John Clark Pro Se Blog

I've noticed that "Letters to the Editor" entries are many times more observant than newspaper editorial minds working on the same page. Here's one today in the LA Times, commenting on the Barack Obama/Rev.Jeremiah Wright matchup.

Art Saginian says  "Jonah Goldberg is right. Wright is a radical. So what?

Americans are as well-known for their brutal savagery as they are for their compassionate philanthropy. We've butchered probably as many people as we have blessed. Take a count of how many people have been robbed, tortured, raped and/or killed at the hands of Americans and their licensed contractors since we became a nation -- millions.

Why should Wright get blamed for saying so -- and why should Obama get teased for seeing the truth in it? We should admit to our ugliness as much as we take pride in our beauty. "

Tough.  Kiefer Sutherland had just been honored by my old Canadian performers' union ACTRA for his services to the performing arts and his Canadian heritage (his father is Donald, who used to paint the scenery when I was acting with the Straw Hat Players in Ontario back in the 50's.)  I guess he had a drink or two to be sociable, left, got in his car, made a U-turn, and was pulled over (the rules say you can make a U-turn if there are 2 sets of double yellow lines, but not if only 1 set) by the ever-competing members of the police enforcers hereabouts. A tad over the legal limit of .08 percent was enough to put him inside.

Well, unlike our friend Paris Hilton who managed to avoid serious jail time back in June, Kiefer's lawyer was smart, or maybe it was his damage-control press-rep advisor; anyway, he is pleading "no contest", and agreeing to serve 48 days in jail, 18 of them in December during a production break of his Fox TV "24" television series which pays him millions, and the remaining 30 days within the following 6 months, in order not to disrupt shooting or cause the series cancellation. ( Martha Stewart led the way.)  He also lost his driver's license and will be on 5 years' probation! Fox TV must be very proud of him!

AP report on CNN website

He's going to come out of this looking good, because he's turned it into a showbiz positive.  We wish him well.

Later It's next year and January 21, and today he emerges unscathed. The writers' strike stepped in, and he served his time consecutively.  No harm, no foul. Talk about lucky.

Now who is Harry Fain, and why is he interesting to me?

Not because he represented celebrity divorce clients such as Elvis Presley, Cary Grant, Lee Majors, Rod Steiger, OJ's first wife.

It's because he, as a result of his effortful promotion, saw No-fault Divorce come about in California on January 1, 1970. Also the onset of the state's laws of Community Property and the creation of a statewide Family Courts system. He had been appointed to a government Commission on the Family by then governor Pat Brown, charged with finding new solutions to always present divorce wars.

Before that, it was possible to discover the reasons for the breakdown of marriages. For example, read how Arnold Gold, Esq. obtained his divorce from Mrs. Gold, and later obtained custody of their three children (see the side-bar).

It should be noted that Fain also got his divorce before no-fault, in the early 1950's. His wife won custody of their three children, and later, just as Gold did, he got that ruling reversed in his favor. Frankly, I cannot be bothered to check out his case at the Hall of Public Records to find out how he was motivated, as I did with (now Judge) Gold. I'll bet they were close friends.

I believe "no-fault" in many cases is nothing but a cover-up of serious reasons behind breaches of the marriage contract and breaches of property rights, and should be examined and put on the record for all to see, perhaps serving as a warning for future betrothments. Now it seldom gets dealt with. "Not probative" is the usual excuse.

It should be dealt with the same as any other contractual matter, in Civil Court, in front of a jury. The system wasn't "broken" before the Fains and other lawyers got on board in, I believe, their own self interest. Now in charge is a fellow lawyer called a judge, and no jury, and the public kept in the dark, and lots of available money on the emotional table.

Harry Fain, Esq. died on Friday the 13th, yesterday, aged 88. Read his obituary here.

Now that their season is over, law professor Brian Fitzpatrick wrote an opinion piece appearing in the L.A. Times concerning the fact that during their last term the right-of-center Supreme Court had reversed or vacated the left-of-center Ninth Circuit 19 times out of the 22 cases it reviewed, and concluded that the appeals court might not have been doing a very good job.

Brian Fitzpatrick

Then former law clerk Julia Campins weighed in with a letter to the paper about what she calls "bully jurisprudence".  She pointed out that the Supreme Court isn't last because it is right, but is right because it is last.

her letter

For me, that put everything in its proper place.

Judge Roy L. Pearson, a Washington Beltway Judge - and therefore also a lawyer - lost his trousers. at the cleaners. So he went to court, represented himself pro se, claimed 54 million dollars in damages, and then lost his suit!

What does this say for our legal system?  Come to think about it, I'm not actually sure.

July 25, 2007
Today it is reported that the defendants, Jin Nam Chung and Soo Chung, were themselves taken to the cleaners by their attorneys to the tune of $100,000 in legal fees. Sympathizers came from across the country to attend a cocktail fundraiser at the Chamber of Commerce in Washington D.C.  So far they have raised $64,000. . .

Anthony Pellicano was a very popular guy around Hollywood's celebrity legal circles for many years, and for his safety remains in prison pending trial, where one is led to believe he is very happy to be.

He and 5 others were indicted for tapping into phone lines and selling information to whomsoever arranged for the activity, parties to litigation of course, through their lawyers.

A much delayed trial is scheduled to go forward next February 2008. The section of the law which is involved is RICO (see under Topics to the left), and one who got caught up in the enterprise is a prominent celebrity lawyer by the name of Terry Christensen. Now this Esq. is asking for a separate trial to take place PRIOR to Pellicano's on the basis that he had nothing to do with the racketeering, after all, he only had 34 tape-recorded conversations with him, and paid him $100,000. Read about this HERE.

Meanwhile, a number of esquires around here are sweating like Rodney Dangerfield doing his act, except his was for show.

Canada's Maclean's Magazine, in their June 11 issue, tells us that England is ROTTING, especially at the grass roots level, and why, and backs it up with facts and figures.

I have a daughter and grandchildren living there in the Midlands, so I care to know whether this is true.

Maybe it's a Conservative (read Republican) missive, the writer tossing fizzlers into Blair's Labour record, now that that party is waiting in the wings. Or maybe not. I wish I knew.

Anyway, read it for yourself HERE.

My friends in England, please email this expat at

john@johnclarkprose.com

and tell me that it ain't true.

I'll pass on what I hear.

"The media hunts in a pack. It tears people and reputations to bits. Accuracy and objectivity are abandoned in favor of scandal and controversy on an overwhelming scale. News is rarely news these days unless it generates more heat than light."

Read more about what Tony Blair has to say as he departs his office. He's a brave fellow indeed, and speaks up for himself, not through a lawyer or an underling, which is unusual over here. Powerful words. Now the "We have the last word!" media wolves are mad and snapping at his heels.

Fathers everywhere are often denied their proper introduction into nature's scheme of things, and next Sunday will be a chance for our partners to show some appreciation - Father's Day.

It's no wonder that we guys need some recovery time off to recharge!

Never mind a sinking Iraq, a sinking Wall Street, a sinking real estate market, rising interest rates, the Group of Eight Summit, and several other petty annoyances. This all comes to a head today.

Miss Showbiz, Paris Hilton vs. The Law His Honor Judge Michael T. Sauer.

Who will win? It's early in the Pacific time of day. Stay tuned . . .

Midday. (This site, first with the news!)

After spending a few days at home wearing an ankle security bracelet courtesy of law enforcement second-guessing her prison sentence, she was driven to the courthouse OJ style on the freeway to appear in court, and now she's been ordered back to jail for the full term, screaming "It's not right . . . Mom . . . Mom . . ." while being hauled out of the courtroom.

Acting meets a show of reality. Sad. But it was never a contest. There will be an appeal, probably, (where they "shoot the wounded"). She can blame her handlers, that is, her lawyers, her parents, her doctors, and the sheriff Lee Baca, aka law enforcement. This litigant should have gone pro se in court this morning after first firing her lawyers and explained for herself that she's not the maker of these moves, she's old enough (26). But it would have required a level of maturity. Hopefully, she'll avoid tragedy and acquire some while serving out her time.

Late afternoon. It's not over by any means. We now see a full-blown war which is reaching far beyond the confines of Paris Hilton and Judge Sauer and Hollywood. What we are witnessing is the beginning of a long drawn-out affair between the courts and the sheriff's department and the media and the public and the chief who denies being a celebrity lover, Sheriff Baca. And who knows, her stock may yet get a sympathetic pop. I'm delighted. Through her, a spotlight will shine on the disfunctionality of the justice system hereabouts, and people and the press are PAYING ATTENTION!

She was taken directly to the Twin Towers for processing in, which is where I start to relate to what's happening to her. Because this happened to me on my sixty-eighth birthday, a never-to-be-forgotten 24 hours in my life, after which I was let out to permit me to hurry to the divorce court to represent myself Pro Se in front of Judge Gold. Read of my experience. As part of the processing-in procedure, she will experience what I experienced, all the makings of a bad sex video (get naked, bend over, spread buttocks, cavity search) along with the discomfort of sitting still in stale prison clothes on a cold narrow stainless steel bench for several hours with the privilege of going to the bathroom in front of willing onlookers. And then, a segregated inmate as I was, alone in a cell where the temperature is deliberately kept shiveringly low. Humiliation is the name of their game.

Sat. June 9
The city attorney, Rocky Delgadillo, who went after Peewee Herman in his Waterloo, felt that Paris should be punished and went after her too. So it was interesting to read today of his wife's brush with the law, when she too was caught driving with a suspended licence See what happened to her. It became evident that other inmates exiting prison were not given special treatment and resented Paris's. See what happened to other inmates.

Then this morning we read this in a Los Angeles Times unusually mealy-mouthed editorial which deliberately left out all of the larger issues.

So late today it was reported that Paris, whether alone or with the aid of damage control advisors, has decided that she would instruct her attorneys to drop any idea of an appeal, and that she would brave it out, and asked her fans for support.

