Earlier, we shared what we know about the Eric Dane-Rebecca Gayheart-Kari Ann Peniche sex tape. The four-minute version on Gawker didn’t include sex, it was just three naked people hanging out, taking a bath, talking about what their porn names would be. I found it a little sexy, because I enjoyed seeing what a pimp Eric Dane was and is. Both Eric and Rebecca seemed really into “good hang” Kari Ann, and there are still lingering questions about exactly what Kari Ann is doing, in the video and for her profession. The credit card part in the video was definitely strange – but we don’t know for sure if Kari Ann is a hooker, or maybe she was just hanging out naked, ordering something from J.Crew.

However, Eric and Rebecca’s lawyer Marty Singer just released a statement about the “sex tape” and Marty wants us to know that we should really, really stop referring to it as a sex tape. Singer’s denial is pretty classic, so you should just read it in its entirety:

So when is a celebrity sex tape not a celebrity sex tape? Apparently, when it stars Eric Dane and Rebecca Gayheart — at least according to a lawyer for the couple.

In a statement released about the naughty nude clip featuring McSteamy and now-wife Rebecca, along with disgraced beauty queen Kari Ann Peniche, the couple’s legal eagle tries to downplay the lewdness of the taped situation.

Reads the statement from lawyer Marty Singer:

“This is simply a private, consensual moment involving a married couple, shot several years ago, which was never intended to be seen by the public.”

“Although the participants are nude, the tape is not a ’sex tape.’ It is a private tape made for only my clients’ personal use, and nobody has the right to exploit it. If anyone exploits the tape, they will be violating my clients’ rights and will be exposed to significant liability.”

[From OK! Magazine]

Ah, yes. They were just three naked people, hanging out, taking a bath. There was no sex. So we will not refer to it as a “sex tape”. It is only a “naked hang-out tape” or even a “flirty naked bath tape”. I love when lawyers gets their panties in a bunch about the semantics of situations. It reminds me of that old hounddog, President Clinton, and his “it depends on what the meaning of ‘is’ is” and the hair-splitting on “sexual relations”.

Here’s one of the strangest twists to this story. It seems that this non-sex tape was in the possession of Kari Ann Peniche, not Eric and Rebecca. Kari Ann tells TMZ that the tape was filmed in her apartment, not the Dane-Gayheart household, and Kari Ann also has a theory about how the tape got released. It involves Mindy McCready and a “summit” over possession of the tape:

Kari Ann tells TMZ the video featuring the whacked-out naked trio was shot more than two years ago in her apartment. Kari Ann insists there was absolutely no sex involved — they played dress up and the two women then soaked together in a bathtub as Eric called “action” behind the camera.

Kari Ann says the video was stored on the hard drive of her computer, but stolen by Mindy McCready, who was her roommate after the two completed a stint on the TV show “Celebrity Rehab.” Kari Ann says she got into an argument with McCready over money and believes the singer took her hard drive when she moved out. Kari Ann freaked out about certain personal information about her on the hard drive and filed a stolen property report with the LAPD.

Last month there was a summit between Eric, Rebecca, Kari Ann and Mindy. Their reps hammered out a deal as to who got what on the hard drive. Eric got full rights to the video and everyone assumed that was that … until the tape surfaced on the Internet today.

So a little song, a little dance a little betrayal down your pants.

[From TMZ]

I actually think Kari Ann’s version might be true. Either that or Eric Dane released it for some extra publicity, because he saw what a sex tape did for Paris Hilton and Kim Kardashian? Because he knows we all want to see McSteamy wang? If Eric released it, my guess is that he wouldn’t have his lawyer sending out snotty missives. So, most likely, the tape was released by Kari Ann or someone in her orbit, most likely Mindy McCready.

