TMZ Live - 10/28/26

Welcome to TMZ live. There is a reason for a separation today. Charles has finally had enough. He has. I don't have any scurvy. There's nothing. Harvey is just a severe hypochondriac. And so he has banished me away from him, which is why he went to the emergency room. Anyway, we are going to start with HIPAA. Hello. We are going to start with one of the most fascinating cases I have seen in a long time. There is a celebrity in England who is the subject of a possible article by two British publications that would show allegations that this celebrity has engaged in sexual misconduct involving women. Yeah, ITN and The Guardian are apparently ready to publish a story about these allegations that women are claiming, making allegations that this celebrity, this male celebrity, has been using his power, his influence as someone famous to groom and sexually have sexual misconduct against several women over the years. Now, the now the twist, the celebrity has said that if these articles are published, he will commit suicide. And that apparently is not just an idle threat, because there were there was a possible article that was going to come out several months ago and he attempted suicide. He was hospitalized and then attempted suicide a second time. His lawyer is now saying that if these articles are published by ITV and The Guardian, he will kill himself. Right. So his name has not been out there at this point, but apparently these two publications are ready to put his name out there. And the judge is now hearing arguments on this as to whether or not his name should be revealed and whether these articles can be published. Harvey, you should explain that in the UK their privacy laws are much stricter than than what we have in this country um and the judge while waiting to make this decision has actually warned these publications and any others that they should not put this person's name out there even though there is some speculation going on on the internet already well so um the consequences are big here because in England, if a judge were to rule that these articles cannot be published and the publications defied the judge, the editors, the reporters could go to jail, to prison for two years. So we are really honored to have a barrister from England who specializes in defamation and privacy, Greg Hallis, who is joining us from England right now. Greg, welcome to TMZ live thanks so much for having me so can you lay out the ground rules here the law here that makes this a horse race okay until um about 25 years ago um england was a sort of a common law country that had um very strict laws of defamation um but uh other than that it had a sort of a general right to freedom of expression that's not as strong as the First Amendment but um against that, it also had absolutely no privacy law at all. And the huge thing that happened just over a quarter of a century ago is that Tony Blair's government passed the Human Rights Act. And it brought into English law, as it is in the laws of almost all European countries, the European Convention on Human Rights. And this is sort of like the Bill of Rights for Europe. There is a right to freedom of expression in there. It's Article 10. But there was a right in there that had hitherto not been known to English law, which is the right to a private and family life in Article 8. And so what we've seen over the last 25 years is celebrities and non-celebrities bringing cases against the newspapers and saying, this information that you want to publish about me is private information. It would have a dreadful effect on my private life were you to publish it. And the press saying that we have a right to freedom of expression. And so the Article 8 right to privacy is balanced against the Article 10 right, and the judge has to decide who should win. And there have been many of those cases. And that's pretty much the way that privacy law works all across Europe. There are different bells and whistles, but ultimately, the balancing of these two qualified convention rights, Article 8 to privacy, Article 10 to freedom of expression is really at the crux of everything. And this arises because the convention rights don't bind private parties, but they bind all public authorities, all emanations of the state and the courts are emanations of the state. So someone brings the case in front of the court and the court has got to, because it's part of the state, it's got to look out for the Article 10 rights of the press, but it's also got to look out for the Article 8 privacy rights of the celebrity. And so it tries to balance which matters more. So, Greg, I'm sorry if I could just ask one quick question. The Article 8 rights, these only apply to people who are public figures, or is it for everyone? Everybody has an Article 8 right to a private and family life. And the test is whether or not the information that the press want to publish is the sort of information in which any individual objectively would have a reasonable expectation of privacy. So it tends to cover things like sexual behavior. It tends to cover things like your medical information. It can also concern things that happened within a domestic setting, within your family life. Most radically, the Supreme Court a couple of years ago in a case called ZXC held that there was normally a reasonable expectation of privacy in the fact that you're being investigated by the authorities such as the police. And that Article 8 right to privacy only falls away when you actually get charged, when charges are brought to the court. So as far as we