Good for her. A smart move, and may she have the strength to get through it with minimal damage, physical and mental as well as financial and image-wise. Perhaps she should look to Martha Stewart as her patron saint, and emerge as a better and more interesting person and for sure a better actress.

The Los Angeles Times's Timothy Rutten, self-appointed guardian-of-the-morals-and-ethics of our Fourth Estate, today writes a biased piece concerning the perceived chutzpa of Rupert Murdoch, taking him to task for talking to the Bancroft family with a view to buying the Wall Street Journal. Read it here.

Now I have little sympathy for Murdoch, ever since his esteemed London Times organ ran the original story planted by my ex-wife Lynn Redgrave "outing" me after a 32 year marriage, and ran a Page 6 style article with no warning. I was assuaged somewhat ever since discovering that he too got divorced after a 32 year marriage and subsequently married a much younger Asian, just like me (although I don't think he publicly outed himself.)

But methinks one detects the deadly sin of envy. Murdoch (a U.S. citizen, not just a resident as Rutten misinforms) makes a profit. The L.A. Times does not. Instead, to cut mounting costs, we coincidentally read today that a large contingent of their best and brightest were shown the door, leaving a residual guard fearful no doubt of being pink-slipped in the shrinking world of legacy newsgathering.

And so one should re-read Rutten's piece, substituting his own paper's name for the WSJ. Perhaps he's wishing that Murdoch had made a sooner approach to the family Chandler. After all, there is a fit, a similar Page 6 covey awaiting under the assumed name Calendar.

Is there a link, a connection, between what is going on in Iraq, Afghanistan and other areas of U.S. involved combat, and what is going on in the French Open?

Tennis is my favorite game and I follow it. What has just happened in the men's singles is a disaster for America. In the worst day since the 1968 open era began, 9 of the 10 U.S. entrants were immediately defeated in the FIRST ROUND, and the one remaining had to retire as darkness set in, to finish the match tomorrow (yeah, he lost too).

And don't look to the American women to bail us out either. By round 3 (next day) they were all gone too except for Serena Williams, ousted later in the quarter-finals. As were the last of the U.S. reps in the men's doubles, the women's doubles and mixed doubles. A rout, to put it mildly.

Report from Paris

Tennis, or any athletic contest with warrior winners and losers, is a game of combat, whose very raison d'etre is that it is not a blood sport, like war, but a safety valve and a substitute for war. The will to win, however, is precisely the same.

Something seems to be happening with the U.S. view of itself. This is not a good sign.

This endless search is in grave peril in California.

We got a rare glimpse of what goes on, reading about yesterday's celebrity-lawyer-filled training session held for Loyola law students in their legal lab. The program is named for Judge Larry Fidler who attended, and is otherwise currently presiding in the Phil Spector trial. In the interests of letting a little light into a tangled web of tactical deceit and see how it's practiced, and at the cost of bestowing free publicity, let's try to examine these much admired industry players; Gods, heroes, necessary evils or pond lives, depending on your courtroom experiences (if any) with them:

The celebrity attorney mentors of this new crop of law students included Paris Hilton's drunk driving specialist Richard Hutton. Then there was Thomas Mesereau Jr. who stood up for Michael Jackson in his famous molestaton case; Mark Geragos, who repped Scott Peterson and Gary Condit and Susan McDougal and Winona Ryder.

Harland Braun, who (for a while) worked for actor Robert Blake and director John Landis, and for a police officer accused of beating Rodney King, and at present Lane Garrison. Prosecutors included John Hueston who worked for the team against the Enron corp. Included too was K.C. Maxwell (a female), a rep for I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby, and Richard Gabriel, a jury consultant in many high-profile trials. Oft-quoted Loyola Law School professors Laurie Levenson and Stanley Goldman were also on hand to throw in a few cent's worth of observation.

I am unaware of any pro se's being invited to sit in.

Braun made a stunning pronouncement. He said that as a general rule, it is better to keep your client off the stand and away from questions, for fear the truth might come out and destroy all the damage a skillful attorney may have done to the prosecution's case.

So it's now out in the open; we learn that TRUTH is not concomitant with JUSTICE!

Would that a few members of the public, prospective jurors and self-representing pro pers had been present to keep them honest with a few hard questions for the benefit of the students. But of course, they would not have been allowed in to monitor this clubby conference of celebrity's highest paid beauts.

They might have been able to point out that ordinary middle-class members of the public would probably face bankruptcy were they to become clients and put themselves entirely in the hands of lawyers, none of whom are required to disclose their huge fees. But perhaps that is part of the attraction of a career in U.S. civil and criminal law.

READ ALL ABOUT IT!

It goes without saying that a defendant has the right to expect a judge will keep all the participants straight and in line when they are under his eye. But will it happen? I could not help hearing the ringing of a bell and recalling my own experience when I observed the mentoring of a bunch of Loyola law students by the judge presiding at my wife's divorce trial against me. Actually in the courtroom, and it led to my pressing a 170.1 disqualification motion against Judge Arnold Gold (which was disallowed and failed - by him, of course.) Here's how I did it:

My Motion to Disqualify

A private protective curtain was pulled aside today revealing (some of) the candidates' income and assets, thanks to the government's Federal Election rules.

There can be no doubt that money links directly to moral, as well as net, worth, so let's see what grabs our attention.

First we need to discount Hilary Clinton (D), John McCain (R), and Mitt Romney (R) who pleaded for more time. They were given 45 day extensions - so more about them later.

We learn that Rudolph Giuliani (R), ex mayor of New York City, charges up to $300,000 for a single speaking fee - in the year ending February '07 he billed $11.39 million for speaking up. He must have amazing stories to tell of the heroism he observed during the 9/11 attacks. Apart from more millions earned in other ways, he received $496 in residuals for his appearances on Saturday Night Live, and a movie "The Out-of-Towners".

Senator John Edwards' (D) speaking engagements are more modest, earning him from $12,000 to $55,000 a time. But his investments are noteworthy, $29 million in assets, not including his home, this year netting him $5.9 million of investment income.

To understand Edwards, one should bear in mind that he was trained to be a trial attorney. He should reveal the names of the cases and the clients he represented in court which earned him his treasure. I would love to read transcripts of his arguments which led to his success. They would uniquely reveal the scope of his moral compass, more so than whatever he may wish to communicate to our ears these days. For more on this subject, read an opinion piece from the L.A. Times here.

And for more detail on all of the worthies from the Associated Press, check this out.

June 14 update
Hilary's announced her wealth, and because their spouse's is brought in too under the disclosure rules, we learn that Bill was paid 10 million in speaking fees last year, including one in London for $450,000 - which beats them all! news report

Royalty comes to Jamestown this week, to help celebrate exactly 400 years since its founding. It has been exactly 50 years since her last visit to this seat of American democracy, which connects to the form as we know it today.

As it happens, today is also exactly 62 years since I, as a child actor, had the heady experience of meeting her and her parents.

Personal memories

One takes the occasion to reflect on the importance of their continuing existence as a going concern, which for misguided reasons has taken on the shadow of controversy, and is very subjective and hard to pin down.

Royalty is, or should be, a standard and symbol reflecting non-political involvement in the affairs of a country, a neutral permanent statement of leadership that everyone can look up to and, yes, bow (or curtsy, depending on your God-given bent.) Here in America, nothing fills that bill of neutrality, not even the Supreme Court as we've come to find out. Perhaps "Speaker of the House" could do it, were it not for the fact that Nancy Pelosi, the current Democratic speaker, is anything but.

Leader Bush and leader Blair are on their way out, impatiently hurried along, to be replaced by other temporary political figures.

And so Queen Elizabeth becomes a borrowed permanent figure over here, looked up to with awkward envy. Long may the alliance last between the United States and the United Kingdom, because we really need each other.

There is something quite thrilling when you observe how somebody is fighting the legal system by playing it at its own game. Never mind the truth, as I have found out to my considerable cost as a pro se; Justice is not too interested in that.

Deborah Jeane was smart. She started out her life in American Business with 1 year of legal training to gain sophistication, and now continues in her current problem, which is huge, with a fiercely loyal attorney to help her strategize (no pro se she!).

Her American business? Why, she ran an escort service for 13 years in the nation's capital that may have been utilized by members of the nation's Capitol. And therein lies her problem. Oh, she's already been dubbed the "D.C. Madam".

Her girls, around 130 of them aged 23 to 55, escorted clients for a fee of up to $300 an hour, and worked under contract with Deborah Jeane as subcontractors, not employees.

The girls have been deemed, some of them anyway, to be prostitutes, much like her clients, some of them anyway, who were lawyers and lawyer-trained politicians. About the same hourly rate, I'd say.

The government doesn't like the exposure, and has handed down an indictment. And made a big BLUNDER. They froze her assets, just like Family Court!

This means that she lacks the means, very expensive means, to try and prove that her "associates" (as she calls them) offered only escort services and not sexual services. So she needs clients to come forward as witnesses, and swear UNDER OATH that they only received non-sexual services. And Americans take their oaths very seriously in court, so seriously in fact that none will come forward ("Scooter" Libby might have a comment on this!)

Subpoenaed documents include phone records of the clients. She has revealed them, which will of course lead fascinated members of the public to check out the owners of the phone numbers. One already has been revealed, and he, amazingly, whilst denying that any sexual activity took place, resigned his office in the government where he was a deputy secretary of State, and as part of his job was required to enforce a provision of the government's HIV/AIDS prevention federal funds program which required receiving groups to sign a pledge denouncing prostitution and sex trafficking.

Disney-owned ABC television has the phone lists, and on their late night 20/20 program this Friday will deal with it in some way (it's sweeps week!). Guess they will first examine the expense records of staff members who spent time in DC "on assignment" before deciding how far they'll go.

Smile, chuckle, and stay tuned.

