Smart Family Hires Entertainment Lawyer

CBS News ^

[Hillary's Lovely Legs]

Smart Family Hires Entertainment Lawyer

SALT LAKE CITY, April 5, 2003

width="1" height="7" border="0">

Elizabeth Smart with her father, Ed (AP/Deseret News, Tom Smart) Elizabeth with her parents Lois and Ed (AP Photo/Deseret News, Tom Smart)

(AP) Elizabeth Smart's family has hired a Los Angeles entertainment attorney to help them screen movie and book proposals about Elizabeth's abduction and remarkable return.

Kelly Crabb, who reportedly has negotiated contracts for Paul McCartney, Dave Matthews and Muhammad Ali, was hired a week ago, said Chris Thomas, the family's spokesman.

According to his firm's Web site, Crabb's areas of practice include motion picture, television and other programming production and financing; composer agreements, personal appearances and motion picture distribution.

"These kind of contracts are very specialized," Thomas said.

Crabb received bachelor's and master's degrees from Brigham Young University before earning a law degree from Columbia University in 1984. He also worked for the Salt Lake Organizing Committee.

Elizabeth, now 15, was abducted from her bedroom on the night of June 5. On March 12, she was found in a Salt Lake suburb with her alleged kidnappers.

[Hildy]

Bully tactics and intimidation??? LOL. That's the funniest thing I've heard all day.

[JesseShurun]

Illbay has attacked the Jews, Christians and The Lord God HaShem and His Son Jesus Christ and His followers here with impunity. I believe Rev is just calling him on it, again

[Eva]

I'm sorry, but the post was acting weird. Everytime I hit it, nothing happened. It took a full minute to post and I have a super fast computer.

[Illbay]

You apparently believe everything you DON'T read--or see printed, stated or announced anywhere else.

[mewzilla]

How much of the proceeds? Just wondering.

[Illbay]

Well, the situation you describe is merely a fantasy.

The REAL sick part is the people on these threads of invent, promote, and build upon that fantasy.

Sick, sick, sick.

[Illbay]

It's not a personal insult to observe you are "vacuous."

Merely fact-based opinion.

[Illbay]

Show me where I even mentioned the fact that they are LDS on my replies to you. Show me.

Then, admit that YOUR preconceived notions are what are at fault here, not mine.

[Eva]

Yes, I see that now. It is probably a good thing that I sent the post to the wrong person because it gave me a chance to vent without having Illbay respond.

My apologies to Revelation 911.

[Illbay]

Still waiting to see you show me where I "attacked" you because of "Mormonism." I'm waiting PATIENTLY.

[stands2reason]

To: ladtx

Just remember the Mormon church gets its 10% cut.

79 posted on 04/07/2003 11:13 AM CDT by Wrigley

...And there you have it.

[Corin Stormhands]

Not a problem. I see you figured it out before I posted.

[luvtheconstitution]

My take is very different. I don't see them wanting the limelight. The fact is, the public is curious and wants to know more. Anyone can produce a movie/book about this experience, but the Smart's have decided to be participants only so they can have some control over what is portrayed. I still see them as victims.

[Eva]

Someone else has already posted a link to one of your diatribes.

[JesseShurun]

Why don't you pick on someone your own size? Oh wait... whereever will we find a spiritual midget? (not an insult, mind you, just an observation

[Eva]

Don't bother to respond to me, I can't take any more of your irrational accusations.

[Freedom2specul8]

Would owning the movie rights prevent it or not? If the parents owned the rights, doesn't that make it off limits?

[stands2reason]

(by taking the Mitchells food 4 times)

What's your source?

[Illbay]

Sorry, you're not getting away with this. SHOW ME WHERE I ATTACKED YOU BECAUSE OF "MORMONISM."

Either do so, or withdraw the statement.

The "links" you showed earlier were places where I had REACTED against those--not even you--who were attacking MY religion. I did not say you had done that.

What I said was that you--like too many on these threads--are dragging this little girl and her family figuratively through the mud based on articles from such notable publications as "The Globe".

That IS what you did, and it has been shown to you.

You can wiggle and weasel all you want, but you falsely accuse me of "attacking" you on a completely different basis, when my attack (not on you, but on your words) is based on your shameless appeal to gossip in a supermarket tabloid.

So, I'm waiting for the apology.

[Illbay]

I will continue to "respond" so that you can have the chance to withdraw your false accusation.