know, there is no criminal investigation, at least what's surfaced so far. So if there's no criminal investigation, and this is only at most a civil lawsuit or allegations and it's not even that at this point right or allegations made by women what you seem to be saying is that you look at the sexual conduct of somebody which is the basis of this as well as medical information and that would kind of align with his mental health so does it feel like this is being weighted toward the celebrity based on the calculus if this were a sort of regular privacy case and someone obviously is accused that has denied these allegations but the allegation is is sexual wrongdoing or wrongdoing arising out of sexual relationships i think the court would find relatively quickly that sexual behavior falls within the privacy right but where it's someone who's being accused apparently by multiple complainants of misconduct normally you know in a straightforward privacy case unless there was a police investigation that was very sensitive, you would normally expect the press's free expression rights to win there. What makes this case somewhat remarkable is that because the celebrity in question has indicated that they would try to commit suicide, this takes this out of the normal run of privacy cases and it invokes a different right under the convention, which is Article 2. So Article 2 is the right to life. It's the obligation on the state not to kill you, except in very extreme circumstances, but also to protect you from things that would kill you. It's one of the protections that people have against being killed when they're in state custody. If they're in prison, the state has an obligation to protect them from being killed, including by other inmates. They have an obligation towards those who are detained in mental hospitals or even those who are voluntarily in mental hospitals against the risk of suicide. So there are circumstances where the state has to protect someone's life where they've assumed responsibility for it. And what this celebrity is doing is saying my risk of suicide means that the state's responsibility to protect me from being killed, even by myself, is engaged by me bringing this previous case to the court. But Greg, and correct me if I'm wrong, the argument from ITN and The Guardian is that there is a public interest in them putting this person's name out there because he is potentially a danger to others in the public. If indeed the allegations that are being made against him are true, then the public would have an interest in knowing that this person is out there and a potential danger. that that is a plank of their argument and it would be very very important on the article 8 arguments and i think it would be victorious in respect of the article 8 privacy rights alone i think that public interest is so strong that if it were just article 8 i think the guardian and itn would likely prevail the difficulty with the celebrity relying on article 8 is that it's a bit different to the others so article 8 and 10 in the european jurisprudence are both qualified rights they're not absolute you have to protect privacy but there are exceptions including for freedom of expression and certainly freedom of expression is important but there are some exceptions to it including for the right to privacy that's why you get the balance traditionally in the European jurisprudence Article 2 the right to life is considered an absolute uh there's not normally a balancing right against any other rights because it's so important and this is um One of the reasons that probably the argument has been framed in this way is that if the certainty makes good that there really is factually a real and immediate risk that he will kill himself as a result of that, if he can also establish that merely because the court knows about it and could stop publication, that the state has a responsibility under Article 2 to prevent that suicide, then questions of how strong the public interest is wouldn't normally come into the balance on an Article 2 question um and that's what i think is making a lot of people very nervous yeah boy this is i gotta say this is so fascinating we cannot thank you enough for coming on and explaining this yeah yeah and um and by the way as we're talking right now uh the hearing is over and the judge is kind of noodling over what to do but um this noodling over all the things that Greg just explained yeah he's got to weigh those three articles and figure out which one is most important yeah wow Greg thank you so much really really appreciate it my pleasure coming up well Meghan Markle's family is being torn apart by these allegations that her brother made against her father Thomas Markle now there's someone else weighing in and what's interesting here, this person is Samantha's daughter. It seems like everybody but Samantha is lining up against Thomas Sr. Be right back. Well, Meghan Markle's family is being torn apart by these allegations that her brother made against her father, Thomas Markle. You know, of course, her brother, Thomas Jr., claims that he found a huge stash of child pornography at Thomas Markle's home in the Philippines, which is now being investigated. Now, Samantha Markle has said that she does not believe this. She thinks that her brother is just trying to destroy her father, possibly over a money dispute. And Meghan hasn't said squarely that she believes it, but she's insinuated that something doesn't feel right. We should also say, though, that there were allegations that Thomas moved to the Philippines so he could have sex