Talk:Anthony Pellicano

Latest comment: 7 years ago by InternetArchiveBot in topic External links modified

Tip of the Iceberg edit

This article is only the tip of the Pellicano iceberg which I wrote quickly this morning. When the expected indictments come down in the wiretapping investigation, he'll be back in the media eye again. Someone with a lot of time might want to do more digging around and add details to this profile. David Hoag 18:57, 11 January 2006 (UTC)Reply

  • Given Pellicano's re-arrest last Friday and his arraignment tomorrow, I've added more details. This may mushroom into more of a story, so I added the "current events" tag. David Hoag 04:00, 6 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

DOB (Date Of Birth) edit

This was the date of birth as published on June 17, 2005 on the District Attorney of Los Angeles' website.

You'll need to type something like "Pellicano" in the small "Search for:" textarea, and then click "Submit", to get the full article, which also includes the dob for: Frederick Proctor.

WB2 04:11, 9 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

Anita Busch Was w/ LA Times edit

Many hands are now contributing to this article, which is good, but some inaccuracies have crept into it. Anita Busch was working for the Los Angeles Times during the death threat incident. It's in the lede para of the articles about her attorneys subpoening Mike Ovitz. Perhaps the contributor was confusing her with Bernie Weintraub, of the New York Times, who was allegedly wiretapped by Pellicano & company.

I also pulled back somewhat the discussion about the venue battle. That hasn't played out yet, and it's important to remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It should provide an overview of the person. It's not a news reportage about the person, albeit constant updates will occur. David Hoag 08:36, 24 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

  • Once again, someone has changed the copy to state that Busch was writing for the New York Times when the fish and rose incident occured. That is not correct. I quote from the FBI affidavit[1]: "Busch was working as a contract employee for the Los Angeles Times." David Hoag 20:02, 25 February 2006 (UTC)Reply
  • Also, Busch was not writing about Michael Ovitz when she was allegedly threatened. She was writing about Steven Seagal and Julius Nasso. That's detailed in the affidavit, which I linked above. David Hoag 20:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)Reply

This is a current event edit

Pellicano is now in the national news nearly every day. He has been the subject of articles in major news magazines like Time and Newsweek for the past five weeks. The US Attorney has announced more indictments are coming this month. So this is clearly a current event and the article is likely to change further within the short term. I returned the "current" tag to the article. CaptainCarrot 19:28, 14 April 2006 (UTC)Reply

  • It was removed again and I put it back again. The measure of a "current event" is not how recently the Wiki article was updated, but whether the story is in the news. (Thus it is a cavaet to readers of the article that the piece may not be the most current information.) The New York Times alone has had eight front-page stories on Pellicano in the past month; the Los Angeles Times has had seven front-page stories on Pellicano in the past month. Both papers have had front-page stories on Pellicano in the past week. The story continues to evolve, so the current tag is appropriate. 207.69.137.203 21:27, 30 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

Vanity Fair article edit

The new Vanity Fair article [2] is absolutely astounding. It would be great if some aficionados could read it carefully and update this article extensively. Phr (talk) 23:38, 1 May 2006 (UTC)Reply

NPOV edit

Should we reword this: "During the search, agents found two practice grenades modified to function as homemade bombs as well as military-grade C-4 plastic explosives sufficient to take down a passenger jet."? That is a VERY small weight of C4, and written like this makes it seem more dangerous than it is. Alvis 05:55, 18 March 2007 (UTC)Reply

If it's enough to bring down a passenger jet, it certainly is dangerous. However, the statement is unsourced and was added by an anonymous user. So if it cannot be verified, it should be removed. The problem is the lack of verification, not a POV issue. 209.179.168.36 16:10, 20 April 2007 (UTC)Reply

Unassociated references edit

Under "Earlier Connections", there are ten references that appear to have just been lumped in at the end of the article without being associated with the text. It seems to me the format of these should be changed so that they're general (and not inline) references. Reinderien 16:09, 29 January 2008 (UTC)

