Archive through July 14, 2002
MoveCloseDeleteAdmin

The ClubHouse: General Discussion Archives: Archive Three: Chiara's Code: Archive through July 14, 2002

Halfunit

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:21 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Ryan - Legal Eagle, lol.

I assume they could subpoena tapes - she explained the whole code that even us net nerds got it. Plus, watching it live, wouldn't that be a firsthand witness?

LOL, I love this group!!!

Zeyna

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:21 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
What do you mean Ryan, she completely explained the code for like 10 minutes before starting

Oregonfire

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:21 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Hearsay is not admissable in court. The defense rests! LOL

I think that BB will manipulate this to their own ends. Chiara is obviously a wild one, good for ratings. Wasn't there some kind of Krista penalty that BB overlooked last year to keep her in the game? Something to do with PBJ. I know this is bigger, but still...

Bbwatcher

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:23 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I don't think so Ryan - Would they think all the live feed posters at all the different websites just made up the same thing at the same time? I'm not sure I understand your point. No offense, of course - you usually make sense. LOL

Foh4ever

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:23 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Oregon, yea... she was snacking on ophelia's cheerios while the house was on pb&j restriction, but the whole thing kinda got white-washed over.

Gouraphik

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:23 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Since when was live video hearsay? After all, it's on tape. I doubt that getting out of any legal ramifications (if it ever comes to that) will be that easy in this litigious age of ours.

Ryanc2002

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:24 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
A: Can't get a fair Jury.
B: The whole world has seen the tapes, they'd never make it in court.

Twiggyish

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:24 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
She reminds me of a little girl in camp, with her ridiculous code. I think she figured if it was in code, no one could figure it out? Good going you guys!!!

Delilah

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:24 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
And to think some of us were considering canceling the feeds (well not me, but I read several people were po'd enough to cancel after the trial period}

Perish the thought! This game is now awnnnn!!

Bbwatcher

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:25 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
You're funny, Ryan. Give it up.

Foh4ever

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:25 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Ryan, if they found people to be on OJ's jury, they can find people to be on this one.

Emjaycue

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:26 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
If someone hypothetically wants the live feed tapes in a hypothetical lawsuit they could get them during discovery by doing a document request in a civil lawsuit. Tonya and Lisa could be deposed by the plaintiff's attorney, in which case they would be testifying under oath under penalty of perjury... you can't just LIE to courts just for the hell of it.

But I doubt this will ever result in a lawsuit... the most that will happen is maybe a short blurb buried in some tabloid gossip magazine...

Ryanc2002

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:26 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
You're using the OJ trial as an example as a fair trial and jury?? *snigger*

Oregonfire

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:26 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I was kidding about the hearsay--I was just teasing Ryan. It was just shorter than "circumstantial evidence."

Demeter

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:27 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
It's not exactly code anymore when you sit there and teach it carefully to thousands of people on the net before telling the story. It's just another language and a simple one at that.

Grits

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:28 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Maybe I'm dumb, but what is all the fuss about? So Chiara mentions the name of some guy she fooled around with. And he's maried. And he's rich.

I just don't get why this is "lawsuit" material. Please, someone, clue me in.

Amac

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:28 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Am I missing something here? If Chaiara's code talk is everything everyone here says it is, why didn't CBS just cut to FOTH once it began (or at least once they caught on to what was being discussed?)

I agree with Ryn. What's the big deal?

Foh4ever

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:29 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Hmm... i never used that word...

"if they found people to be on OJ's jury, they can find people to be on this one. "

hehehehe

Delilah

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:29 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Ok, who's got a wet trout? Ryan, where do you live? I'm coming over with a big wet trout to clobber you with! You ARE the devils advocate, goodbye! (said in best weakest link voice)

Foh4ever

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:30 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Grits, true.. we could drop our speculations here, & go back to listening to them have their conversations about who shaves what and whether or not they get a rash/ingrown hairs....

Ryanc2002

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:31 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
If you were around last night, I was also playing DA with the shower scene and the girls in general.

Emjaycue

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:31 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
It really only would have been lawsuit material if it were FALSE... which doesn't look like it is the case ;-) So its just scandalous, or at least interesting and/or funny (b/c chiara thought talking in code would somehow hide the info)... let us have our fun all you "it's no big deal" naysayers...

Katrina

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:31 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Methinks this is not a big deal. A wealthy, fit, thirty-something man dates beautiful young women. Where's the story? Yes, the show has some obligation to show it has made reasonable efforts not to unduly publicize private people's lives without their consent; hence, the releases, reprimands to the HG's as appropriate, FOTH cam at times, and the fact that they won't use any of that material in their TV shows. However, Chiara retains free speech rights, and it was clear that she was speaking for herself in a live arena, not reading anyone else's script.

Part of the reason the producers don't want HG's talking about various people who aren't covered by waivers is because those conversations won't be productive for the show. They won't use any of those bits on produced television segments without waivers, so those conversations are just a waste of time and videotape for them. Yes, they keep avoiding potential lawsuits in mind, but their number one goal is to put on a TV show. So they want the HG's to be having conversations they might actually be able to use for the TV show. As much as we enjoy the live feeds to varying degrees, they're secondary to the primary objective of turning live video into carefully produced television program episodes very quickly.

Sure, the gentleman in question might become annoyed, but that's not going to bring CBS down..... It just might cancel any chance of Chiara resuming their relationship later. There are plenty of Chiaras for that man to choose from in his world, and she pretty much acknowledged that herself.

The biggest problem I can imagine here for Chiara is that if word gets back to her mother, to whom she supposedly lied about the trip, she might be in trouble with her mommy when she gets home. I'm sure they'll figure out how to work that out just fine without lawyers!

Willsfan

Sunday, July 14, 2002 - 05:32 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Hmmm Video is certainly important in getting police officers fired for hitting people. That is, as a matter of fact all that was on the news last week.