Talk:Howard K. Stern

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Howard K. Stern article.
Article policies


Contents

[edit] Overdose

[arody myspace myspace.com/howardk.stern? The killer of Anna Nicole Smith and her son Daniel for the purpose of obtaining 87 to 500 million dollars from Anna's Ex-husband's (J.Howard Marshall) Estate that Stern was litigating against,which is also why he's fighting for a house in the Bahamas that's not his,so he can open up a sight-seeing location and charge people to come inside like the Presley's do in Tennesee for Elvis house,and why he intentionally lied by claiming that he was the father of Anna's baby.."

Howard K. Stern the father, Anna's son drops dead soon after. This is very odd to say the least —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.72.63.145 (talk • contribs) 09:07, 27 September 2006
Yup. And now she's dead 5 months later. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.11.6.125 (talk • contribs) 21:44, 8 February 2007
What proof is there that Stern gave her the drugs she overdosed on? If she overdosed on drugs? I'm deleting that information until a citation is adde —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.126.197.232 (talk • contribs) 22:10, 8 February 2007
There is no proof. I was able to remove the slanderous comments before the thing was locked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.15.131.248 (talk • contribs) 22:15, 8 February 2007
Yes! accidental overdose is the cause of death. Howard's attornies quickly had a news conference to lash at the media and others for saying such horrible things about their client. I'm sorry, I don't think was I born yesterday. The press conference was aim at the upcoming paternity case. They are positioning themselves to prove that Howard is a fit parent. I must admit his lawyers are very highly skilled with one of them specializing in white collar crimes, mind you. No matter how you look at it, legally or personally, nobody has the right to claim a child as theirs if the DNA disproves it. These lawyers have families and kids of their own. How would they feel if this happens to them? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.89.176.34 (talk) 06:54, 27 March 2007 (UTC).he has a parody myspace myspace.com/howardkstern I want the public to ask yourself , " Have you ever lived or had a young person with a drug problem or depressed in your family? They just want the pain to go away and just take what ever they can get their hands on. Not intentionally wanting to DIE." They just want the PAIN to STOP. Some unfortunately don't wake up! Daniel and his girlfriend broke up. He took drugs hoping to stop the emotional pain and as unfortunate as it is Daniel accidentally overdosed himself.

[edit] Husband?

If their wedding wasn't legally binding then they were never married and it's inaccurate to describe him as her husband. (Alphaboi867 06:36, 9 February 2007 (UTC))

...or her widower. Betaeleven 18:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
There is a difference between a marriage under the law and an informal marriage (or common law marriage in some states). What is known for sure is that they went through an informal commitment ceremony and presented themselves as a couple. Nobody knows anything beyond that. There may be private legal documents but nobody knows yet. Nobody even knows if she had a will yet.
I would say its inaccurate to call him a husband or widower. Committed partner or companion might be used in place of those words. It would also be wrong to call their ceremony a marriage (use commitment ceremony). 12.96.162.45 21:34, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Prescription drugs

There are press reports that do say that she had a large amount of perscription medications with his name on them in her hotel room. That fact should be mentioned in the article.

"Authorities investigating Smith's death retrieved a "large amount" of prescription medicine from her hotel room, law enforcement sources familiar with the investigation said. The sources did not characterize any of the drugs as illegal.

The prescription drugs were in the name of her lawyer and boyfriend, Howard K. Stern, and included Valium and antibiotics, a law enforcement source said. Over-the-counter drugs, including cold and flu medicines, also reportedly were found." [1] 12.96.162.45 21:28, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Changes

I'm locked out, but there are some things that should be added.

- Stern has never been the attorney of record in any case since being admitted to the bar in 1994.

- Stern maintains an apartment in Santa Monica, CA

- At one time, Stern operated a business called "Hot Smoochie Lips Inc." in Santa Monica. That business was a single-client talent agency set up by Stern to potentially manage Anna Nicole Smith. [2]

The source for this is [3]

12.96.162.45 20:05, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Howard K. Stern

"Howard Kevin Stern (born November 29, 1968) is a Jewish-American and killer of Anna Nicole Smith and her son Daniel..He murdered them for the purpose of obtaining 87 to 500 million dollars from Anna's Ex-husband's (J.Howard Marshall) Estate that Stern was litigating against,which is also why he's fighting for a house in the Bahamas that's not his,so he can open up a sight-seeing location and charge people to come inside like the Presley's do in Tennesee for Elvis's house,and why he intentionally lied by claiming that he was the father of Anna Nicole's baby.."

Fine! And do you list all the Christian-Americans or Muslim-Americans (to limit myself to the three monotheistic religions) too as such? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.180.215.65 (talk • contribs) 20:24, 14 February 2007
Howard does not have Crohn's Disease. MishkaMLS 15:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Grammar suggestion

Just a grammer and content suggestion: In the first sentence of the Paternity dispute -the sentance shouldn't state a HE until a specific subject is given. Try putting Mr. Stern's (unless i'm mistaken) name in the place of He. Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.193.226.87 (talk • contribs) 06:22, 19 February 2007

Done. In the future, feel free to use the {{editprotected}} template. Part Deux 12:18, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
Another grammar suggestion would be to spell "sentence" correctly.....as opposed to "sentance". NickBurns 16:17, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Did he lie to the judge?