Later
The ABC-promised revelatory ratings-rich show was a scam and a bust. It set out to show that Deborah Jeane was to be despised and belittled, assumed her guilt, and not one of the customers was identified or approached for an interview, phone records notwithstanding. Which serves to underscore the fact that American media will distort the news to fit its agenda and cannot be trusted. Staying up late was a complete waste of this viewer's time.

Alec Baldwin appeared on THE VIEW yesterday, for an interesting and controversy-free interview.

The LA Times reviewed it - controversially. Times staff writer's notebook

It is clear that the powers that determine such things at the LA Times have decided that Alec Baldwin shall be one of the celebrities to condemn, and so he is delivered to critic Paul Brownfield to cherry-pick, and then be dealt with along party lines.

It is hard to believe that he saw the same show that I and the rest of us saw. It is worth examining for their methods.

For starters, it wasn't "live" as stated by Barbara Walters? Big deal! At least there weren't suggestive chiron banners scrolling across the screen, as I had to endure in Larry King's treatment of me on his similarly "live" show. Baldwin talked about how family lawyers and family courts drive wedges and are helping to bring about alienation in divorcing families, and how his frustration had led to his illegally leaked message (to attorney Harvey Levin and his TMZ/AOL Time-Warner subsidiary scandal site) left on his daughter's voicemail.

The opposing arguments offered by Brownfield to distort Baldwin's POV are of the hearsay type, much favored by gossips, which would not see much daylight in a court of law.

Baldwin's forceful "temper"? As far as one can see, he exercises it for good reason, doesn't suffer fools gladly, and has the industry standing to be heard, and the money to see things through and work for change. A noble calling. And the heck, even, with his situation comedy, a sentiment that so irked this critic who happens to like the series.

Baldwin disparaged media gossips? Well, this estimable critic has now decidedly put himself in their camp. Perhaps the comment that such people are filled with "self-hatred and shame" touched a nerve in Brownfield. He asks whether a study should be commissioned. Please yes, and host it, Mr. Brownfield?

Meanwhile, hear and evaluate for yourself the message left on his daughter's voicemail, because for the umpteenth time she had turned off her phone, thus leaving her own message for her father. And hear him say that he always stops whatever he's doing to call her at the prescribed and court-ordered time. Sanctions, anyone?

Alec Baldwin's message left on his daughter's turned off telephone

The media is awash with this story of the aspiring student playwright turned killer. It appears that he had a good family, a bright and loving sister, and parents who came to America from poverty in Korea, to seek a new life and become part of the American dream.

LA Times family narrative

Wiki entry

He said his piece which is shot through with rage, and pain, and completed his awful deed by killing himself for closure.

Comments have ranged from the banality of the ignorant to the banality of the expert. One Hollywood wag wondered whether he had a deal with underdog NBC as the network of choice to send his package of photos, videos and 1800 word message that took beloved fictionalized violence (Friday the 13th et al) to a new level of reality show.

People should button the lip, hold up on the written word, and gaze in solitary silence at Cho's image as if it were a mirror.

John Donne, the English seventeenth century poet, said it best.

Do not ask for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for thee

It may be that Brooklyn District Attorney Charles J. Hynes is a true American hero, with the character and power to force an official inquiry into corruption in political seats of power using the backup of law enforcement, and with the courage to use it.

As part of the continuing events reported below, today's Times reports on this story.

Judgeships for sale?

Good luck Mr. Hynes. May you provide the template for jurisdictions in other United States of America, and may they take notice. . .

The New York Times is to be commended for following up and reporting on the events in Brooklyn fully, and the jury is to be commended for doing what was right based on the damning evidence against a sitting judge that was placed before it. Americans nationwide deserve nothing less.

Read this and take heart, all you pro se's and pro per's out there. It is possible for Justice to trump the intimidating legal thickets which embolden lawyers and judges to befuddle and keep the public away while they socialize. Dinners and cigars, indeed!

Download N.Y. Times story

Notice how the placing of surveillance recording devices where it counted probably clinched it. And notice how the emperor will be wearing very new robes after his sentencing in June.

Over a five year period, 74 year old Judge Garson presided in nearly 1100 cases which involved splitting families; children, custody and money matters were entrusted to him. As a result of the thorough investigation, old divorce cases may be reopened, and civil suits may be filed.

Now that the illegal activities in the Anthony Pellicano case is winding its way to a California trial, would that the Los Angeles district attorney had the stomach to look into the goings-on in the Los Angeles Family court, and that the Los Angeles Times had the stomach to editorially insist upon it. They managed it in a series on nearby Las Vegas and Nevada, they should focus nearer my Hollywood home.

A Prosecuting attorney, yet. This is headline news, of course.

I make no secret of my disdain for attorneys. Apart from their possible usefulness in going over contracts and arranging legal documents (which can now be done on a do-it-yourself basis with lots of online help), most of my contempt for these miserable creatures is reserved for trial attorneys.

In fact I go so far as to say, (my opinion based on my experience of course), that a lawyer is an officially protected trained professional liar, and anything he or she says may or may not be true, and may or may not be his or her own thoughts, and that as a class they are totally compromised and not real people, thinking they occupy some kind of higher parallel universe.

I do not believe that trial attorneys have any meaningful identity absent a client. I've yet to meet a lawyer who will work on or spend time on any social matter for which there is no personal gain of some kind. As such, they should be ignored and avoided by all sensible, wholesome, decent, well-meaning, non-lawyer people, who, some say, are rapidly becoming a minority in the Western world, but are however voters. Wonder if any trial attorneys will be running for U.S. president in '09? But I digress.

So it was with great pleasure that I read of the current news concerning the 3 boys of Duke University's lacrosse team and their adventures with a stripper at a party who sued them for rape. They were close to major jail time, with the assistance of the press, and the public prosecutor of Durham County, State of North Carolina; but have now been exonerated, after millions of dollars have been spent in legal fees and costs.

Now a Prosecuting attorney, representing as he does we the people - that's you and me - has a special duty to tell the truth. They are supposed to seek their victory based on it, or as near as it ever gets, by what are called verifiable facts, not just by canny courtroom gymnastics like a defense attorney where anything goes (although they too are "officers of the court".) We know what a lie is, but is the tactic of withholding truth also a lie? Of course, because it obscures the truth.

Here we find that D.A. Mike Nifong is accused of withholding DNA evidence that would have served to free the defendants, under indictment for a year. And to make matters worse, he defamed them in his public pronouncements to the press before trial, and of course the media ate it up. Why did he want to do this? It is thought that this was part of his re-election campaign.

The judge stepped in, stopped everything in its tracks, his boss the attorney general dropped the charges, and Nifong apologized.

But a million lawyers' feathers got ruffled. There will be a trial, this time of the D.A., before the secret court of the ethics committee of his own bar association. Studded with a few Duke U. graduates perhaps. And he may lose his license to practice law.

He will plead neither guilty nor innocent. He will plead immunity.

June 15, 2007
Boy, was I wrong! The hearing was not secret, was televised, and he has owned up and will resign. Shows what law societies will do when there is enough public outcry. In fact, enough to have him disbarred for "deceit". That's a laugh. If he was a defense lawyer, he would be deemed to be hugely successful, but too late now to switch sides.

Never mind for him, he can go back to being a "real person", a rich entrepreneur perhaps.

"That's some rough girls from Rutgers . . . Man, they got tattoos . . . That's some nappy-headed hos there, I'm going to tell you that now."

So said girly headed Don Imus about the Rutgers University basketball team consisting of 8 black and 2 white women in his televised radio show last Wednesday.

Now he faces being kicked off the air by none other than ratings challenged MSNBC, the TV network owned by NBC, and the radio station owned by CBS.

Is this nothing but a storm in a teacup? Not at all. This is about promotion of a show, 2 networks, and hundreds of personalities, including Imus and the Rev. Al Sharpton, cartoonlike, all spilling over the edges of the bandwagon together. To get us excited, and make them all more watchable, and change the subject from eternal politics or maybe not.

I have written before about the divide between funny and serious in a related situation where things got turned around.

2005 Knievel case decision

I pointed out that what is amusing is to observe how actors and other public people and yes the unpredictable courts constantly straddle the fence of this divide, hoping to get the best of both worlds. We say something in a kidding fashion, and the target decides to treat the remark as serious. And yet sometimes we say the funny bit in order to be taken seriously and get ignored (like Al Franken). Note that the 9th. Circuit did exactly that in the Knievel case, the majority finding humor and denying his claim against a network.

No fair, Larry David dares to do jokes about minorities, so does Mel Brooks, so does Robin Williams, so does Howard Stern, so does Ricky Gervais, so do the Monty Pythons, well, sort of. "Fun with gays!" The trick is to do a knowing wink, a nudge nudge, a "just kidding" sign. And black comedians don't even bother with that.

Perhaps the lesson here is that unless you are a card carrying comedian, stay away! Comedy is hard.

Next day
It's over. No sponsors = No TV and no radio. R.I.P, Donald. The hardest part is having to listen to the wailing of the holier high priests of NBC and CBS. Well, now Don can at last get a haircut.

The sea has always been a part of my personal history, thanks to 2 years of British National Service causing me to choose to ship out on the Silverwalnut for Silver Line back in the days and the waters of the Korean War prior to emigrating to the New World.

I was on the last voyage of the Queen Mary from New York to Southampton, and on the first voyage of the QEII (yes, as a passenger.)

So the sinking of the Sea Diamond held a special fascination for me. It has eerie echoes of the Titanic disaster nearly a century ago, hitting a rock instead of an iceberg, but with a better outcome.

It is instructive that, hungry for details, one learns to go to Wikipedia, because within a day there was more information there than any newspaper has been able to provide. And, one suspects, with more knowledgeable reporters behind the reporting, maybe some merchant navy types.

