'Where The Wild Things Are' Runs $32.4M 
Oscar Can't Always Get What He Wants 
NBC Bright Spot Of Lousy GE 3Q Earnings; 4Q … 
Oops! Vivendi May Delay 20% NBCU Sale? 
65 Nations Vie For Foreign Language Oscar 
Elle's Women In Hollywood Power List 
HOW BIG IS BIG? AEG Predicts Michael Jackson … 
Sane Debt-Reduction Move By Redstone; But … 
EXCLUSIVE: Comcast Wants NBCU Deal Done … 
UPDATE: Sentencing will take place November 17th.
Maybe Terry Christensen should have hired a real criminal attorney and not his entertainment law partner Patty Glaser who clearly got out of testifying against him by becoming his counsel. Being found guilty on one count of wiretapping and one count of criminal conspiracy means that Christensen could be jailed for as long as 10 years. This verdict is sure to shake up the entertainment legal landscape because Christensen was the managing partner at the powerhouse law firm of Christensen, Glaser, Fink, Jacobs, Weil & Shapiro.
Of course there'll be an appeal, especially after the federal judge took the rare step yesterday of dismissing a juror who apparently lied about making biased statements. (Like how the defendants should be allowed to wiretap because the U.S. government does, and "this case is a joke case" because "no one died.") The jury foreman had asked that juror No. 7 be replaced because his mind was made up when deliberations began and he refused to take part in them. The juror himself claimed the others were angry with him because he disagreed with the majority.
Christensen and the Hollywood private eye he hired, Anthony Pellicano, were convicted of hatching a plot to intercept the telephone calls of Lisa Bonder, the ex-wife of billionaire Christensen client Kerk Kerkorian when both were in the midst of a bitter child support dispute. This was Pellicano's second wiretapping trial: he was convicted of racketeering and other federal crimes related to his illegal information-gathering operation in May.
After six weeks of trial, this jury came back with a verdict remarkably quickly except for the No. 7 contretemps. Pellicano, who again represented himself, and Christensen's legal team argued against removing the juror and called for a mistrial. "It's clear that this jury came in hell bent for a quick verdict and they have exerted incredible pressure on this dissenting view by this particular juror," defense attorney Terree A. Bowers was quoted in the press as saying. "We just think this whole process has totally invalidated and tainted this jury."
The conspiracy and wiretapping case against Pellicano and Christensen hinged on the contents of their 34 recorded conversations. Assistant U.S. Attorney Daniel Saunders argued that the first chat was "the birth of a criminal conspiracy" between two men because of "an insatiable need to win" Kerkorian's legal case by any means possible -- including a secret pact to wiretap Bonder and her attorney in a "shocking display of greed, corruption and arrogance".
But Glaser, a litigator conducting her first criminal trial, asserted there was no wiretapping plot and claimed that Christensen was a victim of Pellicano's, not a perpetrator. To bolster her argument, Glaser called Kerkorian to the witness stand where he testified that he knew nothing about any wiretapping.
In the last Pelliano trial, witnesses testified that several Los Angeles attorneys made use of Pellicano's illegal investigative techniques, but Christensen was the only lawyer indicted in the scandal because Pellicano taped conversations with him. But no actual wiretapping was presented as evidence because of Pelicano's fail-safe method of computer encryption. instead there were recordings of the two defendants actually discussing crimes in their own words.
- Pellicano/Christensen Trial Goes To Jury
- Closing Arguments Set For Today In Pellicano/Christensen Trial
- Kerkorian Says Nothing Really New At Pellicano/Christensen Trial
- Kirk Kerkorian To Testify Wednesday At Pellicano/Christensen Trial
- Kirk Kerkorian Will Testify For Defense In Pellicano/Christensen Trial
- Pellicano Sequel: 'The Odd Couple' Or 'Incredible Two-Headed Transplant'?
