Accounting to BISCHA?

I was hoping that Mac met his obligation to the court in providing BISCHA with all the remaining accounting. That was due Sept 3rd. Does anyone know? Does anyone else care to know? I would like a simple accounting to feel more comfortable that someone/anyone has a grip on what has happened and is happening financially. Sums in payments out (interest, movie production, personal, Lou,other?). I would think that Mac can provide this info to us now that BISCHA has it?
The November hearing being 2 months away, is a long wait for information...

BISHA letter

Greetings all-
Just wondering what others are thinking of the letter BISHA mailed out last week?
-sue

8/13 Court Hearing Update

This morning's Washington County Superior Court's hearing to consider Horace's group's petition proved to be a somewhat routine and, overall, uneventful proceeding.

Ramona O'Brien-Brisson represented the groups position and concerns before Judge Crawford.

She clearly expressed that it wasn't the group's interest to seek party status in the current complaint before the court. Expressed as well was, that while it wasn't the group's intentions to be divisive, their collective interest was to have "control of the film" in that, in their belief, it would prove more expedient in creating revenue with which to begin repayment of lenders. Also acknowledged was an unawareness of Mac's full intention to complete the "existing" film which is, indeed, the Birth of Innocence.

Judge Crawford, while expressing understanding of the group's concerns, made clear that the court would only proceed with the existing securities case presently before him - reconfirming the upcoming trial is set for early November with a status conference ("behind doors") in three weeks time. He did as well indicate that, should they choose, the concerned party could address their position, independently, at a later time following the conclusion of the current litigation.

Regards,

Christopher

** "Second Film" Allegation **

It's essential that a key allegation being drummed loudly and incessantly is addressed and laid to rest.

Mac has stated clearly to all of us as recently as ten days ago (and several times before), that he's fully committed to complete the Birth of Innocence - the very film which has been produced to date. Yes, of course, with editorial and necessary refinements to complete but with the very imagery and narrative that have inspired so many of us. There is absolutely no plan to begin something anew at this time. At one time an alternate idea was discussed and dismissed in full recognition of lenders immediate financial needs and the absolute worth of the very project we've all been a part.

The petition forwarded by Horace's group has been built on the patently false supposition that Mac has somehow abandoned the "original" film. This is "tommy rot" plain and true. We indeed have an extraordinary film and it will be completed by the artist.

Equally critical to be aware - shared with us all by Bill Kinzie and even, at one time, by Horace's group themselves - no film distributor, no marketing agency or any film finance company will touch a film that is under the pall of legal litigation. It doesn't matter who's in control or who completes the film. Whether ongoing litigation concerns Mac or infighting among divided lenders, the result will be the same - a solid stop of any marketable film until full resolution is accomplished. This can be confirmed with anyone in the film industry and (most) lawyers.

This is why, if others are allowed "status", we're all in the soup even further. It cannot, and will not, "simplify things" for us in any way. It will not "free" the film to be completed. It'll only succeed in furthering the distance between us, our financial needs and a marketable film. As legal affairs and challenges deepen, more money is spent, more time lost, more continued hardship for us all.

I'm genuinely sorry. You may choose to shoot the messenger, but I'd like to be very clear - regardless of some lender's feelings towards me - what I share here is not about my personal feelings; it is not a sentiment and it's not about "aligning myself with Mac" - it's a terribly real legal and commercial fact that will impact each and everyone of us. And, as I've always believed, we all deserve to be clearly and truthfully informed.

Painful as it may feel with this divisive air between many - I'll maintain this truth again, it is only in our being United that we will continue to stand or surely, Divided that we will truly fall. This choice can only come from each one of us regardless of our differences.

Thank you again for your consideration during this challenging time.

With real regard,

Christopher

Party Status not yet granted

Ramona O'Brien-Brisson misspoke when she maintained that "party status" had been granted and that Friday would be a court review of their group taking control of the film. This is not the case.

It's been confirmed with counsel that no such decision was made or could be made without arguments of existing parties first being heard. This is what will transpire this Friday in Washington County District Court. And, to be clear, why it's important to let your opinion regarding "party status", (and the divisions it will create) be clearly known.

- CCW

This is so depressing. If I'm reading all of this right (and there's been so much I'm losing track), then the judge has already granted 3rd party status to the AC group?

Then it's all over. Everyone will spend the next 20 years in a legal morass that will suck the life out of everyone but the lawyers. And this is supposed to fix things, how?

please correct me if I've not got it right.
~Marna Ehrech

I support a Compromise

We (the lenders) are NOT standing together...demeaning verbiage has no place in attempts to unify. Egos exclude...humbleness includes.

I have listened to the ones in the AC group. I have been upfront about my disagreement with their plan of action, but I respect each of them and their opinion. These are good people that Christopher puts efforts in shooting down personally. There does not need to be a battle. Fighting is a choice that you make. There is absolutely no reason why good, reasonable, caring people cannot come together and compromise. There is no black and white issue here. Polarization will cause the ultimate damage to Mac, the film and our group.

It is not too late to come together, find the common ground and stand on it. Even if the ground is simply the small piece that acknowledges we all want debts to be repaid... that is enough for now.

I will not sign the petition and I will not support Christopher’s efforts as they stand now. I support a compromise.

** 3rd Party signature clairification **

As many are aware, Sharon Gutwin recently wrote the lenders group that your "vote" concerning Horace's group's "3rd Party status" should be voiced on the Birth of Innocence blog rather than email. Maintaining that an email is, in fact, less viable in court.

I've been in touch with Mac's counsel, (both before yesterday's letter and again this morning) and I'd like to reassure the many of you who've been in touch over the last day and any of you that would prefer to be heard via email that both forms are equally valid. You do not, nor should you, "vote" in both formats. The choice of either is yours.

I will be attaching a legal affidavit attesting to the validity of the compiled list of all lenders responding via email (your original emails will also be on file). These in turn will be added to the names of any of you choosing to record your "vote" online. The sum total, as mentioned yesterday, will be submitted to Mac's counsel by end of business day Wednesday. We hope to hear your voice in this critical issue.

Thanks again for your consideration and on behalf of both Sharon and myself, I apologize for any confusion.

Christopher

Problem With Voting Solved

To sign in, click the button “Follow with Google Friend Connect” under the heading FOLLOWERS on the right side of the page. This will sign you into the application and allow you to vote or to change your vote in the polls.

Petition signature misinformation

I am a member of the AC group and I will be a regular contributer to this blog, but for now I would like to correct the misinformation regarding the number of signatures on our petition.  We asked everyone receiving the petition by email to print the entire petition and send it in with their signatures on the signature page.  Apparently the court clerk counted the number of petitions of which there were seven, but containing a total of thirteen signatures handed in on Tuesday.  The second batch was handed in on Wednesday with six more signatures for a total of nineteen.  We are expecting more.