with 12-year-olds, and he denies that. But apparently, that was serious enough that a letter was written that ended up in Meghan Markle's hands in London in 2019. And she was aware of the allegations and wanted to keep him as far away from her and her kids, ultimately, as she possibly could. Right. So that's what Megan has said about that, that she wanted to keep the kids away from from her father. Now, there's someone else weighing in. And what's interesting here, this person is Samantha's daughter. Now, Samantha said she doesn't believe the allegations. Yet Samantha's daughter, Noel, seems to side more with her uncle, Thomas Jr., because this is what she said about the allegations. Maybe it was a vibe that I subconsciously got. Something's not right about a person, and you don't actively register it. But your body tells you when something's off. It doesn't surprise me. The more and more I think about it, it just doesn't. I don't know why it's not a surprise. It's really interesting, and it seems like everybody but Samantha is lining up against Thomas Sr. Yeah. And now the question, what's going to happen? And the FBI is investigating the allegations of child porn stashed in the Philippines. As for this whole thing about a letter going to Meghan, the authorities gave it to her in 2019. It was the authorities in England. Right. And England had no jurisdiction because he never lived there. They never lived there, never allegedly received any child porn there. There's nothing like that. The Philippine authorities are taking the lead. U.S. authorities said they're going to cooperate with the Philippines, but also launch an investigation if anything illegal happened in the United States. But to your point about jurisdiction, if this happened in the Philippines, and I think that's the only place there's any allegations of wrongdoing, that's who would lead the investigation. So do you think that the letter going to Meghan was really about sort of embarrassing Thomas in front of the royals? It seems that way. Well, no, I see it differently. What I see is that, you know, authorities try and protect the royal family. And if they have information that Harry's soon-to-be wife was... Were they not married in 2019? No, I think it was the year they got married. That's my recollection. Pardon me? So it was the year after they got married. The year after they got married. So she was part of the royal family. And I think you give the royal family a heads up if they've got information about her father. But what information are we talking about here? I mean, he has denied this. He says they're all sick lies. That's what Thomas has said about these allegations. It's alleged by his son they have a fractious relationship that he had found a stash of child porn. To our knowledge, there's no other information that anybody's relying upon except for Thomas Jr.'s statements against his father. Except how did this letter get written? That's the question. I don't know who wrote it. Because Thomas Jr. hadn't made the allegation then. He had not made it; it was years before. So this was Thomas Sr.'s ex-wife? who wrote the letter, right, that's right, that's right, so it's, I wouldn't know what they're basing it on, but yeah, that's, again, I'm not saying, I'm not saying whether these allegations are true or false, because I don't know, what I do know is that authorities in England protect the royal family when they can, and if they get a letter like that, they want to give them a heads up, so at least they can make a decision. Laura Clare from Australia, look, as an Aussie, I live in close proximity to these Asian countries and places like the Philippines, Cambodia, Thailand, they have high activity of pedophilia. It's well known. And, you know, hearing about an old white guy getting accused of child sex abuse living in the Philippines, it's quite common, unfortunately. I think it's good that Noelle has come out and, you know, gone against Samantha's views. I don't think you want to be defending an accused pedo in public to be honest well we as we we stated yes he has been accused but Thomas Markel denies uh that this is true what his son has said savannah chrisley uh has some big news that she wants to share um and we are also learning about her fiance who has a past that is weirdly tied to her father um you know of course that Todd Chrisley uh did a stint in federal prison before he was pardoned by President, before he was pardoned, and there was someone else in that same prison down in Florida Pensacola with him and that would be Jason Galanis who is now the fiance of Savannah Chrisley so let me get let me get this straight so her fiance and her dad were in the same prison at the same time and both got out thanks to the generosity of president Trump. And also thanks to Savannah sucking up to President Trump in order to get, I shouldn't say sucking up, sorry, doing things to help his campaign. When Trump got nominated in 2024, clearly he paid her back well. But the idea, by the way, I'm sorry, we forgot the good news. The good news is that Jason and Savannah are expecting, and she posted a bunch of videos celebrating that um all right there we got that stuff out of the way i know you you don't care about the baby well no it is fascinating because how did she meet him did she meet him through her did her dad say i met this nice guy in prison that you might like i mean i don't think so it doesn't sound like todd is the one who made the introduction hey hey now i'm gonna do do we know how they met that's how that's what we're trying to figure out We know for a fact that they were in the same prison in Pensacola, Florida for at least seven months. Their time overlapped. We don't know whether they had an actual, like, friendship inside the prison. But it's interesting that she would then, that he would, or they would both come out of the prison. And then he would start dating Todd's daughter. So he was dating her. And he's about the same age as Todd, by the way. Did he know her before prison? No. Before he got out of prison? He knew her after he got out of prison. After he got out of prison. And then we started getting photos of her in the Cayman Islands and all over the place with this mystery man. And for months, no one could identify him because every shot we got wouldn't show a clear picture of his face. Finally, yesterday, when they make the announcement that they're not only engaged but also expecting a child, people were able to piece together this is who he is. And he got pardoned after he started dating Savannah. Correct. Now, what's also- Because there's a Hunter Biden twist to this. Yes, the plot twist is that the reason that Jason was in the prison had to do with his former business partner, Hunter Biden. And Donald Trump hates Hunter Biden. Right, so why would he pardon him? And so that's why it's feeling like Savannah, who had a lot of power, clearly, because she got her parents pardoned- Could be. She went to Trump and said, there's this dude I'm dating, and I know there's a Hunter thing, but- But apparently he flipped on Hunter. So I think that would make him... That helped. Yeah, that would put him in a positive light with the president. Wow, this is the definition of a tangled web. Yeah, that Thanksgiving is going to be awesome. Coming up... I did not expect that it would be something we'd be talking about in relation to the midterm elections. Thirst traps. Thank God, finally we have some young, energetic, and yes, a little hot candidates out there. Be right back. TMZ's got every freaking thing big celebs big stories big events Donald Rollins took TMZ DC on a city tour you know what the irony of this is a black man takes a white person to the White House so Harvey you know we talk about thirst traps quite often on the show usually referring to uh actors actresses singers and things that they post that are very clearly just for attention look at my body, I'm hot. I did not expect that it would be something we'd be talking about in relation to the midterm elections. But there is a feeling that one of the parties is relying heavily on thirst traps. That would be the Democrats. Now, I feel like using this term is kind of offensive to politicians who just happen to be good looking. But if it's a real thirst trap, then what you're saying is they're only running because they're good-looking. That doesn't mean, no, no, no. They can have all the credentials, but looks matter. At least that's what- I mean, they're not showing up at rallies like shirtless or anything. Not yet, anyway. Yeah. But joining us now to discuss the thirst traps going on or not in the Democratic Party, our good friend, a Democratic strategist, Liz Smith. Welcome back to TMZ Live. Great. Thanks for having me. Good to see you, Harvey and Charles. First of all, everybody should know that Liz is a star in a Democratic circle. She ran Pete Buttigieg's presidential campaign. She is the real deal. So look, I am old enough to remember that it mattered in 1960 with John Kennedy versus Richard Nixon. It mattered. And that debate showed the contrast. And a lot of people think that's why he won. So this is nothing new. It just seems like it's bigger than ever. That's at least my perspective. What's yours? Well, part of the problem here is that the Democratic Party sort of became the party of the nursing home right we were seen as old and boring all of our leaders were in their 80s and thank god finally we have some young energetic and yes a little hot candidates out there and you know politics is downstream of culture and thirst traps have become the lingua franca of the internet so you're gonna sort of see them trickle into politics a little bit but one thing i'd say is is it's one thing for people to decide to thirst over you and another thing for you to try to force them to thirst over you. So to Charles' point earlier, I think it's better if it's more organic and you just have candidates who look good or fit or younger out there versus going out there and setting up a tripod while you're working out. So Liz, is it organic if our TMZ DC crew runs into, say, Abdul El-Sayed or maybe Wes Moore and one of the first things that they're very anxious to talk about is their workout and how much they bench and what their their workout regimen is is that organic or is that them sort of putting it out there that hey look at me i'm i'm a fit guy i look good and i'm i'm gonna talk about it i'm a big believer in politics of showing not telling and i don't think Wes Moore needs to be going out and telling anyone that he spends a lot of time in the gym for anyone who's seen a photo of him. So, um, look, I think it's very evident with these guys and it's a really good thing for the democratic party that instead of being called old, we're being called hot. That's true. And by the way, this is not limited in any way, shape or form to men. I mean, people are talking about AOC, um, not wholly because of substance, but also just because of the way she presents herself that she really is um very good looking if i can say um i do have a question about it's it doesn't go to looks as much as it does i guess just attraction that one of the things that's being said about john ossoff and it really has to do with a clip that our Charlie shot of him at the airport is the internet started exploding saying this guy's got BDE. And we actually asked him about it and he kind of deflected it. But that's an attractive quality for a politician who is projecting strength. Yes. And look, let me be serious here for a second. When I listen to focus groups or, you know, listen to voters talking about what they want from the Democratic Party right now, they want new, fresh people, even the oldest voters oftentimes the oldest voters are the sickest of how old our party has become and so these younger candidates whether it's AOC or John Ossoff or you know a Pete Buttigieg or Wes Moore these younger candidates who project more vitality look great in what they're wearing look great in photos have a lot of energy on the campaign trail can like do marathon interviews and get up there and give these great speeches and inspire people that's what we need more of in our party. And I think that's very much connected to what we're seeing with, you know, a lot of people thirsting over these guys and gals on the Internet. So, Harvey, to your point about Nixon and Kennedy, it feels like what we're talking about, Liz, here is that this is just the pendulum swinging back the other way because we've had a couple of presidents or the last three who are really really old really really old yes and it speaks to a hunger in among the american people for new voices a next generation of leadership because my god like how many 80 year olds can we have running this country we need to hand the torch off to the next generation and people Democrats, Republicans, Independents are saying that but i really really really hear that most among Democrats because of their frustration with the 2024 election. And the good news is this. We have so many young, exciting candidates who we can, yes, thirst over and get excited for in 2026 and hopefully in 2028. Final question. The Democrats seem to have this area cornered with good looking candidates. Not all. I mean, there are some Republicans, obviously. I mean, And the president's been talking about a lot of attractive butts That's my question on the GOP side is is Trump doing this to try and get in the game on good looking politicians? Because it feels on the surface really bizarre that he's talking about candidates asses, but he's talking about it every day. Is it because he's trying to get in on that? I'm really serious. No, I hear you. I hear. I think it's a couple of things. Like, I think we all know that the president is a pretty superficial guy. Right. It seems like the only qualification he sometimes has for spokesperson jobs is how good do you look on camera? So I think that's part of it. And the second thing is, yes, he understands that when you talk about these things, that it breaks through. It goes beyond the political press. It gets attention. And it highlights that, yeah, that they have some young, exciting candidates on their side. But I don't know how much strategy really goes into everything that he says. Fair. Fair. That's fair. We love having you on, Liz. Thank you so much. Great talking thanks for having me, Liz. Coming up. We told you a couple of weeks ago about Donna Mills jumping on OnlyFans. And by the way, it is a success. She is not going full throttle, but somebody else is. The newest member of OnlyFans is Lamar Odom. Be right back. Welcome back to TMZ Live. So we told you a couple of weeks ago about Donna Mills jumping on OnlyFans. And by the way, she is doing really, really well. It is a success. She is not going full throttle, but somebody else is. The newest member of OnlyFans is Lamar Odom. And Lamar Odom of basketball fame, of Khloe Kardashian fame, of Bunny Ranch fame, He is now on OnlyFans. Not the most shocking news. So what we're told is Lamar is going to be doing some risque content. Because my thing is a lot of time when these celebrities jump on OnlyFans, I feel like it's kind of a cash grab. Because they say, oh, I'm going on OnlyFans. Well, it is a cash grab. Well, regardless it is, but you expect, oh, there's going to be sexual content on it. And I feel like a lot of celebrities actually don't do that. We're being told he is going to be doing some risque stuff. His girlfriend is also going on OnlyFans. And so I would assume there's going to be some collaboration there as well. I think there's a difference between, you know, certain celebs like Donna Mills, obviously, and others, and Lamar. Because, look, Lamar was a Class A basketball player, but at the same time, he was as famous for the Bunny Ranch, for the ODs. Dating the Kardashians. Dating Khloe, cheating on Khloe, you know, stories that were bigger than stories about his basketball career. For sure. And so people think of him in that universe. So what he's kind of doing is saying, well, as long as you're thinking of me that way, I'm going to make some money out of it. Might as well cash out on it. My thing is, I don't know the statistics on this, but do guys do as well as girls on OnlyFans? I don't think so. Like, I just don't think of anyone I can think of that, like, a guy that's gone on to OnlyFans that actually kills it. I think it depends on what audience you're going for. What do you mean by that? I think that for straight audiences, guys probably don't. For gay audiences, I think they probably do. Yeah, yeah, you could be right. But Lamar, it's pretty clear what's going on. The question is, is this solely between him and his girlfriend, which he's not said? He has not. No, they've kind of left that open to interpretation. By her joining OnlyFans, it makes me think they're collabing. Also, as far as I know, they're not like in an open relationship. So I don't think it's like an Adam 22, Lena the Plug situation where they're bringing other people in. But who knows? Maybe that's the... I swear, I'm not trying to throw shade, but he was also in a committed relationship with Khloe. Yeah, that's true. That is true. So you never know. Hey, it's Priscilla from Los Angeles. Did anybody ask Lamar Odom to create an OnlyFans? No, but should that stop him from creating one? Absolutely not. If he likes it, I love it. Let Lamar Odom live out his Girls Gone Wild dreams. If he could make it in the NBA, he can make it anywhere. Now, will I be subscribing? Absolutely not. But will I be watching the clips as they come across my timeline? Absolutely. Okay, so Katie Zachariah had her five minutes of fame, actually five days, before Donald Trump booted her from the press room. And she is now speaking out loud about it. She was gracious at first, saying, what an honor, blah, blah, blah. Now she's casting blame. I'm just as perplexed about what happened specifically with Sean Hannity. Because I had had a very friendly rapport with Sean, and he had even made very backing statements about me on Tuesday, October 13th, really coming to my defense, I was not prepared for the hostility that I received. If you don't go on Fox that night, if you don't do that, you're scheduled to fly out with the president to, I think, Georgia on Friday. Are you still press secretary tonight? I would hope so, and I likely think I would be, Rob, but I can't know what would have happened otherwise, though it would be very likely. It would be impossible. There is no way she could have survived as press secretary. So she's delusional there. But the bigger thing is Sean Hannity. So she's saying Sean Hannity was brutal to her. A, if you watched it, he wasn't really brutal. He was just asking her questions. No, it wasn't a softball interview, but they were fair questions. They were fair questions. B, Sean Hannity would not have asked that without knowing, getting some intel from Trump. She was done already. He and Trump are like this. Right. Sean Hannity and Trump talk all the time. I completely agree and Sean Hannity knew, I believe, when he did that interview that Donald Trump had. There's there's no way that Hannity would have given her that same interview, even though I think he was fair if he knew that Trump wanted to keep her. I completely agree. She was done by that point. You don't think that Sean pulled a little rope-a-dope on her? I don't think so. I mean, he went to Trump. She said that she said earlier that day they'd been speaking and he was supportive of her and that he was all about her being press secretary. He asked about the lawyer question and then the lawyer. I'm just saying, listen, I'm agreeing with you guys that he wouldn't do it without a conversation with the president. I'm just saying to hear her describe how Sean spoke to her before the interview felt to me like it was kind of a there was a setup. Well, he wouldn't be, if that's true, it wouldn't have been the first, you know, person in news who kind of lured somebody in, you know, and then asked some questions. But his questions weren't that hard. They were legit questions. I agree. I'm sorry. Go ahead, Charles. No, I agree. They were legit questions. Her issue, I'll tell you, though, and I know this is not my role here, I'm kind of role play. Her issue is thinking that that's what doomed her. Her first performance was awful, and we've got to be honest about that. And she couldn't have done the job. Right. That's the thing. If she was good, she would have survived it. And the idea that she thinks she would have been press secretary were it not for the shot, that's just crazy. Exactly. She was not, I mean, who thinks she was a good press secretary? Nobody, nobody. It just was bad casting. Well, she does. Would she have gotten a little better? Maybe. But she wasn't good. Coming up, signed, sealed, delivered, get out. That is what a former girlfriend of Stevie Wonder is saying. Actually, she was his fiancé at the time. She, we're told, is absolutely shocked by this, because as far as Carmen thought, she thought everything was fine between them. Be right back. Signed, sealed, delivered, get out. That is what a former girlfriend of Stevie Wonder is saying. Actually, she was his fiancé at the time. Carmen Everson, we reported that we broke the story last week that Stevie Wonder sent her an eviction notice, essentially evicting her from a home where she has lived for decades now. After their relationship ended, they were still friendly enough that Stevie said, fine, you can live in this house. Now, she doesn't have a deed, but Stevie says that he was paying for the house and she had to pay for utilities. But apparently things went south according to what he filed with the courts. Things went south because she wasn't allowing people to come on the property for insurance purposes. So he evicted her. She, we're told, is absolutely shocked by this because as far as Carmen thought, she thought everything was fine between them. Yeah, but the question is, why on earth would she not? I mean, if it's letting somebody in for repairs or whatever else, you're getting a free ride, lady. So, you know, do the little thing you have to do in order to stay there. But, you know, at a point, you know, she's not a squatter because she doesn't own the property. She didn't pay property taxes. So