Here is Eric Dane, shirtless in Malibu shooting scenes for Valentine’s Day on 8/6/09. Credit: Fame Pictures

Recap: Lohan’s carjacking car chase
In July of 2007, Lindsay Lohan was involved in an extremely dangerous high speed car chase in which she which she carjacked the SUV of a guy she met that night, took two passengers hostage and ran over another guy’s foot. Apparently she was at a party, her assistant quit and tried to leave, and she took off chasing her in another guy’s car after snatching his keys. There were initially three guys in the car with Lohan, but one jumped out and Lindsay ran over his foot, never going back to check on him. The other two guys sat there terrified while she drukenly wove through traffic and blew through stop signs, supposedly saying things like “I’m a celebrity, I can do whatever I want.” Eventually the assistant led Lohan to the parking lot of a police station, having notified the authorities that she was being followed. Lohan failed the field sobriety test and was caught with a small amount of cocaine, which she claims was not hers. She plead guilty to DUI and received a day in jail and just 10 days of community service, despite the fact that she was driving on a suspended license and had a prior DUI.

In January of this year, the former assistant Lindsay was chasing sued her for emotional distress and unspecified damages, claiming she lost her job and spent thousands on therapists bills trying to get over the incident.

Now the three guys in the car with Lohan have filed suit against her, saying she endangered their lives. They are seeking more than $25,000 in damages:

A wild ride that led to Lindsay Lohan’s arrest has sparked another lawsuit.

Court records show that three men who claim they were in a sport utility vehicle that Lohan commandeered in July 2007 sued the “Mean Girls” star last week. Their allegations include battery, false imprisonment and that the actress was negligent when she allegedly took over an SUV belonging to one of the men to chase her recently fired assistant.

That chase ended when the assistant’s mother called police because she was being followed and led Lohan toward a police station. Officers suspected Lohan was drunk and arrested her.
Lohan eventually pleaded guilty to two counts of being under the influence of cocaine stemming from the Santa Monica arrest and an earlier drunken driving arrest in Beverly Hills. She served 84 minutes in jail and entered rehab.

Lohan’s attorney, Ed McPherson, called the lawsuit “absurd.”
He claimed the men were having fun during the chase and questioned why they waited more than a year to file suit. “It just doesn’t make sense,” McPherson said. “They had ample opportunity to get out of the car.

“It’s three guys who want to get a lot of headlines,” he said, “and want to make some money.”
An attorney for the men, identified as Ronnie Blake, Jakon Sutter and Dante Nigro, had said last year he hoped to avoid filing a lawsuit against Lohan. McPherson said there were some early talks, but no settlement was reached.

[From Ap.Google.com]

If Lohan had any sense she would have settled this case, but maybe these guys are holding out for more money. I watched all their videos on TMZ describing what happened and they all seemed credible and genuinely terrified by what happened to them. They detailed Lohan’s very reckless driving that easily could have killed someone, including doing circles around her assistant’s car on the Pacific Coast Highway. If this case goes to trial Lindsay could easily lose a lot of cash – if she has anything left after all those luxury goods she’s been buying.

Lindsay Lohan is shown on 10/14/08 at the “Saks Fifth Avenue Launches 10th Annual ‘Key To The Cure Charity Event’” in NY. Credit: Patricia Schlein/WENN

There are a million jokes going around about what scum lawyers are, which generally isn’t fair as I’m sure most lawyers are good people. Kevin Federline’s lawyer, Mark Vincent Kaplan, shows that he probably isn’t one of the good people.

Kaplan sat down with the Associated Press, and told them how pleased he was at the media scrutiny his case has been getting.

He doesn’t grumble about the television trucks and news reporters swarming the courthouse every time there’s a hearing, or the paparazzi who hound the pop princess every moment there isn’t. And he’s certainly not opposed to the TV reports, tabloids and Web sites that have documented every shred of the case that has consumed him for the past 18 months.

After all, the attention has saved his side some major cash.

“If I had to hire an investigator or investigators to provide me with the intelligence about what’s going on, where they are, how are they doing,” said Mark Vincent Kaplan, “it would be north of half a million to a million dollars … as opposed to buying People magazine for $3.95 on Thursday morning or going on TMZ.”

