Thieriot Lawsuit - Judge's Order
Thieriot Lawsuit - Judge's Order
Thieriot Lawsuit - Judge's Order
lz
{3
\+
\#'
\$,
O
I
N'
[email protected] Maribeth Annaguey, Esq, (SBN: 228431\ mannaguey@linerl aw. com Ashley R. Yeargan, Esq. (SBN:259523) ay eat gan@linerl aw, com LTNER GRODE STEIN YANKELEVITZ SUNSHINE REGENSTREIF & TAYLOR LLP I100 Clendon Avenue, l4th Floor Los Angeles, California 90024-3 503 6 Telephone: (310) 500-3500 Facsimile: (3 l0) 500-3501 Attomeys for Plaintiff Elisabeth Thieriot
"-'"Hls,$JfH*^rurun^
Voo'oP
l,|AY 1 4 201?
\s a CSro
6)
ll
l3 t4
vs.
Case No.
BC 48 4 88 ?
t6 t7
'
t8
l9
20
2l
J r
22 23 24 25
4 ct
,{O
;;
itr
833fis
26 27 28
'd
b
Ftl
-g
O l\J
q4
a(r* f;r
nHS
crCase No.
COMP
00204t9ru0
l/
523764vO1
o
I
2
3
PlaintiffElisabeth Thieriot ('Ms. Thieriot" or "Plaintiff'), as and for her Complaint against
Defendants The WrapNews, Inc. and Steve Pond
20
4
5
I.
INTRODUCTION
l.
This action exposes the continuing demise ofjournalistic integrity as more and more
online publications, purporting to be serious news outlets, race to be the first to post online
sensational and inflammatory articles without the requisite research and with total disregard for the
highly questionable "sources" without any real investigation. Couple this with an unscrupulous,
an ax to grind and you have the perfect
ll
l3
14
T*
t2 history of making false statements to the police and in legal proceedings, in an attempt to wreak
havoc on Etisabeth Thieriot's
life.
ex-wife of the former publisher of The San Francisco Chionicle. Relying solely on Julia-Levy and
documents based on claims made by Julia-Levy, and despite information totally annihilating Julia-
l5
t6 Levy's credibility, The Wrap threw caution to the wind in its reckless pursuit for more hits on its
r7 website. In doing so, The Wrap has perverted the truth about Julia-Levy's fraud on Ms. Thieriot
l8
l9 findings and
artifacts (the "Documentary"). The Wrap has portrayed Ms. Thieriot as the villain
20 even though she is, in fact, the victim of Julia-Levy's fraud. This perversion not only defames and
2l severely damages
22
23
ill-advisd posting
published the article with clearly even less investigation than The Wrap. This has just distorted the
facts even more. Now, the headlines, in the United States, Mexico and around the world, read that
24
25
.9
:JI
Ms. Thieriot is "wanted" in Mexico and convey that she is a criminal on the run. These serious
accusations are completely false. This recklessness must be stopped and the perpetrators must be
26 27 28
,L
:c,
held responsible.
Case No.
COMPLAIN
00m48910011 5231&v05
I
2
I
2.
Financier Accased of Fleeingwith Film Footage (the "Story"), The Wrap published false and
defamatory statements that Ms. Thieriot fled Mexico in contravention of a government order, stole
4
5
film footage and equipment, and filmed on goverrrment land without authorization. Each of which
is false. The Wrap knew that the Story was false, or at the very least, it had to have entertained
serious doubts in light of information The Wrap
6 7 8
its key,
if not only,
source Julia-Levy was not credible. Nevertheless, The Wrap intentionally and
recklessly went forward with the Story -- even after being told not to proceed in light of the fraudulent statements by Julia-Levy upon which it was relying. By its intentional and reckless conduct, The Wrap has caused substantial harm to Ms. Thieriot, in complete disregard of the truth
and without eveS a semblance ofjoumalistic integrity. This suit seeks to set the record straight and
l0
ll
l3
II.
THE PARTIES
t4
34,
l5 maintains
a residence
l6
and operates the websit e, Thel{rap.com) anonline publication found at and based thereon alleges,
r9 that TheWrapNews,'Inc. is based in and does business in Los Angeles, California. plaintiff is
20
informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that the Story at issue in this action was
and was both available to and targeted to readers
5.