- Tapes Heat Up Pellicano-Christensen Trial
- Kirk Kerkorian And Steve Bing May Testify in Christensen-Pellicano Trial
- Pellicano Trial Starts For Christensen; Patty Glaser Defending Him
- It's Official: Pellicano To Be Tried Twice
- Could Pellicano Go Through Two Trials?
- Pellicano: Feds Want NYT Source Waivers
- Pellicano Hearing: NYT Covering Itself
- NYT Unveils Pellicano/Christensen Tapes
- Indicted Christensen Still Talking, His Law Firm Still Troubled
- Pellicano Probed? H'wood Attorney Patty Glaser Says "Absolutely Not"
Loading ...
I’ve known these guys for many years. There is absolutely no way Terry Christensen had Pelicano tap Bonder’s phone without telling Kirkorian what they were going to do. Gambling is a REGULATED INDUSTRY – with regulators in Nevada, New Jersey, Michigan, China, and elsewhere. The way the gaming laws are written, if even one of those regulators disqualified Kirkorian from involvement in gaming on ONE jurisdiction, the effect is to automatically disqualify him in EVERY jurisdiction. By tapping Bonder, Christensen created a very real risk that Kirkorian might get disqualified SOMEWHERE, and therefore EVERYWHER. In other words, by tapping Bonder’s phone, Christensen created a real risk that Kirkorian would lose his entire business. There is simply NO WAY Christensen put Kirkorian’s entire business at risk without telling him in advance.
The feds know all that. My guess is that the feds would like to nab Kirk (and others) and that presiding U.S. District Court Judge Dale S. Fischer will give Christensen the maximum sentence – which is lots and lots of years. Since Christensen is about 70 years old, that’s more or less equivalent to life in jail for the old lawyer. But there will be a catch: My guess is that Fischer will stipulate that if the prosecutors tell her later that Terry cooperates and brings down other and bigger players, then she’ll cut the sentence to something nominal (say, 6 months or a year plus a fine). In other words, she’ll pull a Sirica. Since Kirkorian, Bing, former Christensen partner Skip Miller, both brothers Gores and Patty Glaser are probably all up their respective eyeballs in criminal and unethical acts in connection with this case, Terry likely has plenty to dish.
But will he? My guess is “no,” at least with respect to Kirkorian and Terry’s present and former partners. Kirkorian will make all the financial problems (law suits, lost revenue, unexpired lease on the soon-to-fail firm’s hyper-expensive CC digs, etc) go away painlessly with some checks that won’t even be a rounding error for his finances (even with MGM Mirage stock in the shitter, Kirk’s got plenty). That leaves only the problem that Terry has to spend essentially the rest of his life in jail. As an ex-marine, he’ll likely accept that fate: a deal’s a deal.
On the other hand, if Terry can help the prosecutors bring in Bing or either Gores, that might be a possibility. Time will tell.
All this and Sarah Palin in the same day! O, goody, goody, goody!
Glaser is one of the best trial attorneys in LA with some very noteworthy trial wins. Christensen didn’t choose her so she wouldn’t be called to testify – there was never anything to indicate that she had dealings with Pellicano or knew what Christensen’s dealings with Pellicano were. Nevertheless, it was a mistake to choose her as counsel because (1) her lack of criminal trial experience and (2) more importantly, the fact she is Christensen’s partner and too involved in the consequences of a guilty plea for the future of their law firm to look at the case with an interested eye. However, he would have probably been convicted anyway since the tape recordings were damning evidence
He should flip.
richard -
Yes, Glaser is good. But don’t you see Christensen’s problem: He needed a lawyer who was willing to present lots and lots of evidence to the court that Christensen and the lawyer knew was absolutely false. That’s almost certainly the main reason why Christensen fired his initial defense team: THE ORIGINAL TEAM PROBABLY REFUSED TO LIE AND PRESENT KNOWN FAKE EVIDENCE AND PERJURY TO THE COURT! Sure lawyers lie to courts all the time, and they present courts with fake evidence, but when the shittide gets as high as this one and the chances of getting caught get as serious, even criminal defense lawyers start to back out. That’s why Pellicano has NO LAWYER AT ALL.
