[Ed. note: The following letter was just released to Big Hollywood. Written by Carrie Prejean’s lawyer, Charles S. LiMandri, it was sent today to Timothy F. Shields, Esq., the attorney representing Miss California USA Pageant co-directors Keith Lewis and Shana Moakler, and K2 Productions, Inc.]
RE: Carrie Prejean v. Keith Lewis, Shana Moakler, and K2 Productions, Inc.
Dear Mr. Shields:
We are writing in response to your letter of June 13, 2009. There have been multiple written communications from me to you since the date of that letter addressing these various issues in detail, and which we will not repeat at this time. Since your letter was released to the press, however, with the attachments, we feel it necessary to address some of the more egregious misrepresentations made in that letter.
1. There Was No Unauthorized Participation in Literary Works.
As you well know, both Keith Lewis and Donald Trump had given preliminary approval to Ms. Prejean to write a book. In fact, Mr. Trump’s office had circulated a draft amendment to her contract for that purpose at the time that she was terminated – – without warning and without just cause. She did not yet have a contract with a book publisher at the time she was terminated. She did have a contract with a literary publicist to find a publisher for the book, which was the source of the confusion about this issue. Without giving Ms. Prejean or me an opportunity to clarify the matter, she was abruptly terminated. The fact that she was working on a book was well known and was discussed multiple times, both verbally and in writing. Obviously, the book had not yet been published, and there can be no material breach of contract at issue here. Therefore, the reason given for her termination as being based in part upon her doing a book deal is a complete and utter pretext.
2. There Were No Unauthorized Public Appearances.
As you also know, in a telephone conference with eight people on April 29, 2009, including you and me, it was agreed that Ms. Prejean could make public appearances, in her individual capacity, so long as she did not use the Miss California USA title or wear her tiara and sash. Moreover, any public appearances she allegedly made without the advance authorization of your clients, were deemed by Mr. Trump not to be contract violations at the press conference he held on May 12, 2009. Since that day, Ms. Prejean has not made public appearances unless they were authorized by either your client or Mr. Trump. Your client has falsely accused her of doing a Shape Magazine interview, and appearing on Fox and Friends, without prior authorization. In both cases, it was Mr. Trump who asked her to do those interviews and who set them up for her. As to the radio show you referenced in your letter, in which you indicated that she would be reading from a “show biz script,” she did not do that interview after your client would not authorize it.
3. Ms. Prejean Did Not Refuse Reasonable Public Appearance Opportunities.
Mr. Lewis has falsely stated that Ms. Prejean refused to make over 50 public appearance requests after May 12, 2009. Initially, he was suggesting that she did not appear at scheduled events. He later recanted that statement and said that she did not fail to appear at any scheduled events, but simply declined numerous requests to attend them. We asked you to provide us with a list of those public appearances and you did so with a three-page itemized list which you attached to your letter and which was circulated to the media.
We have determined that the list was fabricated from the Hollywood News Calendar, a daily publication of events that are generally open to the public. None of the events listed on the Hollywood News Calendar were specific invitations to Carrie Prejean or anyone else. We are attaching to this letter a copy of an e-mail from Mr. Lewis’s assistant, Lilly Colon, dated December 1, 2008. That short e-mail makes it clear that beauty pageant winners merely had the opportunity to request to attend the events listed on the Hollywood News Calendar and, if timely notice were given, then your clients’ office would attempt to see if they could get tickets. There is no indication that those would be official events where the pageant winners would actually wear their tiaras and sashes. More important, their appearance at any such events was entirely left up to the beauty pageant winners. [Ed. note: a copy of this email can be found at the conclusion of this correspondence.]
We are attaching with a copy of this letter the Hollywood News Calendar that Keith Lewis sent Ms. Prejean on May 15, 2009. We have matched up the events listed on the Hollywood News Calendar with the false list of alleged missed appearances that was prepared by your client, and widely circulated to the media. The list prepared by your client falsely states that Ms. Prejean “declined” events on the calendar, which she was never specifically asked to attend. This is analogous to the situation in which someone does not attend a wedding which they read about in a public announcement in the newspaper. It would obviously be highly misleading to suggest that such a person failed to attend the wedding after receiving a personal invitation. Your letter, and the attached list of alleged missed appearances, makes it look like Ms. Prejean received a personal invitation and specifically declined to attend each listed event. The fact is, she simply did not respond to a notice in a newsletter which listed over 50 events, many scheduled at the same time.
We have learned that your client participated in a conference call on May 15, 2009, the same day that he sent the Hollywood News Calendar to our client. Also participating in that call were three people working for the public relations agency that was representing my client at the time. All three of those people distinctly remember Keith Lewis talking about sending Ms. Prejean an offer to do a Playboy photo shoot, “so when they take her title away, she doesn’t sue me.” This clearly shows that your client was trying to “set-up” our client for termination at the time he sent her the Hollywood News Calendar, and the offer to appear semi-nude in Playboy – – all on May 15, 2009.