The story of Sea Diamond

Only time will tell, of course, but can we get a clue from the mouth of Sam Zell, the new out-of-town owner? He gave a talk yesterday called " 'Make Me An Offer': Sam Zell and the $39-Billion Buyout of Equity Office Properties" to a class of Stanford University law students.

He made a fortune worth an estimated $4 1/2 billion by turning around distressed assets. It's a well-known fact that in February Zell sold the real estate firm he built into the nation's largest collection of office buildings.

Told that many people didn't think newspapers were a good business because of declining circulation and falling ad revenues, he said:

"A lot of people didn't think the railcar business was a good investment. I made a quarter-billion dollars. A lot of people didn't think container leasing was a good investment. I made a half-billion. Should I go on?"

I think not, we get the point. The Chicago company's holdings include the Los Angeles Times, KTLA-TV Channel 5 and the Chicago Cubs baseball team.

His privatization plan, about to be concluded, put him in the driver's seat for a mere $315 million of financing making him chairman, with the right to buy up to 40% of the company later if he so wishes.

Meanwhile, he will be taking care of 38 top executives from a cash bonus pool of $6 1/2 million. Apart from the Chief Executive, who chose not to participate, one notes that the company's current finance chief would receive $600,000, the head of the newspaper division $400,000, and the head of the broadcasting division $350,000.

read SEC Form 8-K for TRIBUNE CO filed April 5, 2007

The Chandler family, the largest shareholder, would depart the board, where 3 members have been sitting since they sold out to the Chicago Tribune in year 2000 for around 8 billion dollars.

What about the employees, the reporters and columnists and editors (and one presumes the printers and truck drivers and other support personnel), will they be happy?

Consider, for this is how it works for failing companies whose profits are declining, like Delta Airlines, emerging from bankruptcy (see below).

The new private company will be partly employee-owned, functioning in a profit-sharing plan. Note the word "profit". If there aren't any, tough. They'll have to take salary cuts to avoid going out of business.

Is this Capitalism's answer to Socialism? Employee part ownership? Can one look for equality with other owners, seats on the board, no strings attached? Don't ask.

Well, perhaps we should give Sam Zell a break. We admit that based on the available evidence he is a brilliant negotiator. And he admitted that because he had been in the news business for less than a week, he wasn't a genius at that. Yet.

My son Ben flies for Delta. He took a pay cut to help his airline survive. Meanwhile, as a loyal father, I had bought some feelgood Delta stock, and put it in my pension fund.

When word came out that Delta would emerge from Chapter 11 (a reorganization) having become profitable again, in early May, I was horrified to learn that my stock would be "cancelled". Just like that, kaput. I thought that a stockholder would retain some interest; after all, stockholders are creditors too, albeit at the bottom of the heap, but just look at accounting principles. Residual value in the name Delta perhaps?. While I now understand why, having read the following download, I don't understand the logic or the law.

see Chapter 11 bankruptcy info

Meanwhile, there will be a new board, a new stock exchange listing, and new stock, some of which will be owned for profit sharing by the pilots. Wonder how the older retired pilots who may have held the older stock feel. I guess they are discovering the true meaning of bailing out (without a parachute, golden or otherwise - see above).

April 3, 2007
Veteran journalist Tim Rutten comes down hard on his alma mater, the Los Angeles Times, today. The future of the newspaper is on the brink of sale to yet another out-of-towner, and one suspects that his is the voice of the entire editorial staff.

The paper is about to go private, to the tune of around 12 billion dollars, submitting to the demands of stockholders, says Rutten, putting the new company basically in the position of a college student who has achieved financial independence from Mom and Dad by maxing out a Visa card.

He then goes after the founding family:

"After more than 120 years, the Chandler family will be out of the newspaper business. Good riddance.

"One does not speak of emotions like gratitude or loyalty when discussing the Chandlers, any more than one would ascribe those qualities to wolves. It simply is part of their nature to acquire and consume. They eat because that's what they do."

We are told that the Chandler family trusts own 20% of Tribune, the current Chicago based publishers, by selling (out?) the paper and the rest of the Times Mirror company for $8 billion, nearly as much as is now being proposed to take the company private. The Chandlers' share will come to about $1.6 billion, if it goes through.

"Talk about clasping an asp to your bosom" he goes on.

"This newspaper now has been sold twice in five years, to accomplish the impossible -- satiating the Chandlers' greed.

"Take it from somebody who spent a lot of years working for them: If these people thought there was another nickel to be made off the Los Angeles Times by selling it to the North Koreans, Kim Jong Il would be running this newspaper's editorial policy the next day. The Los Angeles Times' readers deserve better than that."

It may be that the inmates have taken over. One can only guess that the publisher either lacks control over its employees, or that this is a remarkable case of self-flagellation.

Today is April 2, 2007. What is special to me first, is that this is the 40th anniversary of my marriage to Lynn Redgrave in 1967, which she ended in 2000.

The second reason is that this is the date 6 years ago that I met for the first time my wife-to-be stepping off a plane from Tokyo at LAX. To be, that is, if we liked each other. We did.

The third reason is that today I am restarting this blogsite, which has been asleep for 4 1/2 months because 4 1/2 months ago I was racing off to a hospital in an ambulance, with a heart attack. It happened just the day after I received notice of summary dismissal of my suit against Larry King by the Ninth Circuit, on appeal. (I THINK there was a connection!) Anyway, angioplasty surgery seems to have fixed things and given me a new lease on life, and new energy.

I spent part of my recovery time checking out the open encyclopedia Wikipedia in general and my page in particular.

Download file

Now I find that this freely available and free of advertising site is part of my daily life; there is so much to learn, and so much one can contribute by making new entries and editing.

Wikipedia.

What stays with me is their insistence on the NPOV (Neutral Point Of View). One gets so tired of the unending pitch of ego at all levels, personal and corporate, in all walks of life today. If mankind is to survive, the future of the world lies in this concept of NPOV.

I follow the careers of the Redgrave family with interest, although it's none of my business any more. I note that Vanessa is the latest toast of Broadway having just opened in Joan Didion's THE YEAR OF MAGICAL THINKING. I'm about to read the book. I want to find out whether a loss to death for a family or person is worse than a loss, AS IN DEATH, to a family or person when the subject is STILL ALIVE.

Still alive, as in the countless Family Court decisions to carve up families and spouses and children separating loved ones and dooming them to a lifetime of silence, as in death. I think I already know the answer, which is tied up with the idea of lack of closure. More on this later.

So stick around. I'm still here, and won't go away.

Today, Christmas Day, is the second anniversary of my Blog.

I'm in bed nursing a heart attack, and to all you lawyers out there, especially James R. Eliaser Esq. and Emily Shappell Edelman Esq. and Judge for Hire Arnold H Gold, and supervising judge of the L.A. family court Aviva Bobb, in the spirit of Christmas - or should I say Hannukah in your cases - as Whoopi Goldberg (being Sister Mary Clarence) says to Harvey Keitel (being arch villain Vince LaRocca) at the end of Sister Act . . . . BLESS YOU!

And now, hit it and sing along with me as I lie

DREAMING OF A WHITE CHRISTMAS

This is easy. ATTORNEYS AT WORK.

The AP reports today that Anna Nicole Smith's lead attorney in the Bahamas, Michael Scott, Esq., has withdrawn as her counsel, citing disagreements on matters of strategy and concerns about her conduct.

He said he was unsettled by her decision to exchange vows with her boyfriend, Howard K. Stern, Esq. even before she made funeral arrangements for Daniel Smith, her 20-year-old son who just died, in a not legal marriage ceremony on a boat off Nassau, selling the pictures to Time/Warner's People Magazine.

Stern says he's the father of her new baby. And so does someone called Larry Birkhead. He's gone to L.A. Family court, demanding that mother and daughter return to California for DNA paternity testing.

I just wonder what this has to do with fighting to get back her multimillion dollar inheritance from Texas oil tycoon J. Howard Marshall II, whom she married in 1994 when she was 26 and he was 89, dying one year later. His son blocked the transfer under state law, then he died recently. Now the United States Supreme Court has solemnly given her permission to go after the loot, because her bankruptcy is federal law. Now this has given her a really big problem, how to pay the legal fees this entails (no, I don't think this is a pro se type situation). Well, she's nothing if not creative in finding solutions.

There is a public benefit, however. The American public will have its attention diverted from really silly problems like getting zapped by North Korea.

What in blazes was Cory Lidle low time pilot doing flying his plane where he was flying it? I've many a time taken friends for a sightseeing trip in my plane around there. The corridor was famous. Take off from Teterboro, over the George Washington Bridge, slowly down the Hudson, keep right, 1000 feet, circle the Statue of Liberty, stare diners at Windows on the World in the eye, wave, then fly back the same way. And that was BEFORE!

The thought of flying North up the East river, and messing with the rapid talk of controllers busy with the traffic pattern into La Guardia, and helicopters and seaplanes makes no sense at all. Besides, a glance at the local chart reveals that it's a box canyon ending with the wall of restricted air space, and that a 180 is very tricky, and not possible to maintain regulation altitude. Why the FAA doesn't keep out VFR lightplane traffic is hard to understand, ESPECIALLY NOW!

Something's missing here. No flight instructer worthy of the licence would sanction such a trip. And whoever was flying the plane doesn't matter, for there are dual controls, the instructor always ready to jump in.

Smack into a condo, my first thought was that this was a child custody issue. Now I think it was, "Hey Guys, guess who I've got up here with me . . . Oops, Mayday! Mayday!"

Aside from the sheer unprofessionalism, and the breaking of severe FAA rules, must we now expect a cover-up of some kind? Will we get to hear the tapes of ATC controllers maybe breaking the rules for a celebrity? Can we know? Will the tapes disappear?

They certainly did not help the cause of AOPA and the private pilot, struggling in today's environment to keep flying and be accepted. (Me, no more plane, bless its heart.)

