Jump to content
MadonnaNation.com Forums
loowee

Alleged Madonna letter surfaces. Auction lot drama

Recommended Posts

17 hours ago, acko said:

Madonna is always treated like this by lawyers and judges, the same way she is perceived in a certain way by a large portion of the public and the tabloid media.

I remember when she was 'forced' 2 testify against her stalker in '95...she didn't wanna play up 2 his fantasy by appearing in front of her stalker (a valid point imo),

But the court released some statement about her 'not being the star of this show'.

 

So true

And utterly pathetic. Plus nobody should be forced to sit in a court facing your own molester. It has no relevance to establishing the facts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://pagesix.com/2017/10/26/madonna-dodges-punishment-in-worn-underwear-lawsuit/amp/

Madonna dodges punishment in worn underwear lawsuit

By Julia Marsh

October 26, 2017 | 1:21pm

Madonna ducked a legal sanction Thursday for refusing to have her deposition videotaped in her lawsuit over the auction of some of her memorabilia, including a pair of worn satin panties and a love letter from late rapper Tupac Shakur.

The Queen of Pop is suing former pal Darlene Lutz for consigning her “highly personal items” to the online auctioneer Gotta Have It! Collectibles last summer, claiming the ex-friend did not have permission to sell her property.

Madonna’s lawyers barred Lutz’s videographer from attending her deposition in the case in August.

On Thursday, Lutz’s lawyer asked the judge to punish the “Vogue” singer for the move.

“[Madonna’s] credibility was called into question a number of times” during the legal grilling, the lawyer, Judd Grossman, told Judge Gerald Lebovits in Manhattan Supreme Court.

For example, Grossman said, he asked Madonna during the deposition about a pair of panties she’d sent to a former lover over 20 years ago that were yanked from the auction block when she sued Lutz.

“Do you have any good-faith basis to allege that my client, Darlene Lutz, took these underwear from you?” as the singer has alleged, Grossman pressed.

“I do not,” Madonna admitted.

She also conceded that fan-club letters and snapshots from a Miami bachelorette party that are at issue in the suit had previously been published, according to Grossman.

“[Madonna] was visibly uncomfortable during the deposition. There were periods of time when she closed her eyes, struggling to find an answer,” Grossman said.

But her behavior during the questioning is forever lost to history — and to a jury — because the deposition was not recorded, Grossman argued.

So should the case go to trial, the jury won’t be able to fully asses her credibility, he said.
Madonna’s attorney, Brendan O’Rourke, countered that he believed that the judge had told the parties there would be no videotaped depositions.The judge said he couldn’t recall either way.

O’Rourke added that Lutz’s counsel couldn’t point to one specific instance of perjury in Madonna’s testimony.

Judge Lebovits said that recorded depositions are not the norm, before declining to sanction Madonna.

“I would say that they’re exceptionally atypical,” the judge declared.

Lutz is asking the judge to toss the case based on Madonna’s alleged admissions that many of the items are not, in fact, personal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"dodges punishment" :rolleyes:

Madonna is trying to prevent those aholes from profiting off her back and this woman writes about punishment?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, XXL said:

"dodges punishment" :rolleyes:

Madonna is trying to prevent those aholes from profiting off her back and this woman writes about punishment?

Exactly. Rupert Murdoch's page six from NY Post again.  They never fail to stick the boot into Madonna any way they can. They are clearly going easy on this Darlene creature in their write ups despite her bring a thief, grubby opportunist and gold digger.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So in the end there's some scum trying to sell stolen goods and it's Madonna who is dodging punishments? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Hector said:

 

I love Sharon Stone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i know everything is in one auction but the items are coming from different people. like lutz stole things, while the ex was given her panties from her as a gift, so theres a difference there.

some items are personal and some are not. why is there such confusion and i'm sure Madonna doesnt know what this woman has exactly, time, dates, who worked for her at each time, etc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Hector said:

 

A QUEEN

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ADORE miss STONE. I love how she keeps working even if it's sometimes in dodgy International/European productions.

I do think she's a greater movie star than an actress tho...if that makes sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love QUEEN STONE in spite of (or maybe because of) her rock hard titty implants in BAsic InstAINT 2 (the 37th best worst film of all time) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 28/10/2017 at 9:21 AM, acko said:

ADORE miss STONE. I love how she keeps working even if it's sometimes in dodgy International/European productions.