Are People and TMZ reliable sources? Will they be legitimate to use in court? I don’t think so. I don’t think any person who is looking to profit from pictures of Britney being crazy is going to be a good source to decide the future of her children.

As far Kevin Federline being the good guy in this whole case, the way that Kaplan explains it, it was a carefully engineered public relations exercise.

“I think when the media saw that here’s a guy who stepped up to the plate, not just because he had to but because he wanted to … I think they gained a respect for him and that really turned them around a lot,” Kaplan said. “The mission involved — wanting to change the wrongful impression that was generally perceived for my client — without the media being a willing participant, it would have been impossible.”

But just in case you think Kaplan might be some kind of bottom feeder, using Britney’s money (she’s paying most of the legal bills) and fame to drum up a notoriety that will lead to bog, profitable cases, don’t worry. He’s got sight of the big picture.

“The bottom line is you’ve got two kids … who don’t know and don’t care and should never have to care about who their parents are,” he said. “They just want to be safe and secure, nurtured and bonded with their parents just like any other kids. … That’s really what’s at the core of this just like any other case.”

It is in the end about who is best equipped to care for those two little boys, and even if Britney is the least competent person in America, her children still deserve to have a relationship with her. Even though Britney’s changing of legal teams and mental issues have slowed down this court case, I still get the general impression that Kaplan is dragging out the proceedings as long as possible.

Kaplan is obviously pretty pleased with himself and his career in the future as a result of this case. He tells that AP that ‘everyone’s coming and wanting to hire me’ and describes representing K-Fed as being an ‘opportunity’. He also adds that it’s made it easier to get a reservation at a restaurant.

Kaplan’s next big case is representing Robin Williams’ wife in their divorce.

Britney Spears saw her two boys twice in the past few days under a new visitation agreement. It was her first contact with them in over six weeks since her standoff with police and first hospitalization. Her father and psychiatrist were present for the first visit on Saturday, and she was able to spend some quality time with them again on Monday.

Britney is still trying to challenge her father’s conservatorship of her estate. Her lawyer, Jon Eardley, claims that Jamie’s ongoing supervision of her daily affairs has violated her civil rights. Eardley has moved the case to federal court, and Jamie’s lawyers have challenged this, saying that it’s not an issue that falls under federal jurisdiction, that Britney lacks the capacity to hire her own attorney, and that it’s obvious he’s under the thumb of Sam Lutfi. Jamie’s lawyers also are seeking to have their attorney’s fees of over $40,000 awarded for fighting this case.

In court papers available on TMZ, Jamie’s lawyers state that it’s clear that Britney’s lawyer is being influenced by Lutfi, who is now barred from any contact with Britney by restraining order. In a footnote they say that “Mr. Eardley’s [Britney's lawyer's] claim that Lynne Spears’ declaration is ‘perjured’ and his description of Mr. Lutfi as Britney’s ‘best friend’ speak volumes as to where Mr. Eardley’s allegiances apparently lie.”

Britney’s lawyer says that he needs more time to defend his case because he hasn’t been able to speak to his client in about two weeks. The phone number he had for her has been disconnected.

Britney is shown out on 2/23 at Mastro’s Restaurant with her father, Jamie, thanks to Splash. She was seen at Milennium Dance Studios again last night, and was said to have received a visit from Adnan Ghalib, the paparazzo she’s been seeing.

That Heather Mills– she’s just so talented! Not only does she lend her considerable charm, grace and credibility to such organizations as Vegetarians International Voice for Animals (VIVA), but now she is also starting what I’m sure will be a brilliant career as a lawyer. Mills dropped her legal counsel in her divorce war against Paul McCartney, and is not only representing herself in a hearing against her estranged husband next week, but also plans on suing her former firm for giving her ‘bad legal advice.’ This is the same firm used by Princess Diana in her divorce from Prince Charles.

Heather Mills is set to sue her former divorce lawyers for bad advice – even though she already owes them £2million in fees.