Accident? Please! Ask the right questions, reporters, it's not about the parachute, its about breaking the rules and reckless flying. Stop mollifying the fans!

And for the hundreds down below who survived, just thank your lucky stars. The real ones, high up in the heavens. And be angry.

The first of these two items was filed by the A.P., and run by CNN "The Most Trusted Name In News" [or at least, that is, the news we can trust them to give us]

DISTRICT ATTORNEY: KARR'S CHAMPAGNE FLIGHT COST $6K

An outline of expenses shows the 15-hour flight from Thailand, on which Karr sipped champagne, dined on fried king prawns and roast duck, cost the county $5,925.

[blah blah blah]

Now let's check out what the Cincinnati Enquirer reported today, in the commencement of courtroom action to find justice for little Marcus Fiesel.

COUPLE'S DEFENSE LAWYERS BICKERING. DAVID CARROLL'S REP SAYS LIZ'S IS BAD-MOUTHING HIM

Rubenstein filed a motion in Hamilton County Common Pleas Court on Thursday asking the court's presiding judge to stop Liz Carroll's attorney, Adam Bleile, from interfering in his case. He also asked for an investigation into his actions.

[Blah blah]

Rubenstein was appointed by the Hamilton County Public Defender's Office to represent David Carroll Jr., while Bleile was retained privately by Liz Carroll.

Bleile is accused of calling David Carroll Jr.'s mother, Debra Hounshell, in which he questioned the integrity of Rubenstein, the prosecutor, the judge and the proceedings in general.

[Blah]

Between Aug. 28 and Aug. 31, Hounshell wrote, Bleile called her several times and told her he was representing Liz Carroll for free; that Rubenstein, the prosecutor's office and the judge were "all like family" and would work together to ensure that David Carroll Jr. would not get a fair trial; and that the attorneys were handpicked by the judge, so she should question their integrity.

Hounshell added that Bleile "caused her to question the integrity of her son's counsel, engendered great emotional distress and created a distraction to both her and (Rubenstein)."

Now I ask you, which item is of more concern to the public? The first is just stupid, to be ignored, but the second should be a cause for alarm, for it sets the beginning stage of the money grubbing trivialization of the issues. I hope this is a strong judge.

We can expect that the free appointed attorneys will be fired by their respective clients, who will then hire powerful free attorneys looking for professional credits, and maybe a book deal. Followed by jury members on the same track. So, if/when the media starts to spotlight the case - which cannot be before the trial starts - will it be just a question of time before Gloria Allred shows up? The one obstacle to this scenario is that there is not a single participant to the drama who could by any stretch be called "sympathetic". The only one of those is dead.

Both stories should have a notice attached.

CAUTION: LAWYERS AT PLAY

Yes, you heard it right. This is not identity THEFT.

It's done for Celebrities, who willingly pay a lot of money to professional writers on condition they remain anonymous.

They're called "Ghosts".

You would be forgiven if you thought that the best-selling book "Fatherhood" was written by Bill Cosby. You'd be wrong. It was written by Ralph Schoenstein. He was quite a guy.

He also wrote "Time Flies" for Bill, published in 1988. And he wrote "Here's Johnny!" for Ed McMahon, published just last year, and which Ed is busy promoting on the usual circuit as we speak.

The thing is, if you bought any of these books, you would not find his name appearing anywhere. I guess that does add a premium to his take-home, because otherwise he'd be a lesser paid "co-writer".

Autobiographies make big money for their celebrity subjects for very little work, they just have to sit still for a few hours, as though having their portraits painted, and mouth off.

As for Ralph, sorry to report that he died last week. Perhaps his headstone will remain blank too.

MARCUS. Think about it. Anything hidden? What can you find?

I changed the "C" to a "K", then I separated the syllables.

I came up with MARK US. Can this be his statement from beyond the grave? I know that sounds eerie, weird even, but I want to believe that it is.

What that says to me is that he had a destiny and a role to play in his short life, much as Terri Schiavo had a destiny and a role to play in her life (which I've gone into extensively elsewhere.)

The death and life of Marcus, much like Terri, bookended within its boundaries a message for all of us, about the plight of the helpless and the unrepresented and the unprotected and the defenseless and the dispossessed and the abandoned.

There was a play by J.B. Priestley about such a person, a girl who was so helpless she killed herself. I was in it once. He called it "An Inspector Calls" (the inspector was played by Sir Cedric Hardwicke in my production). It dealt with how, in the death of this person (she too was not a relative, but a worker for a family), every person who knew her denied involvement in her death. And Priestley set out to show how it was NOT so. How everyone she knew was very much a part of her death.

And so it is with Marcus - and Terri - and the society in which we live. We all had a part in it, and it is for all of us, in our quiet moments when we look inward instead of outward, to examine our consciences. Where does our responsibility lie? Is there anything we could have done that we didn't do, or did NOT do that we could or should have done?

Most people are on the fringes of involvement, and shrug off true involvement by volunteering money or labor to charitable causes because it makes them feel better. Among those that are not, that work and interact daily in the front line, are the lawyers and the judges and the justices. They are the ones who can actually, with rigorous determination, DO something. And the final determinant of whether they are effective and fair is to be found among the legions of their "victims", a word I choose to use with some insight based upon my experiences with the non-criminal courts. They are the truly abandoned ones.

The idea of the feeling of abandonment is something that has haunted me all my life, ever since I was left in an English boarding school hundreds of miles from my parents and my London home without the capacity to understand that they were helpless to do otherwise due to the blitz and the war in Europe (the fate of wartime evacuees in England in '39/40, deep into mass enuresis, and a circumstance that was stupidly ignored by the makers of The Chronicles of Narnia that could have set up the movie and given the escapism some meaning.)

Little three year old Marcus was REALLY, LITERALLY, abandoned. Much worse, he was left in isolation, hands bound behind his back, only the sounds of people and traffic outside, a whirring fan, unbearable crushing heat, hunger, and thirst. Truly forsaken, with no power to consider the meaning of his fate because of his age. Just raw suffering and sheer terror. And with his last gasp, came his merciful death.

We cannot ignore the message, HIS message. DO something for some helpless ones, big and little; don't just TALK about it. We need to let him know that we hear him, hear his cry, which speaks to us like the ghost of Hamlet's father.

Never mind John Mark Karr, there are other more important stories going on in this country of ours, and unbelievably, they are not getting the NATIONAL ATTENTION they should be getting. The story of Marcus Fiesel was pitched to Fox News, CNN and all the networks and got little or no play. No national coverage, thanks to John Mark Karr
This miserable yet riveting story must not be allowed to slip under the radar. People need to know, and must know.

It's the truly shocking narrative of a three year old disabled little boy, bound with tape and covered in a blanket and left alone in a hot closet without food and water, just an electric fan blowing, for almost 2 days while his foster parents, their four kids, and a house mate, drove off to the next state about fifty miles away, to enjoy a family reunion.

When they returned, he was dead. The foster parents concocted a story about a missing kid, and went on television to ask for help so that the police and thousands of their neighbors in the community diligently searched for him. Days went by. Meanwhile, they took his body and burned it to cover up their deed.

This is the coverage I found on the Cincinatti Enquirer website:

The crime
The search
On Butler County Children's Services
How the case unfolded
The Warrant
The Agency
The Family Reunion
Background, "Be Outraged"
Readers' thoughts

On that last thread of thoughts, I found this poem posted by someone called Sharon, imagining what might have been the last words of the toddler. Read the above first, then the poem. Tears may flow.

Download file

Attention must be paid.
One last thought. Although a little late, something should be done to remember Marcus and what he stands for. Let his name ring out and be preserved, a memorial in a park, perhaps a label on a piece of national legislation. It will help to give his senseless death some meaning.

LATER
Many people seem to feel that the child's natural mother should not be able to sue, and should not "make any money" out of this tragedy, since she seemed to be unable to take care of Marcus in the first place.

From a legal perspective, she needs to be the one to sue. Yes, "the people" can and will sue for a crime, perhaps even murder, perceived to have been committed.

But the natural mother was the "real party in interest", she had not lost her parental rights. And she can go after any and all defendants, not just the foster family, but the agency and the social worker employees and maybe even the State of Ohio. Defendants they all are not in a criminal suit. And they all have to answer, if justice and a better system is to be achieved. And remember, she might have won back her child if her circumstances improved. I say wish her luck.

Closing update
An overview and update can be found HERE with the trial result and entries as of 21 April, 2007.

With all of the swashbuckling fury of a drunken Topanga plumber, this other force of nature makes its way up the spine of Cuba, towards the spine of Florida. And presents a TIMELY opportunity that should not be missed.

TIME for George W. Bush to think on the fact that as our president, he is not just a politician and a leader - both of which he has demonstrated with alarming regularity - but he is also a STATESMAN.

Using the stick and carrot analogy, we know how the stick is used, but we see little of the carrot.

Here, we face a common enemy.

Mr. President, pick up a phone, and put a call through to Fidel.

Tell him that this is not a political call (although it really is!), but a HUMANITARIAN call.

Say that we are ready to send aid, and would he kindly do the same when the hurricane hits Florida.

Then sit back and see what happens. If nothing happens, then you'll have scored an important PR point, which will not go unnoticed everywhere in the world.

Why NOW? This is just my opinion of course, but I think what is about to happen will show I am correct.

The event is emerging now because a British immigrant, Professor Michael Tracy, on the faculty of The U. of Colorado (my son's alma mater), has spent the last 4 years making a study of the JonBenet Ramsey case, and filming 3, count 'em, 3, documentaries about it, and now he's ready to place and sell them for showing.

Being a professor of "Journalism" (wow, what are they TEACHING nowadays?), he especially knows the REAL problem: How to get exposure to titillate the public's appetite to want to see his documentaries!

Answer: Ploy. Reveal to the authorities the contents of his e-mailing contributor, superfan John Mark Karr, with whom he has had correspondence for four years.