I do think she's a greater movie star than an actress tho...if that makes sense.

You are making sense. She has great charm and charisma but not much range. She was pretty good in Casino and Lovelace aside from Basic Instinct 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://pagesix.com/2017/12/06/ex-madonna-pal-wants-lawsuit-tossed-because-of-panties-giveaway/

Ex-Madonna pal wants lawsuit tossed because of panties giveaway

By Jennifer Bain and Julia Marsh

December 6, 2017 | 4:33pm

2D3912A5-F845-406D-AEEF-54E1EA260C1C.jpeg

An ex-pal of Madonna urged a Manhattan judge Wednesday to toss a lawsuit filed by the Queen of Pop over an auction of her memorabilia because The Material Girl freely gave away the priciest item — a pair of worn satin panties.

“They weren’t careful, the plaintiff wasn’t careful in bringing these claims,” said Judd Grossman, an attorney for the former friend Darlene Lutz.

“For example the underwear, lot No. 10. There was a handwritten note with hearts and symbols to a boyfriend that said, ‘My underwear for you,'” Grossman told Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Gerald Lebovits.

“My client never had anything to do with that lot,” Grossman argued.

Instead, the convicted drug dealer ex-boyfriend, Peter Shue, has said he consigned the lingerie to online auctioneer Gotta Have It! Collectibles. Yet Madonna is not suing him.

Over the summer Judge Lebovits temporarily yanked 22 items from the July auction pending the conclusion of the case.

Now Madonna’s lawyer, Brendan O’Rourke is only asking the judge to return 19 of those lots including a love letter that the late rapper Tupac Shakur sent the pop superstar in 1995.

O’Rourke conceded that Madonna has no valid claim on her gifted panties.

But, “there’s no doubt that the letter belongs to my client,” he said.

Lutz came across the handwritten missive when she was sorting through a pile of Madonna’s fan mail that ended up in her personal archives.

“She didn’t even realize she had a Tupac letter until 2008 or 2009. She hired an intern who found the letter and voilà a gold mine from Tupac,” O’Rourke said.

“Fast forward…she’s trying to profit by selling letters to [Gotta Have It!]. The letter is worth an estimated $100,000. It wasn’t her letter to sell,” O’Rourke said.

He’s also demanding the return of a checkbook, a hairbrush entangled with Madonna’s locks and a letter from Rosie O’Donnell.

Lutz has said Madonna asked her to store the items after moving out of her Miami home.

“This case is no different than if I asked a friend to hold my things in his attic,” her attorney, Grossman, said.

“They had a falling out 13 years ago. This case is about personal revenge, not property rights,” Grossman told The Post after the hearing.

The judge said he would issue his decision at a later date.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This Darlene creature won't give up. The lure of making money is so strong for this disgusting woman.  She has no right to any letters or items she was "supposedly" storing.  They belong to Madonna. Hate how her lawyer is trying to make out that Darlene is the victim.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hope this is not true...

Scumbag

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a special place in hell waiting for Peter shue and Darlene Lutz. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, spotlight said:

There is a special place in hell waiting for Peter shue and Darlene Lutz. 

Perfectly stated.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Gus said:

Hope this is not true...

Scumbag

 

Has this guy had some sort of bad facelift or something... :blink:  That face...

 

And all he does is give bottom of the barrel interviews to outlets nobody knows or cares anything about so he can keep passing himself off as someone important (because of his "gangster" past)... maybe if he did something substantial with his life he wouldn't have to sell a famous person's panties to get by.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Such a loser..."we won"...21 years in jail vs a pair of panties...lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, VogueMusic said:

 

Has this guy had some sort of bad facelift or something... :blink:  That face...

 

And all he does is give bottom of the barrel interviews to outlets nobody knows or cares anything about so he can keep passing himself off as someone important (because of his "gangster" past)... maybe if he did something substantial with his life he wouldn't have to sell a famous person's panties to get by.

Shue is such a fucking parasite. I hope no one bids on M’s panties. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting the given-away panties back was always going to be a stretch legally.

The items that con artist Darlene stashed are another matter entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×