Plaintiffis informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Defendant Steve
24
25
.ft
l,rl
Pond, a reporter and the by-lined author of the Story at issue, is based in the State of California and
the County of Los Angeles.
Plaintiffis informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that the
26
27
Story at issue in this action was authored by Pond and was both available to and targeted to readers
,F
:ql
28
00204E9rc01/ 523764\ns
r(
I
2
3
6.
Plaintiffis informed
of Civil Procedure $ 474, the fictitiously named Defendants sued herein as Does I ttrough 20,
inclusive, and each of them, were in some manner responsible or legally liable for the actions,
4 events, hansactions and circumstances alleged herein. The true names'and capacities of such
5
fictitiously named Defendants, whether individual, corporate, associate, or otherwise, are presently
unknown to Plaintiffand
6 7 8 9
Plaintiffwill
true names and capacities of such fictitiously named Defendants when the same have been ascertained. For convenience, each reference to "Defendants" shall include the Doe Defendants.
and each of them.
l0
7.
Plaintiff is informed and beliEves, and based thereon alleges, that Defendants, and
ll
l3 t4 l5
each of them, are and were at all times herein mentioned, the agents, servants, employees, or
joint
t2 venturers of each of the other Defendants, and at all times herein mentioned were acting within the
course and scope of said agency, employment, or service in furtherance of the
joint venture.
III.
8.
On May 9,2012, The Wrap published the Story accusing Ms. Thieriot, explicitly
l6
t7
(a) O) (c) 9.
Fleeing Mexico in violation of a government order; Stealing footage and equipment related to the Documentary; and,
l8 t9
2l
22
23
The Wrap referenced "documents" it obtained, including a letter from the attorney
general in the Mexican state of Campeche and a letter allegedly from the National Institute
of
24
25
.tt
l0'
Ms. Thieriot is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that the allegations
in the letters and the story are based solely on Julia-Levy's false claims.
it
.F
26 27
28
:';
l-$.
0020489ro01/ 523764v05
l.
Ms. Thieriot is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that to establish
2
3
credibility, The Wrap posted alongside the Story a letter purportedly from the Attomey General from the Mexico state of Carirpeche bearing an official seal (the "AG Leuer"). The Wrap failed to
include an English translation of the letter, which only appears in Spanish. A trug and correct copy
4
5
6
7
12.
Ms. Thieriot is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that the inclusion
of the AG Letter in its native language without translation was intended to give credibility to the
statements in the Story that the Mexican government was requiring Ms. Thieriot to stay in Mexico and turn over the
8 9
l0
13.
Ms. Thieriot is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that each of the
l1 documents The Wrap relies on are based on Julia-Levy's fraudulent claims to Mexican authorities.
l2 To date, there
have been no findings of wrongdoing by Ms. Thieriot or charges against Ms. based on Julia.Levy's claims.
14'
Indeed, the AG Letter says nothing about Ms. Thieriot being required to stay in
than provide a statement of her version of the dispute.
A true and
15. 16.
ry.
To the contrarS the AG Letter specifically says that upon providing her statement,
leave the facilities of the corresponding Attorney's
As discussed in more detail below, each of the Accusations in the Story are false.
2l
22
23
,17.
Ms. Thieriot formed R & E Productions, LLC ("R & E"). R & E's business was to
24
25
"produce and control all rights" to the feature lenglh documentary motion picture titled: Revelations of the Mayans: 2012 and Beyond (previously referred to herein as the
26
.n
"Documentary").
;{
27 28
18.
Julia-Levy and Ms. Thieriot were Minaging Members of R & E. They were ro
jointly.
0020 499
100 |
523
764y05
19. 20.
Ms. Thieriot solely financed the entire production and was the only Investment
2
3
MemberofR&8.
Julia-Levy was responsible for acquiring for R & E the equipment necessary to film
4 the Documentary with the funds that Ms. Thieriot had invested in R
5
was to be
& E's
name.
6 7 8 9
In or about April 2012, shooting for the Documentary began in Mexico under Julia-
Levy's direction. A day later, Ms. Thieriot joined the crew on-location.
