Lawsuit Alleges that Unknown Parties Pressured Newspaper to Halt Publication Of Ads That Raised Questions About Handling of Petters Bankruptcy
MINNEAPOLIS, Dec. 17 /PRNewswire/ -- Stop The Petters Scam Foundation, a Minnesota non-profit corporation, today filed a lawsuit against the Star-Tribune Company alleging breach of contract and related charges, and against 30 unknown "Doe" defendants for interference with contractual relations and related charges.
The Foundation's lawsuit asserts that the Star-Tribune "admittedly was pressured by certain unidentified persons to abruptly stop the publication" of a series of 15 advertisements that it had contracted to publish. Although the Star-Tribune agreed to run all the ads and accepted payment for them, it "apparently succumbed to pressure from as yet unknown powerful interests, and breached a fully executed oral agreement and abandoned its journalistic obligation to educate and enlighten its readers," the lawsuit states.
"Ultimately, this lawsuit is about the value of free speech in America," said Garrett Vail, president of the Foundation. "The Star-Tribune concedes that they received pressure to halt our ad series.
The public has a right to learn what's been going on in the handling of the Petters assets. Somebody doesn't want us to continue asking questions and raising embarrassing facts. We intend to identify who pressured the newspaper, and hold them and the Star-Tribune accountable."
After running the first nine ads in the series, "the Star-Tribune abruptly and unilaterally cancelled the remaining advertisements based upon its contention that it had received complaints from persons who it refused to identify, concerning the advertisements. It further contended that it had not had the opportunity to investigate the accuracy of the advertisements (even though it knows that investigation of the content of advertisements is not a role it assumes)," the lawsuit states.
"The Star-Tribune refused and failed to disclose what concerns had been made concerning the advertisements, and did not recommend any editing or clarification of the advertisements, or offer to accept any proof of the accuracy of same.
Rather, it made the blanket and unqualified statement that it would not permit any more advertisements to be made concerning the Petters Saga by Plaintiff, apparently because of the pressure it received from certain unidentified persons to desist further publication of the advertisements."
The lawsuit names 30 unidentified "Doe" defendants, and says that "Plaintiff will move expeditiously to conduct discovery to determine the identity of the responsible Doe defendants and to promptly amend the Complaint to name such responsible defendants."
The lawsuit seeks damages from the Star-Tribune and the unknown defendants. The damages arise in part from the Foundation's lost ability to publicize the planned airing of a $250,000 documentary film about the Petters case. The Star-Tribune's decision to halt the advertising series resulted in the Foundation not being able to air the documentary on any Minneapolis area network television stations, the lawsuit states.
The Foundation is represented in the case by Minneapolis attorney Dean Barkley, the law firm of Villaume and Schiek and by nationally prominent First Amendment attorney Anthony Glassman. Mr. Barkley, former United States Senator representing the State of Minnesota and independent candidate for the U.S. Senate seat in 2008, is an associate in the law firm Villaume & Schiek, P.A. Mr. Glassman in the past has obtained close to $10 million in jury verdicts against the New York Times on behalf of the then-largest shareholder of Santa Barbara Savings and Loan; won a $500,000 settlement on behalf of the founder of Seagate Technology against the Consumer Attorneys of California; successfully defended Playboy founder Hugh Hefner against personal defamation claims and successfully sued Larry Flynt and Hustler Magazine for invasion of privacy.
The Stop The Petters Scam Foundation was formed to raise public awareness of the handling of the bankruptcy and receivership proceedings involving companies and assets formerly owned by convicted Ponzi Scheme operator Thomas Petters, and to seek a just and fair resolution regarding the disposition of those assets.
The Foundation's advertising series raised questions about the handling of the Petters assets, and related issues.
SOURCE Stop The Petters Scam Foundation
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/stop-the-petters-scam-foundation-sues-star-tribune-for-breach-of-contract-for-censorship-of-advertising-series-that-newspaper-contracted-to-publish-79578222.html
r
More on the Petters Scam
r
www.TheSecondFraud.com
r
www.Petters-Fraud.com
r
r
Showing posts with label Petters Scandal. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Petters Scandal. Show all posts
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
The Second Fraud - Story Exposing the Aftermath of the Largest Fraud in MN History - Rejected by all Major MN Media Outlets
THE SECOND FRAUD is a motion picture documentary that exposes the aftermath of the arrest of Twin Cities businessman Tom Petters. Petters was the brilliant mastermind behind the first multi-billion dollar "Ponzi scheme" ever discovered.
Our exposé dives into the initial Petters controversy, exploring how he was able to keep his lucrative scheme going for what authorities say was over a decade, ending with his inevitable conviction on December 2, 2009.
When Petters' scheme was unveiled, the local community was left stunned. Not even the cynical press had seen this coming. Eventually, light was cast on a problem much greater than a simple Ponzi scheme. A second story was developing in the aftermath of the first scandal that was much more sinister.
