SALT LAKE CITY, April 5, 2003
width="1" height="7" border="0">Posted on 04/07/2003 8:04:25 AM PDT by Hillary's Lovely Legs
Smart Family Hires Entertainment Lawyer
SALT LAKE CITY, April 5, 2003
width="1" height="7" border="0">
 |
|
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.
See, this is what is driving me nuts. You folks accusing us who dare speculate on the possibility that poor Elizabeth ran away (same people who pilloried Ricci with no hard facts, ahem) don't seem to get the fact that, if we care about anything, we care about Elizabeth. I want the girl to have as much of a normal life as she can, given what she's been through -- runaway or kidnapping (and of COURSE I don't know for sure!). Watching a TV-movie about yourself is not a normal life. If, indeed, the Smarts are hiring a lawyer so as to make sure the TV movie doesn't traumatize her, okay...I'd rather they make sure NO TV movie gets made, but okay...if they donate all the money they make from the movie/book deals to a children's charity, okay...but show me the proof of *that*. What proof do you have that these people are saints other than the fact that they're well-dressed, relatively well-spoken, affluent, and happen to belong to the same denomination as you? After all, even Laci Peterson's family supported SCOTT Peterson because he was "such a nice guy" -- until they learned that nice on the surface doesn't necessarily mean nice inside.
We ALL want Elizabeth to be okay. We are ALL happy she's home safely. However, some of us are concerned that the girl is now being exploited by her own parents. Some of us are concerned that, perhaps -- *no*, we don't *know*, but we're suspicious -- the Smarts manipulated the media for their own ends. Some of us think that there are signs that LE downgraded this to a runaway case. Now that, we have some proof of, and it's in this thread. Either they were sloppy or they downgraded the case, take your pick.
So we're suspicious. Sue us. We've been flamed over and over by you guys, and we've responded with restraint and as much good manners as possible in the face of mindless invective that is thrown at us.
And what we care about is Elizabeth Smart having a normal life. Maybe some peace and quiet. To insinuate otherwise -- those comments painting us all as some sort of perverted Ritters drooling over 14 year old girls, for example -- is reprehensible, to say the least. It leads me to wonder WHY you are protesting so violently, when we have repeatedly said that we the only thing we are concerned about is the well-being of Elizabeth.
Is it that the only thing *you're* concerned about is the well-being of the PARENTS? OVER the well-being of Elizabeth? Now *that* is wrong. I don't think you *do* think that, but I can't offer any other reason as to why you are so quick to attack those who find the parents' story suspect.
And you wonder why people would wonder if you're a liberal -- it's the complete intolerance of ANY other view than your own! A liberal tradition, and one you're carrying on with great fervor...right here.
If anything, I applaud your spirited defense of Elizabeth, but I just wish you wouldn't jump down the throats of myself and others who have some lingering and problematic questions about this story...I mean, you must realize that your name-calling and knee-jerk reactions are detrimental to the position you are trying to espouse -- it makes it looks like you DO know something we don't, and you're very anxious for us to not find out about it.
I absolutely respect your right to dissent with everything I, and others, say in regards to doubts about this case. I only wish I could impress upon you the importance of being a bit more reasonable in your posts so we could listen to your point of view without having to recoil from potty-mouthed insults.
Thank you for listening...I hope.
The TABLOIDS said....? That is why you believe what you do?
Didn't the tabloids also report that Fidel Castro gave birth to a two headed Bigfoot in a spaceship over Area 51?
You can bet that most people on this conservative forum disagree with you on Elizabeth Smart.
And YES, David Koresh was a creep. But if he and his 'wife' kidnapped a young teenage girl, keeping her tied to a tree in the woods for two months, would you also claim that the girl ran away with him?
But you all DO sound a lot like the liberals after Waco/Ruby Ridge. It seems that the Smart's Mormonism and general weirdness is skewing your opinion of this case.
And your arguments are based on 'what was reported in the tabloids'?
 |
||||
 |
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
------------------------------------------------------
So do you read story like this and assume that Elizabeth ran away and set this whole thing up?
--------------------------------------------------------------
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
-------------------------------------------------------
Kemp says his 12-year-old daughter wasn't home at the time.
"She never saw him. She was away for the weekend. When she was here I don't know if he saw her or not," said Virl Kemp.
Now Mitchell's wife, Wanda Barzee, has told investigators Mitchell went back to the Kemp house, to kidnap the girl.
I thought I would repeat that sentence in case you missed it and also started accusing this girl of wanting to run away with Mitchell.
Officials suspect the structure took weeks to build, and was carefully designed to avoid detection. It explains how she was so close, yet was never spotted by hundreds of searchers.
I would add it CONVENIENTLY explains why she was so close yet never spotted. Was it soundproofed as well? So a street bum knows how to build a shack that will withstand thermal imagery, eh? Interesting. Very convenient, too.
And even in the own news story you reference:
What you can tell from the lean-to is that Brian Mitchell put a lot of work and planning into his alleged scheme to kidnap Elizabeth Smart.
Maybe you need to look up "alleged", too?
Needless to say, have I ever said she didn't hide out in a shack? No. I just think she RAN AWAY to the shack. Of her own volition. And I said I *think*. I don't know. Neither does this article, since it doesn't address that issue.
Did you ever hear me say Mitchell is NOT a slimebag?
My gut says this story reeks. No, I don't read stories like this and think, "Oh, this reeks." I listened to the Smart's press conferences and read the transcripts later in detail. THAT's what reeks.
Truly, this is a "wonderful story", indeed, how could I find a comment like that out of place...
You haven't answered my question. Why are you so defensive when I am admitting I am simply speculating? :-)
Now, I have to go do some work, so I guess you'll just have to wait for someone else to come along who doesn't believe that Ed Smart walks on water to get all this pent-up defensive anger outta yerself. ;-)
The story reeks. Stinks. To high heaven. It is *rotten*. This is speculation by me. All I ask is that you consider my opinion, and, if you disagree, do so respectfully, as I have been TRYING to do with you.
You really do sound like a liberal. You won't open your mind a crack; you seem to merely want to provoke me into some sort of emotional response. It's not going to happen. Throw whatever touchy-feely pieces you want at me: THE STORY STILL STINKS. Do I have hard facts to back it up? No, and I must have said this fifteen thousand times at this point.
Do you work for the U.N. or something? ;-)
Anyway, like I said, I gotta run, but it has been a pleasure watching you refuse to exchange views with me, and I'm sure you'll find someone else you can stomp, yell, screech at and generally flame soon.
Again...I just wonder why you're so defensive about this. Methinks you doth protest a bit too much. Which makes me even more suspicious of your motives on this thread.
Have a good day. It's been completely unenlightening, but very silly, and I've gotten more than a few chuckles out of your thrashing about. :-) Keep at it, it's fun to watch.
Oh, my my my. I'm sure this doesn't have ANYTHING to do with Mitchell's wife wanting to cut a deal to avoid jail time. ;-) Nah, that NEVER happens...silly me. :p
I leave you with this:
Bwhaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah you are so frickin' biased it really, truly, is funny -- and it's obvious you have some kind of agenda, too.
Now, if you would, go back and read me saying, 80 million times over, that I am SPECULATING.
Maybe you don't OWN a dictionary. I'll post the definition for you later, Mr. Blix. ;-) In the meantime, I *really* need to go do productive things, and arguing with a brick wall does not fall under "productive". ;-)
Have a good day, you silly, silly person. And thanks for the laughs, it's made the workday ahead of me look much more tolerable. :-)
I am not defensive. I am just disgusted by people like you.
For you to believe that Elizabeth coincidentally ran away with a man who was in the process of trying to kidnap teen age girls is pretty far-fetched.
So answer my question... If Mitchell was successful in kidnnapping Smart's cousin, or the California girl, would you be "speculating" here that these three girls also "ran away" with him?
Your comments paint a mental picture for me of a heavy drinker, living in a broken-down trailer house with a couple of wrecked cars out in the patch of gravel that you call a yard- busily downloading porn off he Internet when not making hit-and-run attacks on people with IQ's at least 50 points higher than yours who happen to disagree with you about a not-very-important (but phony) news story.<p. Have a nice life!
I am basing my opinion on the known facts. And you are speculating based on your own prejudgments. Who is the biased one?
If you have evidence suggesting that Wanda is making up the other story to avoid jail time, please provide it. Otherwise, we will assume it is your bias.
That is PRECISELY what I believe- very well put, succinct and accurate.
What a moron you must be.
Sorry, but I also have work to do- I've wasted enough time with you.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
News:
