1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Let no good deed go unpunished

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by sabirk, Aug 12, 2005.

  1. sabirk

    sabirk Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 1999
    Messages:
    494
    Likes Received:
    2
    http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/ae/tv/3307916

    Lawsuit says orphans forced out of Makeover home
    Associated Press


    LOS ANGELES — Five orphaned siblings who moved into a new dream home on the hit ABC television show Extreme Makeover: Home Edition are suing the network, the company that built the house and the couple who took them in after their parents died.

    The children range in age from 15 to 22. They claim that after Extreme Makeover built a new nine-bedroom mansion for them to live in with Phil and Loki Leomiti, the Leomitis engaged in "an orchestrated campaign" to drive them away by insulting them and treating them poorly.

    The children ultimately moved out of the Leomitis' home in Santa Fe Springs, a small city southeast of Los Angeles, and are living separately with friends, said Charles Higgins II, the eldest sibling.

    Their complaint, which was filed Wednesday, alleges fraud and breach of contract. It seeks unspecified compensatory and punitive damages.

    "What we're really seeing is the collision between reality TV and the perception reality TV seeks to create in the minds of the general public," said their lawyer, Patrick Mesisca.

    ABC said in a statement that "It is important to note that the episode was about the rebuilding of the Leomiti family's existing home to accommodate the inclusion of the five Higgins siblings, whom the Leomitis had invited into their lives following the death of their parents."

    People who answered the phone at the Leomitis' home initially said the couple had no comment and later referred questions to ABC and to Endemol USA, the television show's production company. Endemol publicist Melissa Armstrong said the company had not yet reviewed the claim.

    The parents of the Higgins children died 10 weeks apart in the spring of 2004 — the mother of breast cancer and the father of heart failure. The Leomitis, who knew the children from church, opened their home to them in July 2004, according to the lawsuit.

    Producers of Extreme Makeover learned of the children's plight from a television newscast.

    Workers demolished the Leomitis' house in February and then built the new one. Extreme Makeover producers arranged for the siblings to receive cars, groceries, computers, stereos and other gifts.

    The builder, Pardee Homes, paid off the mortgage on the new house but the Leomitis retained the title, according to the lawsuit. Around the time the episode first aired in late March, the siblings moved out.

    Mesisca, the attorney, acknowledged Wednesday that the siblings were never promised a house in writing. But the network's statements and actions could legally be considered a promise, he said

    "We were promised a home," said Charles Higgins II. "They broke that promise.".


    Um, how about being grateful for any generosity you were shown by ABC and the Leomitis family for taking you in.

    What are your thoughts?
     
  2. MadMax

    MadMax Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    73,094
    Likes Received:
    18,924
    too many lawyers! ;)
     
  3. Ottomaton

    Ottomaton Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2000
    Messages:
    18,222
    Likes Received:
    13,423
    More proof that reality TV is the spawn of Satan.
     
  4. MadMax

    MadMax Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    73,094
    Likes Received:
    18,924
    normally i would agree..but i don't see what ABC did wrong here.
     
  5. MartianMan

    MartianMan Contributing Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    Messages:
    1,745
    Likes Received:
    3
    I think it is just the different perspectives.

    Children - sees it as getting a house that's built FOR THEM.
    Adults - see it as getting a house for allowing the children to stay with them
    ABC- sees a great tv show.

    All in all, I would say it's mainly the parent's fault. They allowed themselves to be given a house by ABC even though they didn't want to keep the children. They exploited ABC's offer. The parents knew the only reason they were getting a house was because they brought in the orphans. Then they kicked the orphans out. That is ****ed up.

    ABC should have made sure the adults agree to keep the children, but I guess it was assumed.
     
  6. giddyup

    giddyup Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Jan 24, 2002
    Messages:
    20,464
    Likes Received:
    488
    Does anybody know when they are going to re-broadcast this episode? :D

    I think it is a shame that ABC has been dragged into this. Boy, a little material sure turned those people bad...
     
  7. MadMax

    MadMax Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 1999
    Messages:
    73,094
    Likes Received:
    18,924
    i think you're reading too much into this. we don't know what exactly caused them all to leave. we're hearing ONE side of the story. we don't know that they kicked the orphans out. if they did, we don't know why they did. there may be a damn good reason. you're assuming the parents did this whole thing tricking ABC and the kids...that this was their plan from the beginning. i doubt it.

    the parents had their own house razed to the ground...you bet your ass the title was in their name.

    ABC can't guarantee relationships will work out after the fact...they can't force families to stay together. The kids were given tons of personal items as well. That's not a substitute for a house...but absent further information on what really happened here, it's all a game of speculation.
     
  8. MartianMan

    MartianMan Contributing Member

    Joined:
    May 2, 2005
    Messages:
    1,745
    Likes Received:
    3
    of course i'm speculating. This is a discussion forum isn't it?
     
  9. thadeus

    thadeus Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2003
    Messages:
    8,313
    Likes Received:
    726
    I don't have my mind made up on this type of 'charity' TV.

    It's exploitation of the poor by the media, but it does accomplish some nice things for a select few of the po' folk. (I'm of the opinion that the conditions that allow for multi-billion dollar media are the same conditions that make charity necessary in the first place - so I'm leaning more towards the "exploitation" angle).

    Unfortunately, like the lottery, I bet it gives a lot of other poor people a completely unrealistic sense of hope, and even the weakest money-hope makes people (collectively) far too complacent.

    So, I'm not sure.

    In this particular instance - I don't know precisely what happened, but it's a shame that it did.
     
  10. Ottomaton

    Ottomaton Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2000
    Messages:
    18,222
    Likes Received:
    13,423
    My particular problem is that these things always degenerate into a display of the most sordid side of human nature. Sort of like bringing the Jerry Springer out of the studio.

    As an interesting side, every one of the criminals who appear on Cops has to sign a release form. All of those drunken wife-beaters actually signed something that allowed the footage of them beating their wife in a drunken stupor to be shown on the show. Sometimes, aparently they do it for semi-legitimate reasons, such as a drunk driver who does iit as part of the AA process, but more often than not these people just don't care and want to get on TV.

    Things like that leave me feeling almost dirty. I'm convinced that the goal of all reality TV is to show as much "human drama" as possible, which means suffering, degradation, and conflict. The granddaddy of all of this is "The Real World" on MTV. If you can force yourself to watch, ask yourself if they could possibly find a group of people more likely to explode.

    The only reason that this is done is because it's cheaper to film real suffering than to pay actors and writers to create a dramatic show.

    Human unhappiness = greater profit margin.

    That's the simple equation for reality TV. Any benefit in human terms is incidental to the TV executives.

    If anybody has ever seen the movie Network it almost like the TV people thought it was a guide for how to proceed, not a satire.
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now