Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: blueplum
"Sperm donor": It's that darn Jan. 6, 2006 agreement that says Larry will not go to the media under penalty of $10,000,000 that made me take notice

AND Howard's statement about "according to his calendar", he (Howard) was the father.

Why in the world would anyone sign that agreement? What was there to tell the media?

I'm (Howard) her daddy was just a "big fat lie".

There had to be several agreements attached to a "sperm donor" agreement and the Jan 6th is only one of them. It is not unusual for them to say "I will make no claim to the child in the future". There are several examples on the web.

Suppose someone finds "good evidence" of such an agreement. Actually, they already have. From Jan 6, 2006 until ???????, Larry said nothing about being the father or Anna wishing to marry Larry.

As an anonymous father, Larry could receive money for the rest of his life. Larry forgot one thing...Anna doesn't pay her bills and lies like a rug!!

When Howard claimed to be the father, Larry knew he'd never get a dime unless he continued the "game" Howard's way.

We've never heard boo from the doctor...to verify that Larry went with Anna for her checkups.

We've never heard from Howard or KE or even a store clerk to verify that Anna and Larry went baby shopping and because she had lost a child, I simply think the whole baby shopping bit was another "Red Herring".

When i took contract law, I was taught that a contract and/or confidentiality agreement was invalid if it covers up a crime. It was the eventual demise of the Catholic Church in their quest for secrecy. The contracts "covered up" a crime and the contracts fell "on thier face".

Is being a sperm donor a crime? No, but conspiring to cover it up for financial gain and collusion (with Howard) is. No wonder Opri split...and she had every right to. Larry was working with the nemisis in the case.

3,726 posted on 11/27/2007 4:40:23 AM PST by Sacajaweau ("The Cracker" will be renamed "The Crapper")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3724 | View Replies ]


To: Sacajaweau

The Insider is going to have a little segment on “how Anna Nicole *would’ve celebrated* her 40th birthday with little Dannielynn.” They showed a clip of the shopping spree from yesterday.

I will report whatever the fictitious BD party report is, lol!


3,727 posted on 11/27/2007 1:03:59 PM PST by Rte66
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3726 | View Replies ]

To: Sacajaweau

re: Jan 6 2006 agreement

to be noted: didn’t Birkhead state that he was ‘called’ to come over to sign (an) agreement pertaining to pregnancy and he was ‘angry’? Didn’t he say the contract was dated jan 3rd?

to be noted: didn’t Anna complain of ‘flu-like symptoms’ after she returned from the Shelleys?

‘agreement’ references - one from the grave and two from babydaddys:

STERN: (during LKL interview) “...most people around her, myself included, have signed confidentiality clauses that we won’t go to the media about her.

And, Larry did that and he actually in his own words has a liquidated damage clause for $10 million. And, you know, I’m surprised that he doesn’t — I’m just very shocked at how he’s handled this under the circumstances.”

ANNA: (during Pat O’Brien’s interview from the Bahamas, “in which Anna says the whole debate with Birkhead should not have gone public”)

“Everyone in my life signs one,” says Anna. “And yet he claims he doesn’t remember signing anything like it. Actually, he signed three of them.”

BIRKHEAD - It’s birkhead’s testimony, in rationalizing why he called GBen to ‘tattle’ was that the agreement he ws asked to sign was relating to a pregnancy.


3,760 posted on 11/29/2007 2:58:14 AM PST by blueplum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3726 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson