It was submitted under the name “BM” (firstname.lastname@example.org). We will let readers judge whether asking why Sharon Murphy did not summon medical attention in the case of both Brittany and Simon is a “disgrace to Brittany’s memory”. As for “Let her loved ones move on with their lives” - what do they think the point of this blog is? The only loved one visible is her father, who approves of it..
This blog is a disgrace to Brittany Murphy’s memory. No one knows what happened and we never will. Let her loved ones move on with their lives, and most importantly, let Brittany Murphy rest in peace! Enough is enough
So I just realized that I put my comment in the wrong place. Oops. :/ But let me try again. I wanted to show my appreciation for this blog, and just say that I absolutely love it. I hope that Britt can finally get the justice she rightfully deserves once and for all. I didn’t know until recently that she said “Mom, I’m dying. I love you” and that she suffered so much within her last few hours, yet no one did anything to help her. Hearing that just broke my heart, and I believe that if they would have just done something to help her, she’d probably still be here. It’s not right that her mother or husband just sat there while she suffered. :/ Keep up the good work! You have a huge fanbase behind you, supporting your cause and we will get her the justice she deserves! :)
Sharon Murphy is the source http://www.peteava.ro/id-485817-sharon-murphy-si-simon-monjack-invitati-la-larry-king-live
It was reported last Thursday by Eonline, that Angelo Bertolotti’s case against the LA County Coroner’s Office has been dismissed due to non attendance by Mr Bertolotti or his attorney at a hearing. The story has been picked up by other outlets such as http://perezhilton.com/2012-07-21-brittany-murphys-dads-lawsuit-thrown-out#.UA3apWHBX6U.
Once again Mr Bertolotti has to endure negative coverage simply for ensuring that investigation of his daughter’s death is duly diligent - why the Coroner’s Office is reluctant to release the hair specimens remains a mystery. Does Perez Hilton seriously imagine that Mr Bertolotti would lose interest and not bother turning up to the hearing which he had waited for for so long? He moved from Florida to LA shortly after Brittany’s death in order to tend her grave and to find answers regarding her death. Brittany and the case dominate his life.
Mr Bertolotti’s attorney in the case, Chance E. Gordon (address below), is not responding to calls. Obviously, if he failed to inform his client of the date of the hearing, there is potential for a malpractice suit which might inhibit Mr. Bertolotti from commenting at this point.
CHANCE E GORDON
5757 WILSHIRE BLVD, STE 636
LOS ANGELES, CA 90036-3686 Tel. (310) 462-9688
When we started this blog, it’s primary purpose was to highlight the negligence of Sharon Murphy and Simon Monjack in not summoning medical attention for Brittany at a point at which she was no longer able to call for herself, and after she had spoken the words “Mom, I’m dying”. I think I can speak for my fellow contributors in saying that none of us seriously considered the possibility of foul play. Nevertheless it has to be acknowledged that it is some considerable time since anything has been heard of Sharon Murphy, while a legal case is proceding calling for the release of samples of Brittany’s hair for independent testing. Are the two matters related, does Sharon fear that she might be incriminated? If the demand for the hair samples is unsuccessful, exhumation is a possibility. Is it really possible that any mother, let alone one known to be as close to her daughter as was Sharon Murphy, would not want to come forward and make her opinion known on the subject? When the blog started, Sharon was employing Roger Neal as her publicist - he has long since dropped her as a client, and gave false contact details for her upon his departure. The only representative Sharon appears to have now is her friend Alex Ben Block, who has written articles supporting her interest while at times not mentioning their acquaintance. While he has answered my emails, he has not seen fit to offer any comment in response to the questions below… (Block’s quotes are taken from The Final Difficult Days of Brittany Murphy )
Q Your article states that Brittany was reluctant to seek medical aid due to fears of bad publicity - why do you think Sharon failed to summon medical aid in Simon’s case as well? His bad reputation was by that stage well-known, and no reports of ill health could possibly have made his job prospects any worse.
Q How is it possible that you have repaired your friendship with Sharon after her angry reponse to the article? When did you last have contact with her? And if you have spoken to her recently, did you discuss the possible exhumation? Does she fear arrest and is that why she is in hiding?
“As it turned out, it was where Brittany and Simon were to die, in surprisingly similar ways, only five months apart.”
Q Why “surprisingly”? It would only be surprising if their deaths were unrelated to lifestyle factors.
What do you think of the suggestion that Brittany might have been murdered?
“I first met Simon shortly after their marriage, when Brittany brought him to our house in Encino for Father’s Day 2007. Simon led the conversation, played piano and went outside to smoke a cigar, which Brittany hurried to light. Simon told us they had to take extreme security precautions because they were under surveillance by helicopters and their phone was bugged. “
Q Do you expect us to believe that Simon did not return to the subject of the surveillance when you interviewed him after Brittany’s death? Was Brittany present when Simon mentioned surveillance? If not, why did you not mention the subject to her, surely you must have wondered if she shared this “delusion”?
