Celebrity Legal Victories

Misguided Legal Analysis


Get updates via SMS by texting follow CelebPrivacy to 40404 in the United States

Book Reviews


Films of Interest


California Law

American Media Inc., Threatens to Embarrass Kate Holmes By Robin Barnes

Kate Holmes is justified in suing Star Magazine publishers for outrageous violations of her privacy rights. Why would American Media Inc., widely disseminate stories that are defamatory in nature while luring the public with tales of  addiction and a  troubled  marriage, based upon interviews with former Scientology members?  This is reminiscent of the huge payout in the settlement with Vanity Fair, for publishing Dominick Dunne’s allegations that Gary Condit was responsible for henious crimes against Chandra Levy.  After the suit was filed, Dunne claimed to have been duped by an unreliable informant.
 American Media Inc., is trying to build a claim that the public has an interest in knowing about the alleged use of  e-meters.  What they are threatening though is to expose the details of Kate’s alleged use:  “Our attorneys look forward to deposing Ms. Holmes about her experiences with Scientology and the e-meter, and expect that the case will be promptly dismissed by the court.” Their not so veiled threat: sure we violated your rights and we will continue to do so whenever and however we please.  You either settle this case for a fraction of what we made in sales, or we will use the legal process to invade your privacy even further (you ain’t seen nothing yet).  Then we will move on to our next target, until your number comes up again.

The case should go to trial.  The facts are clear, and if the e-meter is so controversial that it has become newsworthy, the editors could cover the story at anytime without involving Holmes and her family.  The truth is that most tabloid publications are malicious, filled with falsehoods and represent a wholesale invasion of  the target’s privacy.  Tabloid publishers routinely stalk Holmes and her daughter without pause.  They publish what should be confidential information on their whereabouts and daily habits in ways that create a  risk to their safety and well-being.

They do it for profit, as they try to  convince a judge that the public has interest in knowing the intimate details of her private life, while the important news stories, which the First Amendment was actually designed to protect, take a back seat.

A Court dismissed David Beckham’s lawsuit, but there’s no reason to assume that this legal trend will not one day give way to a  new reality.

If Courts continue to allow publishers to intentionally deceive the public, while viciously defaming individuals and placing their family at risk, our constitutional rights are degraded, and when it all becomes too blatant to ignore, the so-called Hactivists are buoyed in their efforts to return democracy to the people.

Write a comment