Ms. Thieriot is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that prior to her
arrival, Julia-levy used the crew hired for the Documentary to film interviews on unrelated topics.
t0
After four days of filming, the crew moved to a new location -- Campeche -- where
ll
tz
13
Julia-Levy stopped the production of the Documentary. Ms. Thieriot is informed and believes, and
based thereon alleges, that one of Julia-Levy's motivations to stop production was his
inability to
t4
24. 25.
Ms. Thieriot and Julia-Levy agreed to cease production and to relieve Julia-Levy
and R
of
&
E.
l6 l7
believes, and based thereon alleges, that Julia-Levy initiated a campaign of retaliation and.revenge
and
l8 against Ms' Thieriot by (a) atternpting to prevent further production in subsequent locations, l9 (b) filing false claims against her with the Mexican authorities.
20
26.
belonged to R
Ms. Thieriot is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Julia-Levy
2l
22 23
used fraudulently-obtained receipts and permits to enlist the police to help him steal equipment that
&
24 based thereon alleges, that Julia-Levy claimed to be a local resident and provided false documents
25
1t
&
E.
26
.*
rs
27 28
00204t9/00
l/
523764v05
I
2
27.
Ms. Thieriot is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Julia-Levy
then tried to use the fact that the equipment was in his individual name as a basis to claim
ownership and mislead the police into believing Ms. Thieriot took the equipment without legal
4 right.
5
V.
6 7 8 9 10
28.
As of the filing of this Complaint, there is no order against Ms. Thieriot requiring
that she stay in Mexico. There have been no findings or convictions against Ms. Thieriot based on
any ofJulia-Levy's allegations. The AG
statements against Ms. Thieriot, does not require that she stay in Mexico.
ll
29.
Ms. Thieriot is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that based solely
t2 on Julia-Levy's allegations, the Mexican authorities indicated that they wanted a statement from l3 Ms. Thieriot. This is to be expected in any investigation when
a
t4
15
false.
30.
claims,
To date, however, Vts. thieriot has not been ordered to appear in Mexico or before
16 17 18
any other legal authority for further proceedings in connection with Julia-Levy's trumped up
u.
l9
20
31.
Ms. Thieriot paid for the footage and equipment (some of which was rented rather
at issue. Ms. Thieriot understood that Julia-Levy would acquire the
equipment and that he would do so under the umbrella of R formed to produce the Documentary.
&
24
25
32.
permission,
Ms. Thieriot is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Julia-Levy
acquired the equipment under his name individually without Ms. Thieriot's prior knowledge or
it
Il
26
.p'
.t)
}27
28
oozo4lg'loolt
sniavos
I
2
3
33.
Ms. Thieriot is not in possession of any of the equipment at issue. In fact, The Wrap
failed to include, let alone mention, another letter issued by the Attorney General on April 18,
subsequent to the
AG Letter that The Wrap published, in which the Attorney General specifically
4 states that the equipment is in the possession of a third party -- not Ms. Thieriot. Attached hereto
5 as
Exhibit E is a true and correct certified English hanslation of this April 18, 2012 Letter.
6
7
8
vll.
34.
Ms. Thieriot is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that prior to her
involvement, another pioducer working on the Documentary properly prepared the paperwork for
the permits to be issued in the name of the production company previously slated to produce the
t0
ll
t2
13
Documentary.
35.
Upon the formation of R & E, Ms. Thieriot is informed.and believes, and based
changed
l5
16
name.
t7
36. 37 -
Julia-Levy did this without Ms. Thieriot's knowledge or permission. Ms. Thieriot is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that Julia-Levy
l8
engaged in the fraud described at Paragraphs 31,32,35 in order to ultimately steal the and sell
t9 Documentary, promote
20
it
as his
VI[.
2l
22
23
38.
The Wrap published the Story despite receiving information, prior to publishing it,
that Julia-Levy is not credible and has a well-publicizedhistory of making false statements of fact
24
25
..8
to governmental agencies.
39-
Ms. Thieriot's representatives offered to investigate the allegations and provide facts
i{
.F.
