« Previous Post | Ministry of Gossip Home | Next Post »

Lindsay Lohan surveillance video sale could affect court case

Lindsay Lohan surveillance video still picture. "Have you ever seen a jury watch a video tape?" lawyer Lamar Parmentel asks Dennis Quaid's Remy McSwain in the movie "The Big Easy." "It's like they're watching Mike Wallace on '60 Minutes'!" In Lindsay Lohan's case, however, the effects of a surveillance video tape aren't that clear cut.

Lohan has been charged with felony grand theft for allegedly wearing a $2,500 necklace out of a Venice boutique and not returning it for days -- having it dropped off ultimately with police. One piece of evidence, Kamofie & Co.'s 42-minutes surveillance video of the actress' visit to the store, was recently sold to the media, raising questions about how a trial might be affected.

The actress is reportedly considering a lawsuit against the store regarding sale of the tape, saying she never gave Kamofie permission to profit off her likeness, TMZ said Tuesday.

A spokesman reiterated Monday that Kamofie at no time gave Lohan permission to walk out the door wearing the bauble, and said the store didn't expect the video sale to affect the case. Paparazzi pictures of Lilo wearing the necklace have also been rounded up as evidence.

"The bottom line is we felt there was far too much speculation about the video recording, and that it was right for the public to be able to see the video itself," Kamofie's Christopher Spencer said in a statement, L.A. Now reports. "The video would be released during the actual trial anyway .... Release of the video at this time does not violate any law."

Still, Loyola Law School professor Stan Goldman told The Times on Monday, "If you're the prosecution, you would have rather that this did not happen," because it could be used to challenge the credibility of the store owners.

According to TMZ, the Associated Press bought the tape for at least $40,000 and worked a deal giving "Entertainment Tonight" and its sister show "The Insider" exclusive rights for a week.

Lohan is due in court Thursday. The judge said Feb. 23 that any plea deal he OK'd would have to include jail time; the starlet, who is on probation for complicated reasons going back to a couple of 2007 DUI arrests and is used to stylists borrowing items for her to use, has insisted she didn't steal anything. 


Lindsay Lohan in court: the white dress, the manicure

Judge tells Lindsay Lohan any plea deal in theft case would include jail time

Lindsay Lohan slipped out the back door after arraignment, got Twitter love from Dr. Drew

-- Christie D'Zurilla

Photo: This image taken from surveillance video shows Lindsay Lohan, center, with a male companion at Kamofie and Co. in Venice on Jan. 21. Credit: Entertainment Tonight / Associated Press

Comments () | Archives (4)

"A spokesman reiterated Monday that Kamofie at no time gave Lohan permission to walk out the door wearing the bauble"

And that has NOTHING to do with the fact that they shouldn't be allowed to profit off of her likeness without her permission. That's what is called a duck, and then a side step. I know lohan haters will just say she's guilty. But if you think about it, there is absolutely no proof here that she stole anything. If anything, there is now more evidence that the store is deceptive than Lindsay is. Also the store owners changed their story because at the beginning they claimed she slipped the necklace in her purse. Then later changed their story when police demanded they see the video footage. And now they try to sell the video for extra cash. Yeah, sounds like a real respectable store. I'm no fan of hers, but before anyone goes off saying she's guilty, look at the other facts. Besides, thieves usually try to conceal something they steal. No wonder the store claimed she put it in her purse. Because that's what you would expect. Only she didn't even do that. This whole story reeks of something dishonest.

It is clear that this jewelry store did this all for profit. Their store is getting all the publicity they what for free and now they are receiving money for the video and the necklace that they are now auctioning off.

Does the surveillance video have sound? How do we know the clerk didn't tell her she could take it for a week? All the video proves is that she walked out wearing the necklace. Why did she have the chance to be photographed in it by the paps etc before the store mentioned anything? I'm no expert but it seems like the store wants its cake and to eat it too.

The only thing wrong is the jewelry store setting up Lindsay Lohan so that they could get free advertising and make profits off selling peripheral items that are only valuable because LL is involved. The jewelry store should be prosecuted.


Recommended on Facebook

In Case You Missed It...


Hot Property


Recent Posts



Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists:

In Case You Missed It...