ROFL
Clues!
In another world wide web exclusive, The Bald Truth has obtained the first round of fiery motions in the $60 million libel suit suit Howard K. Stern filed against author Rita Cosby and her publisher over salacious charges in her book about Anna Nicole Smith, “Blonde Ambition.”
While Stern has charged Cosby tried to “influence the testimony of two witnesses in this case,” the nannies who worked for the late Playboy centerfold, and fears evidence may vanish and other witnesses may be tampered with unless depositions are taken fast, the author’s lawyer dismisses the need for speedy discovery.
In her opposition, respected attorney Elizabeth McNamara argues Stern “fails to articulate good cause for this court to deviate from” standard rules of discovery.
But Stern’s aggressive lawyer, Lin Wood, in a motion filed Friday in U.S. District Court in New York, insists audiotapes made of Cosby discussing payments to the nannies offer “good cause for … limited expedited discovery” of Cosby’s “attempts to interfere with potential witnesses” in the libel case.
Wood cites the audiotape transcripts secretly made of Cosby discussing payment as proof something was rotten in Nassau, and that the tapes show “Cosby offered to pay two critical fact witnesses” for an affadavit in support of her reporting that never did include interviews with them earlier.
See filings we have obtained first here:
cosby-response-to-expedited-discovery.pdf
cosby-pubr-10-24-07-hachette-memo-law-vs-expedited-discovery.pdf
cosby-case-stern-10-25-07-reply-for-expedited-discovery-3.pdf
cosby-case-stern-fri-memo-10-26-07-for-expedited-discovery.pdf
“With such clear intent, the question then becomes to what extent did Cosby attempt to influence other fact witnesses and to what extent did Cosby attempt to influence other fact witnesses, and…attempted to illegally shape or stymie discovery of the truth,” writes Wood in his reply to support expedited discovery. “Cosby’s actions have potentially compromised both the integrity of the judicial process…and Stern’s right to a fair trial.”
Wood is asking that Stern “may immediately depose Cosby on the limited topic of her attempts to influence” the nannies, but reserve the right to question her further on other aspects of the case later.
But McNamara says speeding up the process would not just create a “sideshow,” but be costly and slow down the six month schedule the judge has laid down as a timetable for all discovery to be completed.
Beyond that, she attaches transcripts of audiotapes Cosby made of the nannies’ PR man, Lincoln Bain, who made damning tapes of the ex-MSNBCer attempting to pay the nannies for an affadavit. In a sort of dueling tapes, McNamara says Cosby’s tapes were aired on FOX News on October 15 and show Bain contradicts himself and should not be trusted.
There’s also the implied issue of criminality. If Stern is charging Cosby broke the law by attempting to influence potential witnesses and the case is ever investigated by law enforcment authorities in the U.S. or the Bahamas, anything she says in even limited discovery could be used against her. In other words, if the judge allows speedy discovery before all the issues and facts are determined, McNamara appears to be suggesting her client might be forced to plead the 5th under questioning by Wood, if it ever gets that far.
The publisher also files a brief in support of Cosby.
http://www.artharris.com/2007/10/27/bald-truth-exclusive-rita-cosby-shoots-back-howard-k-stern-wants-speedy-discovery-read-libel-suit-court-motions-first-here/#more-553