lawsuita

"TARNISH IN TINSELTOWN

THE

DONNIE DARKO

SCANDAL, CONSPIRACY, COVER UP

AND MURDER?"

THE TANGENT UNIVERSE COLLAPSES

May 29, 2007

In "Donnie Darko" one of the notes says:

"When a ‘Tangent Universe’ occurs, those living nearest to the vortex

will find themselves at the epicenter of a dangerous new world."

THIS is THAT dangerous new world.

(All events noted on this web page are in chronilogical order starting on May 29, 2007.)

           I forwarded a copy of the letter about this case that you read earlier to attorneys in Florida, Missouri and California in hopes of seeking representation and was denied by every one of them. Altogether I contacted about a dozen attorney's. Most of them told me I didn't have a case, even though they never read "Tiny Little Virus" nor saw "Donnie Darko," let alone understood what they were about. As victims of the disease of "INAH - 3 contraction" I wasn't surprised at their ignorance. I wasn't deterred either, in fact their ingnorance motivated me all the more! The rest of the attorneys told me I was out of my mind as I was taking on multi billionaire defendant's and I didn't have a hope in HELL! They told me they'd pull every trick in the book and screw me without me having any idea what happened. They reminded me that I was penniless and powerless and there was no way that I was going to prevail. Some of them laughed in my face. I was not deterred though as I went through a lot of shit to get to this point and nothing, and no one was going to stop me. I made sure that my claim, and my Message, was known to attorney's from coast to coast so as to "spread the word."

          "Donnie Darko The Director's Cut" premiered at the Seattle Film Festival on May 29, 2004. With only days left before the three year statute of limitations ran out, I finally secured an attorney in Florida to assist me with the cover sheet and with my complaint. Like many of the other attorney's, they also refused to represent me because I was suing several billionaires and they were intimidated. One of the attorney's read my settlement Message, all 363 pages of "Tiny Little Virus" and watched "Donnie Darko The Director's Cut" as her daughter was a huge fan. She said there was a connection and told me to sue for ten million dollars. On the very, very last day of the three year statute of limitation I filed my lawsuit after having failed at my wholehearted attempt at an out of court settlement which I clearly outlined in my Message. Below is a copy of the cover sheet.

          I initially sued just Gaylord Entertainment and Newmarket Entertainment Group because Gaylord Entertainment financed the majority of the production cost of "Donnie Darko," (2.5 million dollars), and Newmarket Entertainment Group distributed both versions of the film and financed "Donne Darko The Directors Cut." Without the financing from Gaylord Entertainment, "Donnie Darko" may never have been made and without Newmarket financing and distributing "Donnie Darko - The Director’s Cut," I may very well have died and never even heard of "Donnie Darko," as "The Directors Cut" was the version that I saw in September 2005.

          Also on May 29, 2007, the Copyright Office was notified of my suit by the judge presiding over this case. Below is a reprint of form AO 121 that was forwarded by the court showing the names of the defendant's and my name as the plaintiff.

          Newmarket Entertainmnet Group was the first defendant to be served their summons on June 6, 2007. On June 13, 2007 Gaylord Entertainment was served their summons. Nine days later, on June 22, 2007, two men pulled up in a car, got out and approached me as I was in front of my home. They identified themselves as Fort Lauderdale Police "officers" from the narcotics division and asked if they could come into my home because it was hot outside. "Odd, I thought to myself, such wimps that they can’t handle a little heat! It was only June - what were they going to do when September came?" I told the "officers" that they needed a search warrant and the one officer told me that they didn’t. I knew they were up to something when one of the officers grabbed me by the arm and led me inside. My property is completely fenced in so the only way in is through the front gate. While still outside one of the "officers" asked me who owned the home.

          Once inside my home I asked the "officers" what this was about. One of them said that they got a tip from crimestoppers that I was using and selling crystal meth and renting out rooms of my house as a hotel. I told him that none of it was true so I knew that someone was fucking with me. The "officers" were communicating with a third person via a walkie talkie. Just then the other "officer" asked "Who is that naked man outside?" I turned and looked out the front door window and my houseman, Davin was sweeping the front porch. I told the "officers" that it was my houseman and they opened the door and told him to come inside. One of the "officers" took Davin into the middle bedroom while the other one stayed with me in the kitchen. I could hear the second "officer" interrogating Davin but I couldn’t hear what he was saying. I didn't know what was going on but I had my suspicions. The third "officer" showed up and joined the second "officer" at interrogating Davin. I could hear them opening up and going through all the drawers in the bedrooms.

          After about forty minutes of ransacking my home, the three "officers" and Davin, still naked, joined me and the first "officer" in the front room and concluded that I wasn’t using and selling meth and I wasn’t running a hotel. They told me that it would be reported as such and then they left. Once they did so Davin told me that they kept asking him over and over which bedroom I slept in and where I got my money from.

          On June 29, 2007 Greenberg Traurig, P.A., attorneys for defendant Newmarket Entertainment Group filed its motion with the court to dismiss my claim. Below are reprinted three of the seven pages of the motion which clearly convey their position.