4. There Was No Lack of Cooperation by Carrie Prejean.
As you know, we have previously discussed that we envisioned that Ms. Prejean would be attending events as Miss California such as Rotary conventions and avocado festivals. In my e-mail to you on May 16, 2009, after Ms. Prejean indicated that she did not think it was appropriate for her to accept Mr. Lewis’s invitation to attend a gay documentary in Hollywood promoting same-sex marriage, I confirmed the following: “Carrie would be happy to attend, upon reasonable notice, all requests for media interviews, community affairs, parades, festivals, events of service and charitable organizations, sporting events, and any other such activities that can be expected to promote and further the intended purposes of Miss California USA.” It was not my client’s job, as Miss California, simply to help your client promote his personal or business interests as a Hollywood agent and producer, or gay activist.
It was your client who failed to cooperate with my client in allowing her to do the types of activities one would expect in her role as Miss California. In fact, my client had to go to Mr. Trump just to get your client to agree to let her meet and greet the troops returning to port on the USS Ronald Reagan. Mr. Lewis also made it difficult for her to schedule her attendance at the Special Olympics, even though she had been volunteering there for several years. If there was frustration reflected in some of my client’s e-mail correspondence with your client, that is because he was prohibiting her from making the kinds of public appearances that she wanted to do in service to the community. Furthermore, your client was trying to wrongfully profit off of my client’s participation as Miss California, in violation of her contract, by taking twenty-percent (20%) of any appearance fee she would earn, such as at the Las Vegas jewelers convention she attended at his request.
5. Ms. Prejean’s Termination was Retaliatory.
Ever since Carrie Prejean gave an answer at the Miss USA Pageant in support of traditional marriage, she has been continuously and viciously attacked. Instead of coming to her defense, your client apologized to her attackers for her honest answer at the Pageant. In fact, Mr. Lewis released a statement the next day stating that he was “personally saddened and hurt” by her response. Both Keith Lewis and Shana Moakler joined with the attackers in renouncing my client for her views in favor of traditional marriage. They even released her confidential medical information to the press to embarrass her.
Moreover, even when it appeared as though Mr. Trump would allow her to keep her crown at a press conference scheduled for May 12, 2009, they tried to upstage him, and insert Tammy Farrell in Ms. Prejean’s place, at their own press conference held on May 11, 2009. At that time, they falsely accused Ms. Prejean of most of the same contract violations. This is the case even though, on May 12, 2009, Mr. Trump exercised his authority in finding that there were no such contract violations. That did not stop Shana Moakler, however, from resigning as a Co-Executor Director of the Miss California pageant and continuing to attack Ms. Prejean from the sidelines. Her close friend, Keith Lewis, did not resign, but obviously decided to continue to undermine Ms. Prejean at every opportunity. Both of them were bound and determined to get her fired and they have now finally gotten their way. Moreover, they did not even have the decency to tell her or me that they were firing her before they released it to the press.
6. Summary and Conclusion.
Carrie Prejean’s good name has been tarnished by your clients’ false and defamatory accusations. Mr. Lewis has circulated to the media, with your letter, a list of alleged missed appearances that is based on the Hollywood News Calendar he sent her on May 15, 2009. The way he has presented this information is, for all intents and purposes, an outright fraud. Mr. Lewis’s statements, in the presence of three witnesses, the same day that he sent out the Hollywood News Calendar, is an admission that he was even then scheming to take away her title. Our client has experienced harm to her reputation, her standing in the community, and she has suffered severe emotional distress. Please view this letter as a last opportunity for Mr. Lewis to retract the defamatory statements made against my client and to seek to restore her good name. If he does not comply, I will have no alternative but to recommend that Ms. Prejean proceed to do so through litigation.
Sincerely,
LAW OFFICES OF CHARLES S. LiMANDRI, APC
Charles S. LiMandri
—
[Ed. Note: Below is the copy of the email referenced in point #3 in the letter above.]
——– Forward Message————- From: Lilly-Colon
Date: Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 12:49 PM Subject: FW: HNC 11/28/08
To: Chelsea Gilligan
Hello queens!
I’m ,going to be forwarding you the Hollywood News Calendar, it’s comes in daily Mon-Fri. You’ll get one for the hollywood news calendar and 1 for the entertainment news calendar. Let me know if you see any events that you would like to attend .and we’ll do our best to get you in. The more notice the better. You can simply copy and paste the listing you want to attend. Make sure you copy the date as well. You may need to remind me to forward to. you every now and then, sometimes I get busy.
It’s going to be an exciting year! ! ! ! Hope the 2 of you had. an amazing Thanksgiving. I bet it was nice to eat! lol We are so lucky to have the 2 of you as our queens this year. I feel like you guys are ready for nationals already. (
Chelsea, when you get a chance will you send me your bio? Thanks doll!
xoxo
Lilly Colón
K2 Productions, Inc.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.