she's like a tenant. And he's going to get her out. I have to tell you, it doesn't feel that way to Carmen Everson. She lived there for 40 years. Her mother passed away in the house. This is a woman who it starts to feel like your home after 40 years, not like it is. Yes, but you don't feel like a tenant necessarily. So these guys wanted access to the property for insurance purposes. And she's like, I get off my property as if it as if it's hers. You're right. Legally, it is not hers. He was allowing her to stay there rent free for a number of decades. People have homes. People have homes that they don't own. And when you don't own it, you have a landlord and there are certain responsibilities. She is living there rent-free, and she doesn't have to do anything in terms of paying or fixing or whatnot. But then when the landlord says, I need to get somebody in to either help with taxes or insurance. I got a few minutes for termites. I got stuff to do. Sorry, lady. I mean, I know you were there for 40 years, but if you couldn't do that. You're right. It's his asset, but this is his former fiancée, too. This is someone who he had a romantic relationship with for a period of time. He just called to say, get out. Oh, wow. You beat me to it. Look, I even had a prop. Bad juju if you're superstitious. Rhonda Croton on Hudson, New York. I love Stevie Wonder, but he's out of pocket for this one. He agreed nearly 40 years ago to let his ex-fiance live rent-free without a written lease, and now he expects her to go start paying rent somewhere else? That's outrageous. But it's on her. All she had to do was let some guy in to fix whatever. I mean, Harvey, wouldn't you say that it would have benefited not only Carmen but Stevie if they had a written lease, right? Even if the lease said you don't have to pay rent, but if you had some written agreement. If you would read the People's Court guide on how to tell it to the judge, you would learn about oral leases and leases that don't provide. And I would love to read that if anybody actually published that book anymore. That book is available on eBay for a small fortune. For a small, like, 25 cents, whatever you got. Coming up. Jay-Z was out in New York City yesterday, and we got a chance to talk to him about the Super Bowl halftime show, which he'll be doing. There are all sorts of questions. Any pressure preparing for the Super Bowl? No, no pressure. Oh, I know that's right. No pressure. Be right back. so we got the man of the hour uh actually the man of the next few months as far as NFL fans are concerned Jay-Z uh was out in New York City yesterday and we got to chance got a chance to talk to him about the Super Bowl halftime show which he'll be doing there are all sorts of questions to ask Jay about one in particular right well i mean we'll say this he probably doesn't have the showdown right he doesn't have the set list he doesn't have the guests except maybe one i'm thinking he probably does have that but close to home but Salia ran into him and asked him about putting this show together jay any pressure for preparing for the Super Bowl i don't have pressure oh i know that's right no pressure what's the preparation like same as always i know that's right all right thank you so much i'm excited you know you know yeah exactly no one wants to see Beyonce at this Jay-Z halftime show whether they do or don't I want to hear whether he's planning on top she's not going to do that she's not going to step on his moment he's already done it three times this is his 30th anniversary year he's been on tour this is his moment she's going to let him have the moment she's coming out no she's not she's coming out we should bet she's coming out infinity I infinity is diabolical like what grow up infinity what she's not coming out hi i'm zaria i'm from new jersey um i think all the backlash jay-z is receiving is very disingenuous i think it's disturbing to ignore his legacy and what he's put in for hip-hop for the last 30 years if you don't like him you don't have to watch it but let's not act like jay-z isn't jay-z he's totally yeah exactly nobody says nobody says He doesn't need to have anybody out there on the stage with him. Nobody says he's not deserving of this. Nobody. It's just weird that he's picking himself. That's the only thing. Oh, come on. Coming up. The house Richard Simmons lived in for a long, long time has finally sold for $3.8 million. That $3.8 million might sound like a deal in Beverly Hills, except it's pretty much a teardown. Be right back. So the house Richard Simmons lived in for a long, long time has finally sold after numerous price reductions. It's a house in the Hollywood Hills. It sold for $3.8 million. It was sort of like Tara. I mean, that's the way he kind of designed it from Gone with the Wind. That $3.8 million might sound like a deal in Beverly Hills, except it's pretty much a teardown and I don't say that to be disrespectful it is to Richard but it kind of is he lived there for a long time and clearly didn't update things and I think whoever bought this is probably just gonna pretty much start over I mean that 3.8 million is just for the land yep okay so we're about to end I just I want to like publicly apologize for talking about Charles and suggesting he had scurvy. However, I do have this. Thank you. Here's the medications that you can take that will probably cure whatever it is. This is out of pocket. This is way out of pocket. You're throwing Advil at me. I'm throwing as much as I can. This is ridiculous. Pray for Charles. We'll see you tomorrow. Triple antibiotic? What?