The latest legal action comes as Ms Mills prepares to go face-to-face with her estranged husband Sir Paul McCartney for a dramatic five-day divorce hearing that will decide how much she receives from his estimated £825 million fortune.

Ms. Mills, 40, will represent herself at the High Court hearing, which begins on Monday, having split from her divorce lawyers Mishcon de Reya. Insolvency lawyers at Mishcons are now pursuing Ms. Mills for almost 20 months of unpaid bills and are expected to launch a legal action in the next two weeks.

A source close to Ms. Mills told the Evening Standard: “There is a possibility of Heather Mills counter-suing. Whatever she owes Mishcons – whether it’s £1 million or £2 million – one would have expected her to get something for it and one fails to see what they [Mishcons] got her. There has been no divorce settlement and no outcome over all this time so draw your own conclusion as to the service she received from Mishcons.”

[From From This is London UK]

I like the way Heather thinks. There’s been no divorce settlement, and no agreement by Paul’s lawyers over her extravagant and delusional demands, so surely its her lawyer’s fault, not hers! Her ex-law firm has fought back against Heather’s claim they poorly advised her, saying that she never followed their suggestions in the first place.

Sources said the firm will defend the advice it gave Ms Mills and suggested lawyers were frustrated that she often refused to take the legal advice given.

The slur will raise eyebrows as Ms Mills was being represented by Anthony Julius, the Mishcon litigator who also handled Princess Diana’s divorce from Prince Charles and whose wife died from cancer in October.

Mishcons has now put the matter into the hands of its head of insolvency.

A source at Mishcons said today: “We expect a claim to go in against Ms Mills in the next few weeks.”

The former spouses are scheduled to face off in court next week, and sources say that neither side has come anywhere close to agreeing on a settlement. Early in the separation, Paul reportedly offered Heather £15 million, which she refused. I’m wiling to be that amount looks pretty good to her now.

First things first: I never support Lindsay Lohan. Lindsay Lohan could somehow turn into the Virgin Mary, and I’d still have a really big problem with her. I think I might be going to a special level of Hell just for saying that. But if someone should be such a giant prick as to make me support Lindsay Lohan, I’m pretty sure that person is destined for a special level of Hell too. Probably one where “Herbie Fully Loaded” plays on a loop.

Lohan’s car hit busboy Raymundo Ortega’s van on October 4, 2005. Lohan had just finishing having lunch at the Ivy. The Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department’s ruled the incident to be Ortega’s fault for making an illegal U-turn directly in front of Lohan. They also ruled that alcohol was not a factor in the crash. It seems pretty clear that Ortega say dollar signs on impact. But he didn’t do anything for two years, until Lohan went to rehab for the second time. Then he filed a negligence suit on June 14, 2007 against both her and the Ivy (who he believes served her alcohol even though she was underage) for $200,000. His argument seems to be that because Lohan has alcohol problems now, she must have had them then. While that could very well be true, I can’t imagine how someone could prove that. More specifically, I can’t imagine how he could prove that Lohan was drunk at that moment two years ago, especially when the sheriff’s deputies said she wasn’t. It seems like he’s trying to take advantage of the situation.

Lindsay finally countersued the guy, since she paid for all the repairs to her car herself – which she didn’t have to do, since the crash was ruled Ortega’s fault. [I just want to note that I’m seething right now because I’m actually feeling something close to empathy for Lindsay Lohan, and that makes me HATE Raymundo Ortega with the fire of a thousand suns]. Anyway, Ortega has been dragging Lohan in and out of court almost weekly, promising that he has some evidence that will prove she was drunk that day. But he’s failed to produce it or comply with any of the judge’s orders to turn over paperwork pertaining to his evidence.

According to court documents filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, Lohan’s camp is requesting that a judge order the Los Angeles-based busboy to provide proof that Lohan, contrary to the CHP’s report, had been drinking on Oct. 4, 2005, before she smacked into Ortega’s van with her Mercedes.