26 27 28
to The Wrap upon further investigation. The Wrap pressed forward and published the Story anyway making
:: IV
it internationally
,|
Case No.
002M8910011 523754v05
I
2
3
40.
representatives by telephone. During that call, Ms. Thieriot's representative cited to an article published by the Los Angeles Times and discussed another published by The New York Times,
4 reporting on Julia-Levy's history of making false claims. True and correct copies of these articles
5 are attached hereto as Exhibits
A and B respectively.
Times article (Exhibit A) reports that during the murder trial of Phil
6
7
8
41.
The
los Angeles
Spector in 2007, the defense intended to call Raul Julia-Levy as a defense witness to testiff about
the demeanor of the victim, who was Julia-Levy's former girlfriend (and an alleged prostitute). The
los Angeles
l0
ll
l2
l3
42.
l4
t5
l6
l7
A Sheriff s D_epartment investigation report included in the prosecutor's filing said Julia Levy had used fake names and social Security numbers and falsely claimed to have attended Harvard
University and USC. (emphasis added).
l8
r9
43.
Ms. Thieriot is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that in light of the
20 prosecution's
filing described in Paragraph 4l above, Julia-Levy was excused from the courffoom
and never again mentioned throughout that trial.
4'
The Story published by The Wrap, however, fails to mention Julia-Levy's history
of
making false statements to police and in legal filings, which is a material fact given that the claims
against Ms. Thieriot are entirely based on Julia-Levy's statements.
24 25
.!
45.
The article in The New York Times (Exhibit B) detailed Julia-Levy's claim to be the
:Jl
26
in
widow denied
.F
:rl
27 Julia-Levy's claim and insisted on a DNA test, which as of the time of the publication had not
28
occurred.
0020489N011 523764vo5
46.
Ms. Thieriot's representatives pointed out each of the above articles to Pond and
2 advised him not to rely on an obviously unreliable source. Additionally, Ms. Thieriot's
i J
representatives requested additional time to investigate the facts and documents and offered to
)
6 7 8 9
47.
name.
Nevertheless, the following day, on May 9,2012,The Wrap published the Story and
in so doing, aided Julia-Levy in his vendetta against Ms. Thieriot to try to destroy her and her good
48.
Ms' Thieriot is informed and believes, and based thereon alleges, that by the time
Ms- Thieriot's representative spoke with Pond, The Wrap had decided to run the Story irrespective Ms. Thieriot's representatives.
ll
12
49.
As of the filing of this Complaint, the Story remains accessible on the Website and
on the Internet through the various republications spawned from The Wrap's initial post. Indeed,
the accusations contained in the Story have been repeated and republished throughout the world in
l3
l5
50.
As expected, the Republications further distort the tnrth and have resulted in.
l6
headlines that Ms. Thieriot is "Wanted" in Mexico suggesting she is a criminal on the run from the
t7 law.
l8
t9
20
2l
22
23
24 2s
.9 ::i
Thieriot and persons who read the Story reasonably understand the references therein to be
references to Ms. Thieriot,
26 27
28
.F.
,.3'
:q
002ftE9ruO1/ 523?64v05
I
2
3
54.
The Story as a whole and each of the Accusations are defamatory on their face
of
Ms. Thieriot and expose her to hatred, contempt, ridicule and obloqun and/or cause her to be
shunned or avoided and tend to injure her in her occupation.
4
5
55.
Upon information and belief, Ms. Thieriot alleges that the Story as a whole and each
of the Accusations were made by each of the Defendants with knowledge of their falsity or with
reckless disregard for their truth or falsity.
7
8
56'
Upon information and betie{, Ms. Thieriot alleges that the Story as a whole and each
of the Accusations were made by each of the Defendants in a grossly inesponsible manner with
t0
57.
Several news publications have picked up the Story and are running the
ll
l3
58.
t4 Thieriot
has suffered general and special damages in an amount to be determined at trial but
l5 l6 l7
l8
believed to be no less than One Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), including without limitation,
damage to Ms. Thieriot's reputation, career and standing in the community.
59.
Upon information and beliei Ms. Thieriot alleges that each Defendant's conduct
was done with oppression, fraud and malice and that, therefore, the conduct of each Defendant
60.