Christensen’s double conviction establishes beyond a reasonable doubt that his “defense” that there was no tap on Bonder or that he didn’t know about it was a complete lie. Glaser and Christensen obviously knew that for a fact when they argued otherwise to the court. And all the evidence they presented to the court in support of their confected “defense” they also knew to be fake and fabricated. That’s all very, very illegal and grossly violates the state’s ethics code for lawyers.
That’s why Christensen needed Glaser. She was willing to lie to the court and present evidence she knew was phony. For that matter, it’s highly unlikely that Gary N. Jacobs, General Counsel at MGM Mirage (a former name partner and still “Of Counsel” at Christensen, Glaser, Fink, Jacobs, Weil & Shapiro) didn’t know every detail of the bugging and the far reaching attempted defense frauds on the court. Loyalty within the Firm, you know. Ask them about their departure from the old Wyman, Bauzer firm and how they all signed on for, say, $20 Million in lease payments under the new lease left by the failure of Bombastic Bushkin’s old firm. Ah, so noble! So loyal! So crooked!
i hope christenson turns on all his dirty guilty friends/colleagues. let it rain!
Terry
I’m sure you followed the case more closely than I did. My impression was that Glaser presented somewhat farcical explanations of compelling evidence but I wasn’t aware that she presented faked evidence. What was the faked and fabricated evidence she presented? Also, out of curiosity, what was the first defense team who withdrew from the case.
The system works. Pellicano/Christensen should take their dirty bag of tricks and go rot in jail where they belong! Their “appeals” are just another abuse of The Judicial System, and taxpayer dollars.
Why wouldn’t Christensen flip?
Seventy years old with a felony conspiracy conviction leading, I would think, to permanent disbarment, unable to regain status or respect in his field. Why should he rot in jail for life just to please those he can no longer serve or consort with? What’s in it for him to die old in jail?
I bet he flips and then that flip will look so good, so inviting, that Pellicano will flip.
Dah-da da da da-da da da flip it
Dah-da da da da-da da da flip it good
Hi Richard,
There really isn’t space to rehearse the evidence here. But consider this: Christensen’s defense was a whopping lie (as the jury has now determined) and he did offer his own evidence.
Christensen replaced his original lead defense counsel, Dan Webb, with his fellow law firm partner, Patty Glaser, over the strong objections of the prosecutors. Webb is a highly experenced and respected criminal defense attorney. Here’s a bit of Webb’s official bio to give you some idea of what Christensen chucked overboard:
“Dan Webb, a partner in the litigation department, serves as firm chairman [of giant law firm Winston & Strawn] and is a member of the Executive Committee. His trial practice concentrates in the areas of major commercial, civil, regulatory, and white-collar criminal cases. Mr. Webb has tried over 100 jury cases, including numerous successful commercial and white-collar criminal trials. In recent years, he has tried numerous complex commercial cases, representing large corporations in jury trials lasting two months or longer. Mr. Webb joined Winston & Strawn in 1985 as a partner, after serving as the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Illinois. Mr. Webb has spent his entire professional life as a courtroom trial attorney and litigator.”
Yet Christensen, an experienced, tough, sophisticated and just-plain-smart attorney chose to go with Glaser … who had never tried a single criminal case. (Christensen’s partner Robert Shapiro, a famous criminal defense lawyer in his own right, literally sat out the case as an observor in the courtroom.)
The replacement of Webb by Glaser came at a savage cost to Christensen, and he knew and knows it. It is said by close observors of the case to have made a hugely negative impression on the trial judge, U.S. District Court Judge Dale S. Fischer, who allowed the substitution but is said by the same close observers now to “despise” Christensen (and presumably Glaser). Fischer is very, very careful to maintain a professional, disinterested tone … but her real sentiments are said to show through if you know what to look for and you’re there on the scene (which I have not been – I only talk to those who have been there). Good luck with the sentencing phase with that in the hopper, Terry!