The 21-year-old starlet’s lawyers also request in their latest filing that the judge conclude that Ortega’s allegations are false because the plaintiff has ignored their repeated requests to turn over the documents he claims to have that prove his assertions. Ortega’s lawyer has said that they have witnesses who will support their side of the story.

[From E! News]

I’m not inclined to believe Lindsay Lohan is innocent of anything. The sky could suddenly turn green and rain hedgehogs, and I’d be certain her drinking was somehow involved. But something tells me Ortega’s “witnesses” are a load of crap. This whole thing sounds like it’s filled with opportunists. And they need to be stopped, not to make Lindsay’s life better, but so that no one feels inclined to cut her a break out of sympathy.

The judge also ruled against Lindsay’s request not to have her deposition taped. Her lawyer argued that the press would try to get a hold of the tape, which would go for tens of thousands of dollars. But that’s more than most of Lohan’s movies rake in anymore. Really, it can only help.

Picture note by Jaybird: Here’s Lindsey Lohan leaving Byron salon on November 28th. She then went to the Staples Center for a Lakers game. Images thanks to Splash Photos.

Debra Opri, the lawyer who supposedly (and likely) agreed to represent Larry Birkhead pro bono, is suing Birkhead for $600,000 legal bill. Opri had agreed to represent Birkhead in exchange for the publicity his custody battle with Anna Nicole Smith would give her (depending on who’s side you believe). It’s hard to believe that Birkhead would have entered into a traditional contract with a lawyer who was going to charge him the standard exorbitant rates, consider that a lot of lawyers would have loved to represent him in the publicity-generating trial. But Opri says Birkhead owes her $600,000, and is also suing Birkhead for defamation. There is a ton of animosity between the two, and following their own little case can be a little complicated.

“She sued Dannielynn’s dad for defamation Monday, claiming that he has engaged in a ‘malicious and relentless media campaign to discredit me and to destroy my reputation,’ according to a statement from Opri released to E! Online. The plaintiff [Opri] said, however, that all proceeds from the suit will go to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

“‘My primary concern has always been for a child named Dannielynn…It is my belief and my strong conviction that no child should be exploited in any manner,’ she said. After petitioning a judge to order Birkhead into arbitration to settle his unpaid $600,000 legal bill for the six months of services she provided him during his paternity battle with Anna Nicole Smith, Birkhead filed his own lawsuit against the Los Angeles attorney, accusing her of fraud and legal malpractice.

The Kentucky-born and L.A.-based photographer claimed that Opri, after originally agreeing to represent him pro bono in exchange for all the publicity she was going to receive from the case, amassed a list of frivolous expenses that she expected him to pay for.”

[From E! Online]

So far the judge seems to be siding with Birkhead, denying many of Opri’s motions. It seems like she’s just angry and vindictive about her departure (firing) from a case that can only be described as a media whore’s wet dream.

“Birkhead also accused Opri of hanging onto at least $800,000 of a $1 million paycheck he received in exchange for a series of media appearances following Smith’s death. The money still in Opri’s client-trust account has since been frozen and placed in an interest-bearing account, pending the conclusion of these proceedings, and she lost her bid for mediation earlier this month after L.A. Superior Court Judge Charles C. Lee ruled that her contract with Birkhead did not call for binding arbitration.

“She also failed to address her former client’s allegations of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty and conversion, Lee said. But Opri is now suggesting that Birkhead had ulterior motives for trying to get the drop on her in court.

“‘It is clear now that Mr. Birkhead’s attempts to discredit me concerned what I knew and what might be exposed publicly…and not a legal bill,’ Opri said. ‘With the recent release of the Rita Cosby book, Blonde Ambition, Mr. Birkhead’s attacks have escalated to include false and malicious allegations that I was a source for the book.’”

