[doug from upland]

I am still gathering info. I don't think he ever had a contract hiring him to do a film.

[kingu]

If I pay a guy, there's an implied contract there. Shouldn't it be simply a matter of producing canceled checks? Ahh well, lawyers will muck it up for quite a while, I expect. In any event, the guy was wrong not to mention the person who did the most research on the matter.

Either way, I want the film out there.. If it doesn't show at this year's SlamDance, then there's always next year - or a pick up from one of the cable channels. Not to mention that it's getting media coverage now, which the story wasn't a few weeks ago.

[T'wit]

Kelly was hired to investigate (his father is a PI) and to shoot the video relatedly. Mike paid for everything; Kelly didn't have a nickel to his name. I understood at the time, as others did, that Kelly was producing this for Mike. But he was a good two years late with the project. I'm not privy to what happened next but will guess that Mike chewed him over the lack of results, so Kelly walked off with the film. That's a guess, but an educated guess. I do know that he broke contact with all concerned, including me.

The lawyer did not figure in these matters at the time. At least her name never came up in my hearing (and I was pretty close to things).

Let me see what I can learn about it. Meanwhile, I can't say whether the video "should" be shown until one can be satisfied that it's accurate. (One colleague who reviewed a lot of the footage earlier said it was disorganized and not very good.) I'd rather nothing be shown than get the wrong story out.