O, and Richard, there’s one bit of evidence that I just can’t bear not to point out. As I noted above, there is no way Christensen did not apprise Kirkorian of the Bonder bug. Yet Glaser and Christensen put Kirkorian on the stand to testify that Christensen had never told him any such thing.
Presenting Kirkorian’s almost certainly perjured testimony alone would have been enough to have caused a blow out between Christensen and Webb. That’s especially true because it’s likely that the feds have thier eye quietly on Kirk, even though they’re not telling the world.
There was lots, lots more.
Glaser and Bowers did what needed to be done and it did not work. Why did it not work, who could have predicted that a juror, #7 would be removed….his only mistake was being a little vocal and of pissing off #9 and in so doing upset #1. Also the attitude of both juror #1 and #9 was obvious to me and others sitting in that courtroom. Glaser did a very good job of trying to present a reasonable doubt, Mr. Saunders got to go last and his final presentation to the jury was forceful and on point….leaving the defense at the ‘dock’ when the flight took off.
Also having Mr. Pellicano sit there only feet from Mr. Christensen did not help in so much for the jury to look at Christensen they had to see Antony in his most spiffy prison uniform. In the end it would appear to have been a perfect storm for what could have been a hung jury….my thoughts were that Glaser did plant enough seeds to grow and develop a reasonable doubt and I was wrong…..however, the appeal on the jury and its behavior should be interesting.
John J. Nazarian, Private Invesitgator
Mr. Nazarian wrote: “[M]y thoughts were that Glaser did plant enough seeds to grow and develop a reasonable doubt and I was wrong.”
That’s a bit of an understatement, isn’t it, Mr. Nazarian? As I recall, you wrote and published that that “it is my prediction that when it’s all over, Terry Christensen is going to walk — he is going to be found not guilty! I have watched the jury and they are ‘getting it.’ And what is ‘it?’ It is the point that Glaser and Bower make each and every time they do their stuff.”
But other than kooky, ejected Juror #7 the entire jury voted to convict on all counts after minimal deliberation. It wasn’t even close. Nobody in the jury box bought even a bit of “it.” “It” was nonsense and seen for what it was.
At this point, if he cares about his own well being Christensen should forget about appealing and concentrate on reducing his sentence. Judge Fischer will want some strong admission, repentance and cooperation from Mr. Christensen … and focusing on that appeal is going to make all three very, very hard to present to Judge Fischer. Indeed, there have been no signs of any of them so far, and Judge Fischer is not going to like that one bit if it keeps up. That’s extra years in the slammer right there.
As a matter of curiosity, it would be interesting to know exactly what information Bower was allowed to have by partners Glaser and Christensen. I would be more than surprised if Bowers was not kept mostly in the dark about the worst of it. Withholding all that information from Bower probably reduced his effectiveness as a courtroom advocate (his “it”) but greatly increased the chances that he wouldn’t walk off the case, since he may not have been asked to lie and present arguments known by him to be utterly baseless. Glaser, of course, has no such excuse.
I guess everything in life has tradeoffs. Pluses and minuses. Mr. Kerkorian is probably doing some cost/benefit calculations along those lines right now. He’s very good at that kind of thing.
Well said Terry Hughes! You seem to be the only person leaving comments that really got “it”!!! Of coarse, being the victim of Christensen’s “charade”, I got “it” too!!!
I think the PI’s comments are indicative of how some of the minions who do the unsavory for LA’s elite are incapable of understanding how important privacy is to the average Joe and how shocking and dreadful it is to have anyone impinge on that.
The failed logic always seems to be “well if you’ve got nothing to hide, then what’s the problem?” There is no problem. The “nothing to hide” attitude is the perfect attitude, but only for a slave.
Free people, American people, bristle at the idea of people tapping their phones, reading their mail and email. A person who will go through your curbside garbage in the middle of the night will never understand a jury in a privacy case.