They fell for it, of course, and went scurrying off to find him. In Thailand, of all places.

The fact that Tracy is succeeding in spades of Pulitzer Prize proportions is apparent on all of the news media everywhere, who are getting bored with the Middle East. And it's a welcome distraction for the Administration.

Tracy has the brass to say "I don't regard JonBenet's murder as an important story. It raises questions about what the role of journalism is in a democratic culture." I watched him doing an interview, in which he stated that he will NOT be questioned any more.

Yes, following the path of Ann Coulter and other 15 days of fame ilk, the Brits have learned well how to practice the skills of American chutzpah and PR for a financial advantage.

I repeat, just my opinion.

Later
John Mark Karr's just arrived in Los Angeles, and ready to be transferred over to Colorado, for indictment and trial.

Seeing his face as he sat in the dock, one is reminded of the unforgettable character created by Bill Murray in "Little Shop of Horrors", sitting in the dentist's chair of nasty Steve Martin, barely able to contain his excitement at the pleasures to come.

And another, similar, character, must be his attorney, who can't wait to remind a court that his client cannot possibly obtain a fair trial given the media attention.

Later still
Oh tush, the D.A. declines to prosecute! Once again, we see how the cynical media WANTS to be duped if the results can hold the possibility of public obsession, viewers, ratings, and an interview with Larry Ziegler Live on CNN, the "All the News You Can Trust" station.

Well, I think they should pay Mr. Karr for the material, for he provided many hours of their programming. Wonder if he could sue. Misappropriation? Misrepresentation? Unfair Competition? Or how about Unfair Business Practices! Or Interference with Business Advantage!

And don't forget to share it with your true love, Mr. Karr. But first, find a "good" lawyer. They're out there.

October 5
Just in today, fresh from Santa Rosa: A judge dismissed child pornography charges against former JonBenet Ramsey murder suspect John Mark Karr. Prosecutors, having lost his original computer files, dropped the case, said they didn't have enough evidence to take it to trial. Karr was released immediately.

My question is, any reflection or repercussion on Professor Michael Tracy? Perhaps all we can say or do is mock him in class (nudge to his students). His videos may have lost considerable value now. Poor guy.

We know who paid the prosecuting attorneys, you and me, but who paid for his defense? Perhaps his lawyers worked Pro Bono, seeking a rapidly receding Holy Grail.

[He wrote this essay, which reverberates today, a hundred years ago, and it was published after his death in 1910 (his daughter didn't like his comments on religion). I've edited and shortened it for clarity, impact, and to get you thinking, but please, if you have a mind, I urge you to click and download his glorious original text, provided below)]

1. Man, the human race, is one distinct species. It exhibits slight variations in color, stature, mental capacity and food preferences due to climate and environment, but it is a species by itself, and SHOULD NOT BE CONFUSED WITH ANY OTHER.

2. Warm-blooded animals (dogs, cats, horses, monkeys etc.) make up a separate distinct family, but also exhibit variations in color, size, and food preferences.

3. As for the other families (birds, fishes, insects, reptiles, etc.) they are distinct, and also links in the chain which stretches down from the HIGHER animals to Man - AT THE BOTTOM.

HOW IS THIS?
The higher animals do engage in individual fights, yes, but never in organized masses.

Man is the only animal that deals in that atrocity of atrocities, WAR. He is the only one that gathers his friends about him and marches forth in cold blood, and with calm pulse, to exterminate his own kind.

Man is the only animal that robs others of their country, takes possession of it, and drives them out or destroys them. Man has always done this.

There is not an acre of ground on the planet that is in possession of its rightful owner. It has been taken away from owner after owner and cycle after cycle by force and bloodshed.

Too, man is the only slave, and the only animal who EN­slaves. He has always been a slave in one form or another, and has always held other slaves in bondage under him in one way or another. In our day he is always some man's slave for wages and does that man's work; and this slave has other slaves under him for minor wages, and they do his work. The higher animals (not Man) are the only ones who exclusively do their own work and provide their own living.

Man is the only Patriot. He sets himself apart in his own country, under his own flag, sneers at other nations, and keeps uniformed assassins on hand at heavy ex­pense to grab slices of other people's countries, and keep them from grabbing slices of his.

And in the intervals between cam­paigns, he washes the blood off his hands and then works for the "universal brotherhood of man". With his MOUTH.

Man is the Religious animal and is the only Religious ani­mal. He is the only animal that has the True Religion, in fact several of them.

He is the only animal that loves his neighbor as himself, and cuts his throat if his theology isn't the same as his. He has made a graveyard of the planet in trying his honest best to smooth his brother's path to happiness and heaven.

The higher animals have no religion, so we are told that they are going to be left out in the Hereafter. It seems questionable taste.

Man claims himself to be the Reasoning animal. But his record is the record of a maniac. He calmly sets himself up as the Head animal, whereas he is the bottom one BY HIS OWN STANDARDS.

Proof - My Scientific Experiment:
Man claims to be the reasoning animal but he is incurably foolish; he is incapable of learning simple things which all other animals easily learn.

In an hour I taught a cat and a dog to be friends. I put them in a cage. In another hour I taught them to be friends with a rabbit, and in the course of two more days I was able to add a fox, a goose, a squirrel and some doves. Finally a monkey. They lived together in peace; even affectionately.

Next, in another cage, I confined an Irish Catholic from Tipperary, and as soon as he seemed tame I added a Scottish Presbyterian from Aberdeen.

Next a Turk from Constantinople, a Greek Christian from Crete, an Armenian, a Methodist from the wilds of Arkansas, a Buddhist from China, a Brahman from Benares, and finally a Salvation Army Colonel from the English suburb of Wapping.

Then I stayed away two whole days.

When I came back to note the results, the cage of my higher animals was fine, but in the other there was a chaos of gory turbans and fezzes and plaids and bones and flesh - not a specimen left alive. Why?

These Reasoning animals had disagreed on a theological detail.

One is forced to concede that in terms of true loftiness of character, Man is nowhere near even the meanest of the higher animals. It is clear that he is constitutionally incapable of ap­proaching that height, because he has a defect which makes such an approach forever impossible; it is permanent in him, indestructible, and ineradicable. What is it?

It is the MORAL SENSE, and he is the only animal that has it. It is the quality which allows and ENABLES him to do wrong, and has no other purpose. It is incapable of performing any other function, and was never intended to.

Since the Moral Sense has only one purpose, the capacity to do wrong, it is as valueless to him as is disease. In fact, it is a disease. Let's look at one.

Rabies
Rabies makes a man mad and able to do something which he could not do when in a healthy state, which is to kill his neighbor with a poisonous bite. But, of course, it makes no sense to call him a better man for having rabies.

Rabies is an innocent disease, compared to the Moral Sense. No one can be a better man for having the Moral Sense.

The Primal Curse
So what do we find the Primal Curse to have been in the Beginning? It was the infliction upon man of the Moral Sense; the ability to distinguish good from evil; and with it, necessarily, the ability to DO evil. For there can be no evil act without the presence of CONSCIOUSNESS of it in the doer of it.

And so my scientific conclusion is that we have descended and degenerated from some long ago ancestor insect by insect, reptile by reptile, animal by animal, till we have reached the bottom stage of development, namable as the Human Being.

Below us, nothing.

Download file

This is from a British born citizen of the United States, and I'm sure only one of many thousands in this country who would also wish you well, but are aware that it is not politically correct to do so, and don't have the guts to say so. You probably won't find other messages saluting you like this one. Here, people either want to condemn you out of hand for mostly anecdotal reasons, or do it the safe way, make fun of you, and in a few cases want you to open your borders so they can come over from Florida and kill you.

It is easy to ignore the fact that you are in charge of a sovereign nation of around 11 million people, around the population of an extended London, or Tokyo, or New York, or Los Angeles. And in an area less than that of Pennsylvania. And that the notion of diversity may not sit well if such a small number is to be contained for the general good.

I praise you because you had a vision way back, and have been true to it, and the result is that you have a politically stable country, and an orderly society. I don't think the same can be said for some other meaningful Caribbean countries, and one might say the same for America, which is becoming more divided by the day. (Read this criticism of America)

Seriously now, on this your anniversary, it is time for a fresh assessment, and review of your life. Here are the events, as we know them.

You were born in 1926, survived a Jesuit boarding school, and later obtained a law degree. You got married at 24, and were divorced six years later, and had one son.

You were an early critic of the dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista. Your political ideas were nationalistic, anti-imperialist, and reformist. You were not a member of the Communist party then. In 1953 you attacked Batista, unsuccessfully, were caught, tried, and sentenced to 15 years in prison, but released 2 years later; at which time you went into exile in Mexico vowing to continue the fight.

Just over a year later, you and a band of guerillas including the Argentinean physician Che Guevara, returned to Cuba and succeeded in the fight. Batista fled on Jan. 1, 1959, finding no support from the United States.

Thus you became the new hero to your countrymen. Early on, you formed a government that included moderate democratic politicians.

Your reasons for changing from that democratic beginning are not clear, but you did improve the living conditions of your people, and for that they rallied behind you.

Of course, we are all aware that you later embraced Communism, and looked to the Soviet Union for material support.

This the United States did not like, of course, and they cut imports of sugar, your main crop, and you in turn nationalized U.S. businesses in Cuba.

On April 14, 1961, you announced to the world that your society was Socialist.

The next day, U.S. planes bombed your airfields.

Two days later, a bunch of expatriates, trained by the CIA, landed on your shores hoping to foment an uprising. The U.S. failed to back them up, and you captured them all.

Thus, the "Bay of Pigs", your fear of invasion, and your turn to the Soviet Union for protection. which suited Khrushchev just fine.

In February 1962, the U.S. created its first embargo, hoping to force you to your knees.

In October, U.S. spyplanes were observed in your airspace, and you shot one of them down. But the planes found evidence of Soviet missile sites being placed, aimed of course to the North, and then found ships bearing missiles headed your way.

Our President Kennedy acted immediately, and the people of the world saw the onset of the third world war looming, this time with a nuclear arsenal between America and the USSR, with Europe right in the middle, or, perhaps, the Far East. We all held our collective breath.

After much tense negotiation, Khrushchev agreed to withdraw his missiles from Cuba. In return, the United States agreed not to invade Cuba, and to remove its missiles from Turkey.

That's when your legal training came into play, very smart of you. To this day, the treaty has protected you.

By Dec 1965, a disgruntled U.S. (they hate to be foiled) began airlifting some of your residents who wanted to leave and live in America.

The following year, our President Johnson granted permanent residency to Cuban immigrants who arrived in this country after Jan. 1, 1959. The airlift ended after some years, and by then, over a quarter of a million Cubans had arrived.

Oct. 9, 1967. Che Guevera, who had left your side 2 years earlier to spread non Soviet Marxist dogma elsewhere, had been detained in Bolivia by a CIA/U.S. Special Forces military operation, and was executed without trial, according to testimony.

In 1975, U.S. Intelligence admitted to more than eight attempts on your life by the CIA.

The next year, the Cuban Communist party adopted a new constitution, and so Socialism was institutionalized, and you assumed the presidency. And, of course, to ensure your country's viability, you kept up your ties with the Soviet Union, without which your economy would have foundered.

But some sixteen years later, the USSR went under, withdrew their support, and your economy fell into recession.

Sept. 9, 1994: Cuba and the United States agree to cap the number of Cuban refugees admitted into the United States at 20,000 per year.

There were hundreds of thousands of relocated Cubans living in Florida by now, and they decided to bombard your country with leaflets urging revolt.

You shot down two of these planes that were violating your airspace, and in response, the United States made its trade embargo permanent.

And so you were ignored at this side of the water, except we were prepared to let Cubans in if they were able to successfully complete a sea crossing by boat. The rule was, if anybody was stopped before setting foot on dry shore, they would be returned to you.

Europe and the rest of the world watched, and did not desert you, however. January 1998, you and your people welcomed Pope John Paul II on a state visit.

Then a dramatic personalizing thing happened in real time that electrified everybody.

In November, 1999, a little boy, one of your people, by pure chance was found floating on a rubber inner tube, out in the Atlantic. Investigation showed that his mother had secretly left her husband, and attempted the dangerous crossing with her boyfriend and a few others. Little five year old Elian watched them arguing as the water got rough, fell asleep, and woke up alone and adrift. Funny how anecdotal family trouble gets attention. Finally. Real people with real names and faces and problems. To that, we can all relate.

Did our Coast Guard turn his inner tube around, wish him luck, and push him back out to sea? Of course not. He was brought ashore, and left with his uncles and aunts somewhere in Miami, and everyone was supposed to think that that was an American "happy ending" to his story.

Not so. Your voice and his father's voice were heard loud and clear, there were legal ramifications, and America was embarrassed enough to find its human side, follow its own family laws by the book (not by the judge), and Elian was forcibly returned to his father.

I was among the millions who watched his interview last year on CBS's Sixty Minutes, and it was clear that the right thing had been done. We saw an impressive little boy, met his father, and saw his school chums in their school uniforms.

Attitudes began to change here. In October 2000, the U.S. House of Representatives approved limited sale of food and medicine to Cuba, revising the Cuban trade embargo.

But taking the high road, through the United Nations, in April 2004 we censured Cuba over recent human rights abuses, including the detention of more than 75 political dissidents, held in inhuman conditions. (I'll trade that with the thousands held here similarly, in places like California's Pelican Bay high security prison), and also you were accused of some sort of sin that you were worth $550,000,000, a paltry sum by American standards. You claimed, believably, that you did not benefit from state owned enterprises.

Then just last month we heard that you were ill following a bad fall, witnessed on television, and that you were in the hospital with internal bleeding. Already, the media here were almost gleeful in quoting rumors that you were dead. You were very smart, and simply disappeared to be out of touch, which brings us to today.

I have written several times about Cuba before on this site.

Freedom of Speech; Elian Gonzalez; Richard Branson

You have shown yourself to have a very human side, and a great sense of humor and irony.

Your legacy is that you stood up to the great Goliath to the North, and have survived in your role as David, remained true to yourself, and hopefully everybody will draw their own fair conclusions from your story.

To close, again, a very Happy Birthday to you.

NEXT DAY

The New York Times invited readers to send in their brief comments on this subject, and here is the list, all 741 of them (including mine). It is incredible that the result was almost 100% in favor of letting the Cubans decide what should happen next. In fact, most were very much in sympathy with Castro and the Cubans. Bravo!

Download file

People have often asked me this question. They say "Look what the Jews did to you, Judge Arnold Gold put you in prison the day before you had to appear in court to start your case, then kicked you out of your house to sell it and pay for the fees of opposing counsel (who sued you in the first place) who were 1. your wife's attorney Emily Shappell Edelman, who is Jewish, and 2. Nicolette Hannah's attorney, James R. Eliaser, who is Jewish - who I discovered used to work for the judge's law firm. By ordering this, he effectively created the loss of my small son to me and me to him, and the exodus of the entire Clark family, less me, to the East Coast.

Then there was Family Court Supervising Judge Aviva Bobb, who I believe is Jewish, who backed Gold up, kept awarding new fees to Eliaser, and then refused to let me buy my guest house so that I could continue to live in Topanga, keep my dogs, and not store my belongings and not live in a trailer. Just a reminder here of my expectations that celebrity pandering could not happen in Hollywood's hallowed halls of justice: View image

An Appeal to the Second Circuit got me a negative review from Justice Miriam Vogel, also Jewish.

An Appeal to the Supreme Court, after I had written to Chief Justice Ronald George, who I believe is also Jewish, was turned down.

And the media, which wouldn't stop, appeared to get more fodder from the site of Hebrew University, where one of their professors made me the anecdotal target setting out to prove her totally inapposite use of me in a legal paper. Her name was Hila Keren, and to this day, I have received no response from her.

And then of course, there was Lew Wasserman, the top Jew in Hollywood, from the old House Calls case.

Well, my answer to this all-important question is that far from being anti-Semitic, I am, perhaps surprisingly, PRO-Semitic, and HUGELY ENVIOUS of them.

I have always respected the culture of the Jews, and their education, which certainly exceeds mine. I look up to them. Always an outsider, I even believe I have the soul of a Jew. I have made a point of making close friends with Jewish people. (In fact, more than one of my girlfriends was Jewish.)

I WANT TO BECOME JEWISH, so that I could be completely like them, recognizably the same, but without their religious beliefs, a secular Jew.

I believe that there is the APPEARANCE of networking and mutual backscratching taking place. Of course, business is all about mutual backscratching, nothing wrong with that, but if I am right, I want to be a part of THAT network.

It is absolutely no coincidence that I believe I could then enter the places where Jewish mingling and socializing take place. Clubs, temples, agents' offices and so forth, where right now I would be unwelcome and refused entry. Perhaps because I am no longer attached to a celebrity.

It was Adolph Zukor, that originator of things Hollywood, founder of Paramount Pictures, who ages ago gave this deathless advice to newcomers to the Hollywood scene: "Talk British but think Yiddish!" That was right up my tree.

To this end, I have entertained the thought of taking a hint from Careen Johnson, a struggling black bricklayer and funeral parlor assistant who, dying to become successful as an actress, changed her name to Whoopee Goldberg. She was smart, it got her an Emmy, an Oscar, a Tony and a Grammy. And of course she had the great talent to back it up.

Now me, I could change my name to Clarkstein or Clarkberg, but would it help? Not bloody likely! If I became a Jew aspiring to become successful as an actor or a celebrity, I would surely be advised to change it back to Clark.

Don't think so? Look at Emmanuel Goldenberg, Muni Weisenfreund, Julius Garfinkle, David Kaminsky, Bernard Schwartz, Jacob Cohen, Joyce Frankenberg, Aaron Chwatt and Ephraim Goldberg. They changed their monikers to Edward G. Robinson, Paul Muni, John Garfield, Danny Kaye, Tony Curtis, Rodney Dangerfield, Jane Seymour, Red Buttons and Frank Gehry respectively. And then there was Larry King (interesting choice, but what is wrong with "Larry Zeiger Live"?)

No, I'm afraid that that can only be my fantasy.

But getting back to the law, I did make a point of hiring Jewish lawyers, who always keep their original names perhaps as a badge of office, oh, and a Jewish press agent, thinking that would help.

The first to defend me was Melvin S. Goldsman, and Marci Levine, Esqs. of Freid & Goldsman, their names giving them away.

I fired them when I found that my Mel allowed his Jewish adversary to write a time sensitive stipulation to Nicolette that could have led to the cessation of hostilities, didn't read it because he was out of the office and there's no money in ceased hostilities, and told his secretary to tell me to sign it, which I did. Boy, was I green at the beginning. Perhaps they were old friends.

LA County Bar Association

My next was Steve Mindell, Esq. I fired him because he was about as aggressive as my little son's kindergarten teacher. When I asked him to get Lynn to open a joint bank account with me so that she could pay her share of the upkeep of our joint property during the three years of my lone occupation, he simply told me she wouldn't agree. When I asked him to get our joint stock portfolo released from the freeze put on it at the height of the dotcom bubble so we could cash out, again, he wouldn't do it. It would have meant getting a court order, and he wouldn't go to court for it. Nothing appeared to be happening, other than his endless bills.

So then I hired hit man Mike Kelly, Esq., a referral from a Topanga millionaire divorcee lady friend. Of course, he's Irish, (the worst kind, I hear someone shout - but that's a joke).