Ultimately we discovered a tangled web of local professionals: judges, politicians and lawyers, some of which may have knowingly or unknowingly allowed the Petters fraud to perpetuate in the first place. Now these groups are left in charge to clean up the mess. As hundreds of years of legal precedent are blatantly ignored, creditors and victims are crying foul from the sidelines as they are swindled a second time by the very system that is in place to protect them.
How can this be happening? What was the motivation behind these actions? Suddenly it became clear. Tom Petters had been running a Ponzi scheme, but he also had a legitimate business empire holding such entities as the American icon, Polaroid. While there was no money left from the Ponzi scheme, there was plenty in the rest of the Petters Empire. The only problem was, to fund their fee fest, the lawyers involved needed to find a valid connection — or create one.
This film spins the tale of a dark story complete with a colorful cast of characters who are incorporating what we believe to be THE SECOND FRAUD.
THE CONTROVERSY
Ours is truly an independent film. We have worked on a shoe-string budget with a limited crew, yet we have pulled off what we believe to be incredible production value. Our relevance is ripe as we come on the coat tails of Michael Moore’s CAPITALISM : A LOVE STORY, Steven Soderbergh’s THE INFORMANT, and F. Gary Gray’s LAW ABIDING CITIZEN. The public ear is tuned into the truth about both corporate and government greed and corruption.
This film brings to the table hard questions that demand real answers. The local Twin Cities media may have followed the Petters scandal as it happened, but as an outsider, as an independent filmmaker, I bring to the table a different flavor, one that is credible but also digs below the surface.
We bought airtime on every major Network Affiliate to broadcast our film on Sunday, December 13, 2009 and Monday, December 14, 2009. When they saw the content we were dealing with, however, each network independently rejected us.
As a filmmaker, I am not disappointed by what some might call “censorship” in this situation. Others may even say this is disregard of first amendment rights. What fascinates me is what looks like a massive cover up of a continuing fraud—taking place behind the scenes of a fraud that in the public view has been stopped in its tracks. So why isn’t anybody getting their money back?
II say, give my documentary a chance. Let the questions be asked. Let the answers be heard. Do not let precedent be created by a system that may be too corrupt to change once it has gone too far.
Sincerely,
Ryan James Frost
Producer/Writer/Director
r
Link to Story
www.TheSecondFraud.com
r
r
r
Our exposé dives into the initial Petters controversy, exploring how he was able to keep his lucrative scheme going for what authorities say was over a decade, ending with his inevitable conviction on December 2, 2009.
When Petters' scheme was unveiled, the local community was left stunned. Not even the cynical press had seen this coming. Eventually, light was cast on a problem much greater than a simple Ponzi scheme. A second story was developing in the aftermath of the first scandal that was much more sinister.
Ultimately we discovered a tangled web of local professionals: judges, politicians and lawyers, some of which may have knowingly or unknowingly allowed the Petters fraud to perpetuate in the first place. Now these groups are left in charge to clean up the mess. As hundreds of years of legal precedent are blatantly ignored, creditors and victims are crying foul from the sidelines as they are swindled a second time by the very system that is in place to protect them.
How can this be happening? What was the motivation behind these actions? Suddenly it became clear. Tom Petters had been running a Ponzi scheme, but he also had a legitimate business empire holding such entities as the American icon, Polaroid. While there was no money left from the Ponzi scheme, there was plenty in the rest of the Petters Empire. The only problem was, to fund their fee fest, the lawyers involved needed to find a valid connection — or create one.
This film spins the tale of a dark story complete with a colorful cast of characters who are incorporating what we believe to be THE SECOND FRAUD.
THE CONTROVERSY
Ours is truly an independent film. We have worked on a shoe-string budget with a limited crew, yet we have pulled off what we believe to be incredible production value. Our relevance is ripe as we come on the coat tails of Michael Moore’s CAPITALISM : A LOVE STORY, Steven Soderbergh’s THE INFORMANT, and F. Gary Gray’s LAW ABIDING CITIZEN. The public ear is tuned into the truth about both corporate and government greed and corruption.
This film brings to the table hard questions that demand real answers. The local Twin Cities media may have followed the Petters scandal as it happened, but as an outsider, as an independent filmmaker, I bring to the table a different flavor, one that is credible but also digs below the surface.
We bought airtime on every major Network Affiliate to broadcast our film on Sunday, December 13, 2009 and Monday, December 14, 2009. When they saw the content we were dealing with, however, each network independently rejected us.
As a filmmaker, I am not disappointed by what some might call “censorship” in this situation. Others may even say this is disregard of first amendment rights. What fascinates me is what looks like a massive cover up of a continuing fraud—taking place behind the scenes of a fraud that in the public view has been stopped in its tracks. So why isn’t anybody getting their money back?
II say, give my documentary a chance. Let the questions be asked. Let the answers be heard. Do not let precedent be created by a system that may be too corrupt to change once it has gone too far.
Sincerely,
Ryan James Frost
Producer/Writer/Director
r
Link to Story
www.TheSecondFraud.com
r
r
r
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)