          In this motion, Newmarket states that I "crawled out of the woodwork" and that I "clearly concocted my claim in an effort to get rich quick off the intellectual labor of others." Below is a copy of the FedEx delivery confirmation showing that my Message, which you read earlier, was received at Newmarket on October 30, 2006. The length of time from October 30, 2006 until May 29, 2007, the day I filed my lawsuit, was seven months so I didn't just "crawl out of the woodwork" as my presence had been known by Newmarket for a minimum of seven months and a maximum of up to one year. This was the first lie told to the federal judge overseeing this case and it wouldn't have occurred unless I was correct in my claim!

          On Friday July 6, 2007, exactly two weeks to the day that my house was invaded by supposed Fort Lauderdale Police "officers" and I was accused of crimes I didn't commit, Gaylord Entertainment's attorney's Gordon Hargrove & James filed a motion for an extension of 20 days to "investigate the facts and circumstances of this claim to ascertain if GAYLORD is a proper party, and if so, to formulate a response to the complaint." Below is reprinted a copy of that motion.

          On Tuesday July 10, 2007, I received a phone call from Gaylord Entertainment's attorneys Gordon, Hargrove & James informing me that in 2001 Gaylord Entertainment sold the rights of "Donnie Darko" to "Oklahoma Publishing Company." They sent me an article via e mail concerning this matter and told me to drop my suit against Gaylord Entertainment and instead file it against Oklahoma Publishing Company.

          On Wednesday July 18, 2007 I received a phone call from Gaylord Entertainment's attorneys Gordon, Hargrove & James inquiring if I thought about Gaylord Entertainment’s demand that I withdraw my suit against them and file it against Oklahoma Publishing Company instead. I said that because Gaylord Entertainment's film division Pandora financed 2.5 million dollars of "Donnie Darko," which was based upon my autobiography and my life, I would not withdraw my suit against them. See a copy of Gaylord Entertainment's Press release below showing their partnership with Warner Brothers in producing "Donnie Darko" marked by the BLUE blocks.

          During this conversation I mentioned that I wished to discuss the eighty five (85) Message as my out of court settlement. Gaylord Entertainment initially accepted my eighty five (85) page Message but then returned it to Fedex unopened. They were not interested in discussing my eighty five (85) page Message but did inform me that I did not copyright it. Since Gaylord Entertainment initially accepted my eighty five (85) page Message but then returned it back to FedEx unopened, then how did they know what it said, and if it is copyrighted or not, unless they received it through a third party. I inferred Gordon, Hargrove & James's threat that I had not copyrighted my eighty five (85) page Message to mean that Gaylord Entertainment already knew of its content by receiving it through a third, unidentified party. If they already knew of its content then why did they deceive the court and the judge presiding over this case by filing the motion on July 6, 2007, requesting 20 days to "investigate the facts and circumstances of this claim to ascertain if GAYLORD is a proper party, and if so, to formulate a response to the complaint."

          I also "FELT" that someone else may have already copyrighted my eighty five (85) page "Message" and that if I did not retract my claim against Gaylord Entertainment and file it against Oklahoma Publishing Company that the words in my un copyrighted eighty five (85) page "Message" would be used against me during the trial for the sole purpose of making me look like the copyright infringer of my own words. I informed Gordon, Hargrove & James that I have since found out that the attorney that I initially consulted to deliver my Message was disbarred from the state of Missouri. They were displeased to hear that. Below is a copy of the FedEx double sealed envelope containing my unopened Message that was returned to me from Gaylord Entertainment which I showed on the last webpage "Anticipation." Needless to say, it is being kept in a very safe place!

          On July 21, 2007, I received the following letter dated July 19, 2007 from Gordon, Hargrove and James threatening me with Rule 11 proceedings, which ultimately they did not pursue.

          On Wednesday July 25, 2007 I filed my first of three motions to the court requesting that I add the additional defendant's to the suit, those being Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainmnent, Oklahoma Publishing Company, Flower Films Darko Entertainment and Adam Fields Productions. My intent was to add them later so as to not be overwhelmed by paperwork as a copy of all correspondence has to be made for each and every defendant.

          On Thursday July 26, 2007 Gaylord Entertainment finally responded to the court with its motion for a more definite statement, or in the alternative, motion to dismiss. Below is a reprint of that motion.

          As part of my case, I also requested, and purchased, for $306.00 what was supposed to have been "A TRUE REPRESENTATION OF THE WORK ENTITLED "DONNIE DARKO," registration number PAu-2-490-028, from the Copyright Office at The Library of Congress that Richard Kelly copyrighted on July 13, 2000. I wanted to secure a copy of Richard Kelly's script to "Donnie Darko" so that I could compare the similarities at the trial. By doing so would bolster my case. Below is the receipt for that purchase dated August 2, 2007.

          On Wednesday August 8, 2007, I responded to Gaylord's motion for a more definite statement, or in the alternative, motion to dismiss. Below is reprinted the first eight pages of that motion which included the 14 page letter that I forwarded to my prospective attorney which you have already read. I wanted the court to know what you know.