Upon information and belief, Plaintiffalleges that, uirless enjoined and restrained by
2l
22
23
will republish,
continuing injury of Plaintiff; that such continued republication, repetition and dissemination of the
defamatory and offensive falsehoods
will
24 reputation and adversely affecting her philanthropic and business efforts as well as her personal
25
.[r
relationships- Upon information and beliel Plaintiffalleges that she lacks an adequate remedy at law insofar as damages will be very difficult to calculate for such on-going injuries. By reason
the foregoing,
:{
,1r,"
26 27
28
of
:: :!|
Case No.
00204E9/00 | / 523764v05
I and each of thern, and all peisons acting in concert with thern, from republishing, repeating,
2
3
4
5 6
7
'
Paragraphs
above, as
if fully
8 9
62'
Defendants.
The Story as a whole and each of the Accusations werc widely publicized by the
l0
ll
63' '64'
The story as a whole and each of the Accusations are false. The Story as a whole and each of the Accusations are of and concerning Ms.
l2 Thieriot
and persons who read the Story reasonably understand the references therein to be
l4 l5
65'
To the extent that all or any part of the Story as a whole or any of the Accusations
of Ms. Thieriot, the Story and the Accusations place Ms. Thieriot
66'
upon information and belief, Ms. Thieriot alleges that the Story as a whole and each
l8 of the Accusations were made by each of the Defendants with knowledge of their falsity or with
t9 reckless disregard for their truth or falsity.
20
67
'
upon information and belief, Ms. Thieriot alleges that the Story as a whole and each
2r of the Accusations were made by each of the Defendants in a grossly inesponsible manner with )) want of due care.
23
68' 69'
24 25
fr
.$.
26 Thieriot has suffered general and special damages in an amount to be determined at trial but 27 28
:$
believed to be no less than one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00), including damage to Ms.
:-mmrill
0020489n0t/ 523764v05
I
2
3
70.
Upon information and belief, Ms. Thieriot alleges that each Defendant's conduct
was done with oppression, fraud and malice and that, therefore, the conduct of each Defendant
71.
Upon information and belief, Plaintiffalleges that, unless enjoined and restrained by
)
6
7 8
will republish,
Accusations all to the continuing injury of Plaintiff; that such continued republication, repetition
and dissemination of the defamatory and offensive falsehoods
will
Plaintiffby damaging her reputation and adversely affecting her philanthropic and business efforts
as
well
as her personal
relationships. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff alleges that she lacks
l0
such on-going
1l injuries. By reason of the foregoing Plaintiffis entitled to a permanent injunction enjoining and
t2 restraining Defendants, and each of them, and all persons acting in concert with thern, from l3 republishing, repeating, distributing or otherwise disseminating the Story or the Accusations to the
l6
t7 l8
l. 2, 3.
For actual and special damages in an amount to be determined at the trial of this
l9
20
action, but believed not to be les6 than one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00); For punitive damages; For a permanent injunction;
2l
22
23
TNVASION OF PRTVACY:
24
25
4' 5. 6.
For actual and special damages in an amount to be determined at the trial of the
action, but believed not to be less than one Million Dollars ($1,000,000.00); For punitive damages; For a permaneni injunction;
26
27
28
0O2O4tg lO0
523 764
v05
I
2
3
7. 8. 9.
For costs of suit herein incurred; For interest on any monetary award to plaintiffs at the legal rate; and,
For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper.
)
6
GR
I
8
:-"By:
t0
Elisabeth Thieriot
ll
t2
13
t4
t5
l6
t7
l8 l9
20
2l
22 23
24
25 .f'
:Ji
26
.i
lt)
27 28
13
0020489n0U 523764v05
Case No,
o
l
2
3
o
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
PlaintiffElisabeth Thieriot dernands trial by jury on all matters and issues so triable,
4
5
rTz
6
7 8
for Plaintiff
Elisabeth Thieriot
l0
ll
l2 l3
t4
l5
l6
t7 l8
l9
20
2l
22
23
24
25
,R
26
,ll
trl
27
28
_14
0020489/00
J-ffiTi
l/
523 ?64v0s