My last lawyer (apart from my Appeal lawyers, also Jewish) was a Cy Schaffer (also a Jew), to whom I paid $50,000. In court, Judge Gold said he had made an order that I was not to use funds from a tax refund to pay this lawyer, and he should immediately refund it to me. Schaffer protested. Gold hunted for his order, then said he couldn't find it, and told him he could keep the money.

I fired Mike Kelly after stretched out months when he alleged I was trying to get Nicolette evicted from her little house by not paying the property taxes, and it was going to be sold by the taxing authorities. He didn't read the 1-page notice, which had been sent over to him by her tricky attorney Eliaser, who I'm sure had read it. It wasn't for me, it belonged to another John Clark, on a foreclosing property in South Central Los Angeles!

So now I was out of lawyers because I stopped believing in them, lost six hundred thousand dollars to them, and had no more money. That's how I came to represent myself in court, and had to learn what it is to be a PRO SE.

Having wised up, my first appearance before Judge Gold was over the unread by my attorney property tax inquiry. There was Eliaser, sputtering to the judge that I was trying to get his client evicted. I showed the court the 1-page notice showing it didn't belong to me. Judge Gold just smiled, and thanked me for being smart enough to catch it. I asked for a sanction against Eliaser for wasting the court's time. Not granted.

As for my Jewish press agent, a gentleman named Michael Levine, a self-styled media expert, I hired him to give me advice on handling the media now that I was suing Larry Zeiger -sorry, King. I got no advice at all; he refused to visit me at my house, but I did find that my money, about thirteen thousand dollars, went towards starting his new wannabe Drudge Report, aimed at bringing down the likes of Mel Gibson and Michael Jackson and maybe me and others who APPEAR to be breaking his moral code (chuckle chuckle). Networking again, is my opinion. But unlike Red Buttons, I did get a dinner, several actually. It wasn't until after I had dropped him that I discovered that he used to be married to King's current wife by whom he had a child. I think he should have told me about that before I paid him a penny.

If I ever get as drunk as Mel Gibson, I'm told that I tend to act out my Jewish fantasy while singing the freedom chorus of the Hebrew slaves in their banishment.

But when I sober up, I get to thinking more about what "they" did to me. Here I am, my possessions lost or stolen, alienated by my kids and my family (I face back East to see them), removed from my house and my wealth by quasi-military enforcers, and exiled from Topanga, my Homeland. Then these words come to me.

As long as deep in the heart,
The soul of a Jew yearns,
. . . . . . . . . .
Our hope is not yet lost.

And Barbra comes to my rescue in song.

July 22, 2006
The LA Times, praise G*d, has become quite funny and readable lately.

An editorial today approvingly reports that an open microphone at the dinner table at last Monday's Group of 8 summit in St. Petersburg was responsible for revealing the REAL George Bush,

He was heard to say that politicians "talk too damn long", that China and Russia are both "really big countries", and was heard to thank Blair for his nice birthday sweater, (wonder if it was from Marks and Sparks).

But the biggie was when he used the word "shit" to describe Hezbollah's recent adventures in the Middle East.

This was not, of course, as shockworthy as V/P Dick Cheney, a few months ago, overheard telling Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat, to go f*ck himself, sorry, I got caught up in the game, I mean fuck himself.

Maybe these open mikes are deliberate governmental plants to get the news out that our executives are startlingly human, just like the rest of us, which is comforting to know. At least we are discovering what's really going on in their minds.

From the particular (that's you and me) to the general (that's large groups of people, crowds, states, countries), deductive/inductive reasoning brings them all together.

It is no news that individuals declare war on each other, either politely or perhaps in (civil?) court.

To plead that there would be no war if only nations were sensible and settled their differences by negotiation is a waste of breath.

To argue that the solution lies in world federalism, well, that's not going to happen. A friend just back from a visit to his homeland tells me that even in the United Kingdom today, you will not see the Union Jack being proudly flown outside homes any more. (The Union flag comprised the individual flags of England, Scotland and Ireland superimposed. Wales was never represented, but do have their own flag.) Instead, the flag you see will depend upon where you are in the U.K. I was quite shocked!

So, countries don't want to merge, and individuals love to fight, and if you don't agree, spend a little time observing behavior in family courts across the land, or your nearest bar, and nothing will change that. It is in our nature.

Another useful argument is that we should ignore leaders who bring about war. The problem with that argument is that leaders have followers who obey unquestioningly. If only the followers had personal consciences and morals, and would refuse to fight. Nice thought, won't happen.

I've already written on the theme of war, and how history shows that fought to a conclusion, it is a healthy part of human development and brings about life changes that are accepted by all combatants, unlike a negotiated peace (check the Treaty of Paris, or the first Gulf war).

So, I believe that combatants should be allowed to have at each other under watchful eyes. That current fierce combatants should be allowed to declare open war on each other.

Weapons of Mass Destruction would be banned. Defined as any weapon that can have an effect on the rest of the world's population. Didn't that happen already, with mustard gas during WWI? Wasn't it banned under the Geneva Convention?

As for suicide bombers - did that change the rules? No, that's nothing new. Both sides were happy to exercise that choice, and did, during WWII.

The answer is that the rest of the world could join together, armed with strong, superior, punitive measures to target all sides. The U.N. could but won't be that union. They prefer words.

Perhaps this solution is happening now, even as we speak. Just so long as the big powers who possess the superior weapons stay out of it.

And now, let us pray . . . .

Events in the Middle East are escalating rapidly. The latest spark was the involvement of one Gilad Shalit, a lone Israeli soldier, on June 25, abducted by agents of the militant Hezbollah fighters, who hold seats in the Lebanese government.

Let's revisit a time 92 years ago, two years after the Titanic went down. You might want to compare the dates, then, and now as they unfold; the similarity is unavoidable.

1914
June 28, one Gavrilo Princip, another lone individual and a Bosnian Serb, was captured by law enforcers of the Empire of Austria-Hungary for assassinating their Archduke Franz Ferdinand and his wife.

The military was mostly on leave at the time, and three weeks were allowed to go by during behind-the-scenes activity. The Empire was looking for justice for this insult to their sovereignty, and obtained the support of a powerful ally, Germany.

July 23. The Empire sent an ultimatum to Serbia, which demanded, among other things, that Austrian agents would take part in the investigation of the murder, but that Serbia would take responsibility for it.

The Serbian government obtained the support of Russia. They said no problem about the inquiry, but no way would they allow the participation of Austrian agents on Serbia's territory. So far, sounds reasonable, sort of.

Then see what happened.

Diplomatic relations fell apart, and they all decided to play hardball with each other.

July 28. The Empire declared war on Serbia.

July 29. The Empire bombarded Serbia's capital city Belgrade, and ordered general mobilization. So that same day, Russia ordered general mobilization.

July 31. The Germans, having pledged support to Austria-Hungary, sent Russia an ultimatum to stop mobilization within 12 hours.

August 1, with the ultimatum expired, Germany declared war on Russia.

August 2, Germany with warlike ambitions to the West, saw this as an opportunity. Germany wanted free passage through Belgium, on its way to France, to make faces at England, ignoring the neutrality of Luxembourg and Belgium.

August 3, Germany declared war on France.

August 4, Germany invaded Belgium, and England, guaranteeing Belgian neutrality, declared war on Germany.

The deeds were done. Millions lost their lives.

The difference between then and now? The size and effectiveness of the weapons. Casualties, then millions now billions.

The difference between the belligerents' mindsets?

None. None.

As everybody must know by now, Star Jones left ABC's "The View" on June 26. She announced her departure on the show BEFORE the PTB (Powers That Be) had given her permission, and it certainly wasn't in that day's script. She caused Barbara Walters to be publicly embarrassed (a cardinal sin), who herself then made things worse by attempting a cover up by lying to the press. What a mess!

Star has made clear that she feels used and abused. Which is fine, just don't expect to ever work again.

ABC has stated that they didn't renew her contract because of her "highly publicized wedding" and because of "her extreme weight loss".

Tom O'Neil, senior editor at In Touch Weekly, says "If she taps what made her successful before, she can become successful again."

What? Get married again and put the weight back on?

He also says that CNN and Fox News Channel have approached her with offers, but both networks officially deny that they've had any contact with her whatsoever.

Here's wishing Star good luck in her future endeavors. A lawyer, she's finding out that Showbiz has its own Constitution (unwritten), and she may actually have to go back to lawyering (but keep the showbiz out of the courtroom, leave that to the judge.)

Meanwhile, In Touch shows itself to be not in touch. Perhaps they need to get a new life too.

If you read the entry down below of April 2, 2006 ("Placido Domingo, Where Were You?"), you will be familiar with that sorry story.

I am here to tell you that it's going to have a happy ending.

I consulted with what's called hereabouts a "personal injury" attorney, the kind that works for free and a hefty chunk of the proceeds. I was assured that we had a case and a right to quiet enjoyment pertaining to the show, and it would cost us nothing.

But I decided to hold off, and wait for a reply to my letter.

I can now report that I have received a gracious letter of apology and regret from LA Opera, with the notation that they are not responsible for operating the house, L.A. County does that, and also provides the front-of-house staff. It came with an invitation to attend any future performance as their guests.

Then I got a letter from the County. They investigated the matter and rendered their apology too, and a note suggesting that in today's employment climate, it can be difficult to take the kind of action that perhaps ought to be taken.

I have responded by saying that we have decided to accept their apologies, and expressed the hope that perhaps our unfortunate experience will be used for the benefit of future training classes for house and security staff. Audiences ought to be able to go to the bathroom without running the risk of being assaulted by security on their way back to their seats, between, or even dare one say, during arias.

I have asked LA Opera if we might attend the first performance of their upcoming LA TRAVIATA, by Giuseppe Verdi, on June 7th and they are pleased to do this for us. They asked me to erase the posting, but I said no, it needs to remain as a cautionary tale for the good of LA Opera and all future patrons. I said it should never happen again to anybody.

I said goodbye to the lawyer chap, who sounded quite sad, and