During the trial for Anna Nicole remains, Stern said he had no income since aprox 2002.. this articles says he "maintains a business called "Hot Smoochie Lips Inc."?? can someone clarify? ---((F3rn4nd0 ))(BLA BLA BLA) 21:06, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

He's a lawyer and his only client was Anna. He had no other business. "Hot Smoochie Lips" is a talent agency that was created just for Anna. [4]dposse 23:41, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
He did receive income for his participation in the Anna Nicole Smith Show although it was minimal. He acknowleged that his role in her J. Howard Marshall lawsuit will entitle him to approximately 5% of the final judgement. The judge ball parked his potential share at $6M. He acknowleged in his testimony that although Anna Nicole did not pay him a traditional salary, she covered all of his living expenses, including rent on an apartment he maintains in Hollywood. On cross examination, it was brought out that he had check signing privileges for Anna Nicole and may have had access to a debit card connected to her bank account. Debra Opri, attorney for Larry Birkhead, stated that a criminal investigation was underway regarding checks written on Smith's accounts. I hope that helps to clarify things. Cleo123 00:10, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
OH please! There is no need to activate the card because he hardly leaves Anna's side. She pays for everything even the boat they bought in Florida which was reported to be under Howard's name or his company's name. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.89.176.34 (talk) 06:45, 27 March 2007 (UTC).
In regards to the bank card you're speaking of: H K. Stern said under oath, that the card was NEVER ACTIVATED. Now this may help Stern in such a way that it will prove Ms Smith had enough trust in him to provide him with a bank card DIRECTLY connected to her bank account, AND by never activating it, he can show he wasn't trying to use her money up. Even though she mantained him in other ways it will be extremely helpful in a court if it is ever brought up. FyT 00:37, 25 February 2007 (UTC) 18:34, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Howard K. Stern Is Jewish

Why was this not mentioned? Just because you don't like that he's Jewish doesn't mean it shouldn't be on the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mortifer (talk • contribs)

Do you have a suggestion to make, or are you just looking for someone to get mad at? If you can provide a reliable source for that (please see WP:BLP), by all means add it. TINC. Patstuarttalk·edits 08:45, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Do I have a source? Are you serious? Do you think he's Italian?

Aside from the very obvious factor of his name.

I think everyone, but you, already accepts that he's Jewish.

Why is his religion important? His religion has nothing to do with any of the controversies unless you're a klansman or a Nazi. If you want to mention his religion in his history, fine, but saying he's a Jewish-American is pointless. Teller isn't listed as an Atheist-American, George W. Bush isn't listed as a Christian-American. 68.150.198.213 20:18, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
Maybe if he does't want to be called out as one, maybe he should stop behaving like one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.118.255.104 (talk) 23:12, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
Jews are a Minority, therefore it is naturally worth to mention.
I presume you're talking about the US since 68. was referring to Americans. Jews certainly aren't a minority in Israel. However I'm pretty sure atheists are a minority in the US, heck maybe even smaller a minority then Jews Nil Einne 15:10, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Yes, but athiesm is considered by no one to be a race, while judaism is. Therefore it shouldn't be likened to "Christian-American" but "African-American".
And by the way, 12% of the US population professes to not believe in god while only 2% attest to be followers of Judaism.
Stern's religion, whatever it is, should be mentioned. This is not an instance of bias - please remember Wikipedia is an ENCYCLOPEDIA that is to contain factual biographical information. A person's heritage and religion would be important parts of their article. If someone has a verifiable source for what his religion and background is, of course it should be included. NickBurns 16:18, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Remember talk page guidelines & BLP

This talk page should solely be about discussing the article. Discussing the subject of the article should be done elsewhere. Per BLP, I removed a large amount of stuff which appeared to be solely about discussing the subject of the article and some of it in a rather negative lighNil Einne 11:07, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] APPEALS/DELAYS

Every lawyer has the right to protect their clients. They do take the oath to defend their client to the best of their abilities. That part I understand fully. However, with all the legal maneuverings that HKS lawyers are doing, delaying the inquest into Daniel's death, delaying the paternity hearing..etc. It is also understandable that from the media and the public's point of view, HKS is not very forthcoming which leads to the media and the public to suspect either foul play or wrong doing on HKS. It seems to me that HKS side loves the media when they get paid (Anna's funeral, exclusive interviews..etc) but when it comes to facing reactions from the media and the public, they cry wolf. The media has defense attorney, prosecutor, and people that are licensed to examine exactly the actions of HKS. And most (media and public) agree that all these appeals and delays spells HKS has a motive and has something to hide. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.89.176.34 (talk) 22:32, 1 April 2007 (UTC).

Is there something you want to address with regards to the article in this rant? If not, please take your ranting somewhere else. As I mention in the post right above yours, this is not the place for discussion of your opinions of the subject. Nil Einne 06:57, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Libelous material

I've reverted large amounts of unsourced material (much/most of it libelous) added by IP 172.166.191.210, amongst others.[5] I've added the page to my watchlist to catch subsequent edits like that, but I won't be able to do any real maintenance on the article, so it would probably be good if someone else could look after it. -- Ddxc 17:20, 8 November 2007 (UTC)