they have it quoted may excuse them. But I'm not sure. Didnt' feel like look up other precedent at the moment.

I do wonder though--what their print version may say. And if they have a cover story, what the headline will say.

The latest article:
http://www.nationalenquirer.com/jon...aine_use_alleged_lose_custody/celebrity/67655

The photo of course--usually a bad one, but kept by tabloids in case something juicy like this comes up.

Sadly though--like Kate, just b/c Jon refutes it, doesn't mean that it is true. And should his bodyguard go on record as a witness, it is still damning and will not look good to jurors in a he said/he said moment.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Shhhhh! You know they read here for ideas. If it gets ratings they'll do it!

I heard a rumor that that's the idea for a new reality show.

C-list Mud Wrestling.

Kathy Griffin is hosting.

 

[madge]

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

of course they are. nothing surprises me anymore.

I wonder what they're compensating Jon with, to convince him to participate.... and I wonder when they're going to film said sit down.... and how much press there will be building up to the event, which will end up being a whole lotta nothing.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

of course they are. nothing surprises me anymore.

I wonder what they're compensating Jon with, to convince him to participate.... and I wonder when they're going to film said sit down.... and how much press there will be building up to the event, which will end up being a whole lotta nothing.

Probably just reminiscent of the good ol' days. Kate doing all the talking, Jon saying nothing.

Only the slaps will be missing as they likely will be sitting with the Great Wall of China separating them to avoid any....wrestling.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

Found my link redrosesix....pretty cool read on tabloids and the law.

http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/99aug/9908tabloids.htm

 

[madge]

finally...something that may suggest that Stephanie the nanny may have barked up the wrong tree? The bodyguard may be suing the National Enquirer for being falsely accused ... http://www.usmagazine.com/celebritynews/news/rep-jon-gosselin-sex-tape-cocaine-claims-false-1970218

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

finally...something that may suggest that Stephanie the nanny may have barked up the wrong tree? The bodyguard may be suing the National Enquirer for being falsely accused ... http://www.usmagazine.com/celebritynews/news/rep-jon-gosselin-sex-tape-cocaine-claims-false-1970218

That's where I get all stuck on libel.....

It seems they should have validated Miss Stephanie's rumor.

hmmmm....glad someone spoke up pronto on this one!

 

[C.Ann]

finally...something that may suggest that Stephanie the nanny may have barked up the wrong tree? The bodyguard may be suing the National Enquirer for being falsely accused ... http://www.usmagazine.com/celebritynews/news/rep-jon-gosselin-sex-tape-cocaine-claims-false-1970218

Uh - oh.. Looks like someone could be in serious trouble.. Another 15 minutes of fame??

 

[newtodis]

finally...something that may suggest that Stephanie the nanny may have barked up the wrong tree? The bodyguard may be suing the National Enquirer for being falsely accused ... http://www.usmagazine.com/celebritynews/news/rep-jon-gosselin-sex-tape-cocaine-claims-false-1970218

How did Jon get invited to that wedding? And I wonder what his gift to the happy couple will be!

 

[TanyaLovesPooh]

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!

Buddy was way more gracious than I would have been, she would have found herself tossed out of my bakery with NO cake.

Shhhhh! You know they read here for ideas. If it gets ratings they'll do it!

What was I thinking??

And you are right if it were to get ratings, they would.