[From E! Online]

It sort of sounds like she’s saying that she knew about the alleged Larry Birkhead/Howard K Stern male lovefest, or at least knew it details of it were going to be published. Apparently Rita Cosby introduced Birkhead to Opri, which seems very, very odd to me. Especially because that implies that at some point Rita Cosby and Larry Birkhead were on good enough terms that she was making legal recommendations to him, and he was listening. Very bizarre. I’m no lawyer, but I’m guessing she won’t win the lawsuit. It just seems so unlikely that Birkhead would have hired her if she planned on charging him her regular rates. I’m sure he knew the custody fight would be long and arduous and thus very expensive. He certainly wasn’t a rich man, pre-Anna Nicole Smith. Why would he agree to have a lawyer for pay when he could have a lawyer for free?

K-Fed has gone all “I’m a good dad, I’m going to show everyone you’re crazy” on us, and that’s okay as long as it’s true. But he’s super hardcore about punishing and humiliating Britney Spears legally. I guess that’s okay if there’s truth behind all the accusation flying about, and it’s not some massive blindfold put on us by his attack dog lawyer, Mark Vincent Kaplan. But not only does K-Fed want to serve all of Britney’s friends, employees, and business associates with Israeli-commando delivered subpoenas, but he wants Britney to pay for him to do it to her.

“Kevin Federline’s lawyer wants Britney Spears to pay some of her ex-husband’s legal expenses in their divorce case, court documents show.

“Attorney Mark Vincent Kaplan said in an Aug. 26 declaration that Federline has ‘no net income’ after various expenses, and that his spousal support of $20,000 a month ends in November. Spears, meanwhile, brings in an average monthly income of $737,868.

“Spears is ‘clearly the ‘monied party’ in the dispute and should pay $50,000 for Federline’s litigation expenses, Kaplan argued.

[From the Washington Post]

K-Fed should probably work on getting some of his own income, since his spousal support is ending in two months. I didn’t realize it would be so soon – and that definitely raises a small cloud of suspicion over his real motivations. This makes it sound like I’m on Britney’s team, which I’m not, but it is a super slap in the face if she’d have to pay for K-Fed’s lawyers that are working to legally humiliate her. Though she certainly manages to publicly humiliate herself all on her own.

K-Fed’s commandos FINALLY managed to find and serve Britney’s former manager, Larry Rudolph. Rudolph admitted that he was in hiding to avoid being served, and had been in New York City for quite a while. Apparently he must have some very damming testimony regarding Britney’s mental health of childcare skills if he flew to the other coast. Though he and Britney aren’t working together (and she’s blamed him for being forced into rehab, after which she fired him from his job as her manager … and fired her mom from her job as her mother) he supposedly doesn’t want to testify against her or do anything that would make life worse for her either.

“While Spears’ career Svengali told E! News anchor Ryan Seacrest earlier this week that he had spent the past few weeks on the run from Federline’s process server, his incognito skills are either sorely lacking, or he gave up the game, finally getting slapped with the paperwork at the West Los Angeles branch of the Sunset Tan tanning salon Thursday morning.

“Over the weekend, Rudolph expressed his reticence at testifying in the case to Seacrest, saying he wished to remain loyal to the tabloid trainwreck despite his rocky professional relationship with the singer, with whom he has twice parted ways. He told Seacrest that, should he be made to testify, it “won’t be good for Britney.”

“In a statement issued to That Other Blog later in the week, Rudolph said he didn’t take personally some of Spears’ comments directed at him in the media, namely that forcing her into rehab was Rudolph’s brainchild, saying, “I understand where she’s coming from.”

“Rudolph also said that despite her recent, and intense, downward spiral in the public eye, ;my loyalty will always stay strong with Britney…I do understand that eventually the time will come when they will find me, but until then, I’m trying to avoid being brought into this mess.’”

[From E! News]

Larry Rudolph is a pretty nice guy for staying loyal to Britney, and deserves her speaking better about him. What’s ultimately best for Sean Preston and Jayden James is the truth, no matter what. If Rudolph does have some particularly damming evidence, it should come out.

Picture note by JayBird: Here’s Larry Rudolph with Brit in February in NYC. Header image of K-fed in Times Square earning his bling promoting Virgin Mobile. Images thanks to PR Photos.