CV? edit

ISTR that Pellicano had been an attorney once upon a time, or at least obtained a JD. Anyone else hear such? knoodelhed (talk) 20:06, 5 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Don't know about that, but I just confirmed that he is a former member of mensa. I heard it straight from the mensa membership directo herself. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.60.138.61 (talk) 14:26, 14 March 2008 (UTC)Reply

Pellicano was not, to the best of my knowledge, ever an attorney. However, he has been the lead editor of practice guides for attorneys, on the subject of investigation, which were published by Thomson-West. Non Curat Lex (talk) 07:25, 11 October 2008 (UTC)Reply

Confusion with Jack Palladino edit

I moved the following comment from the first paragraph of the article to this talk page: "(Note:Pellicano has often been confused with Jack Palladino, a San Francisco-based private investigator whose client list has included Bill Clinton and Courtney Love.)" JohnClarknew (talk) 07:27, 16 May 2008 (UTC)Reply

NO, THIS IS COMPLETELY FALSE, as numerous sources clearly state that THE CLINTONS & PELLICANO did business together, as in the Clirntons HIRED Pellicano.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2006/apr/19/usa.world

http://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/newsletter/2003/0203g.shtml

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/gossip/2003/11/21/2003-11-21_ahnold_got_pellicano_brief_-.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.29.226.173 (talk) 16:17, 28 December 2010 (UTC)Reply

Anthony Pellicano Sentencing Posponed time and again edit

For whatever reason since August 2008, the Pellicano sentencing keeps getting pushed back. Readers are probably looking for some closure regarding this matter - - see: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/crime/la-me-pellicano13-2008nov13,0,5740879.storythis —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roz Lipschitz (talkcontribs) 08:21, 14 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

Looks like sentencing of Pelicano is now scheduled for 15 Dec 2008 - - http://www.latimes.com/news/local/crime/la-me-pellicano13-2008nov13,0,5740879.story —Preceding unsigned comment added by Roz Lipschitz (talkcontribs) 22:56, 18 November 2008 (UTC)Reply

This man will be in prison for a long time! edit

On 15 Dec 2008 Anthony Pellicano was sentenced to 15 years! This comes to great relief for his many victims. The prosecution only asked for 5 years 10 months. HOWEVER, because the judge observed that Pellicano had no remorse whatsoever for his acts and that he expressed extreme pride for his criminal activities, he was given just 1-year shy of the maximum sentence. He will have to serve 85% of his sentence to be eligible for parole. With time served this will be in about 12 years, two months time. See:

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-pellicano16-2008dec16,0,6208677.story
http://wcbstv.com/entertainment/anthony.pellicano.sentenced.2.888061.html

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.167.95.144 (talk) 02:32, 16 December 2008 (UTC)Reply

Copyvio piece edit

There was a part which was blatantly ripped from a DOJ press release, pointed out by an anonymous editor.

The copyvio was from [3], and was replaced with a loose legal threat and a phone number. (Wikipedia is not a bathroom stall?) I've seen some weird ways to report copyvios but this tops them all.

Removed the ripped text (and the phone number). I think we can do better. --RabidDeity (talk) 08:53, 18 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

Note: If it is from a DoJ press release it is in the public domain. Geo Swan (talk) 03:06, 21 September 2009 (UTC)Reply

This Article is Dumb! edit

Very poorly written, jumps around, doesn't make sense...vague IT NEEDS TO BE COMPLETELY RE-WRITTEN OR NOMINATED FOR DELETION! It is pathetic! Roz Lipchitz (talk) 19:44, 18 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

Hi Roz, I don't know anything about this topic but I did do some copyediting on the text that was already written a while ago so your comment appeared on my watchlist. Are there any constructive suggestions or particular problems you could comment on so I can go back and improve the article when I get a moment? Personally, I wonder about its notability for an encyclopaedia but I suppose there are worse. Regards, Myrtle. Myrtlegroggins (talk) 22:15, 20 October 2015 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 5 external links on Anthony Pellicano. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:50, 29 February 2016 (UTC)Reply

External links modified edit

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Anthony Pellicano. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:20, 15 October 2016 (UTC)Reply