“Simon, as many of Brittany’s family members and friends came to believe, had created a web of paranoia around Brittany and used it to separate her from anyone who might have challenged his dominance”
Q Does that include you? Does your opinion of Simon differ from your daughter Hayley’s? She had dinner with him shortly after Brittany’s death, and was also involved in the Brittany Murphy Foundation. You, however, describe him as a sociopath who lied to you about his past.
“Simon’s health, meanwhile, took a sudden turn for the worse in the second year of their marriage after he fell off a ladder during a photo shoot in Los Angeles. That apparently started his seizures, which he also told me were tied to brain tumors.”
Q So do you believe that Simon was, as he claimed, a professional photographer? Why has none of his commercial work surfaced, including the alleged first picture of Brittany to appear in a magazine? Do you believe the ladder story, rather than that Simon’s seizures began as a result of being beaten while in ICE custody?
Q Why will you not repeat publicly your private denial to me that you told Julia Davis and Angelo Bertolotti that you have taped interviews with Simon Monjack in which he discussed surveillance of himself and Brittany? Have you been pressured into keeping quiet on the subject of the Davis case since you attended a screening of “The Terror Within”?
Q Why did your employer The Hollywood Reporter refuse to hand the tapes over, rather than deny their existence?
#brittanymurphy: I posted a response to Alex Ben Block’s Hollywood Reporter article in its comments section - several hours later it was deleted. I’ve had to reconstruct it as the original didn’t save correctly, but what follows makes all the same points in the same tone as the original. Certainly there was no profanity or any kind of insult unless one counts questioning Block’s competence and integrity as a journalist, which I believe is justified in light of the evidence. As I have more space here, I have decided to expand the original post, quoting text from the article as I go….
“Dear Randy, I appreciate your note and attention to my article this week. I am certainly not the publicist for Sharon Murphy although she is a friend of mine.”
That was Alex Ben Block’s reply to me in an email referring to an earlier article. I urge readers of this latest article to bear in mind its disingenuousness regarding Block’s friendship with Sharon Murphy.
So, quoting from and dealing with the article’s points…
“Angelo Bertolotti, who says he is the late actress Brittany Murphy’s biological father”
As opposed to what other kind of father? Brittany was not adopted, neither did Sharon remarry. It seems that Block is joining the eccentric Roger Neal in repeating Sharon’s bizarre assertion that Angelo Bertolotti is not Brittany’s father. Neal is clearly a ludicrous figure, but Block does have a reputation as a serious journalist which I urge him to consider. Angelo is now officially recognized as Brittany’s father on her birth and death certificates, and his name appears on her 2007 will. Their physical resemblance is especially evident in childhood pictures…
…and letters can be found here which clearly imply that Sharon’s sister recognizes Angelo as Brittany’s father.
Sharon’s handwriting, with Brittany adding her own name http://twitpic.com/4deyjw
“Due to the lack of investigative efforts by the Los Angeles Police Department,” says the lawsuit filed Wednesday in L.A. Superior Court, “and the failure to conduct toxicology tests on the specimens” of her hair, Bertolotti believes that “his daughter’s death was incorrectly determined to have been allegedly caused by pneumonia and anemia.”
There are two elements of spin here. First Block uses the term “lawsuit” to imply to an unintelligent audience that Angelo is seeking financial redress whereas in fact he is demanding a course of action - namely that Brittany’s hair samples be tested. Secondly, with this later statement…
Bertolotti says that tests of her hair may show evidence from the toxic mold and that may have been a cause of her death.
…he claims that Angelo supports Sharon’s mold claim (her case absolutely IS financial opportunism incidentally). I challenge Block to produce a direct quote from Angelo in which he alleges Brittany died as a result of toxic mold.
“Sharon Murphy and Bertolotti do not communicate with each other and have not for some years, despite efforts by Bertolotti to do so.”
As Block is in communication with Sharon, he is complicit in obstructing Angelo’s attempts to contact her.
“On Wednesday, a spokesperson for Sharon Murphy said she had no comment, and a call to her lawyers for comment was not returned.”
Since the departure of Roger Neal, the only spokesperson Sharon has is Block himself.
“Sources close to Sharon Murphy say for years prior to her daughter’s passing she discouraged her from having a relationship with Bertolotti,”
So Block’s sources acknowledge that Angelo was unfairly excluded from Brittany’s life.
“and more recently she has raised doubts about whether he is even really Brittany’s biological father, as he adamantly claims.”
And as has been officially recognized, as previously discussed. Why won’t Sharon name Brittany’s father, if he is not Angelo? First she told Roger Neal that the mystery man was dead, then that he was alive but not Angelo.
“Bertolotti has said previously that he was a mobster connected to a New York area crime family earlier in his life and served about 12 years in prison for a variety of charges (all after Brittany was born).
I infer that Block is intending to imply that Sharon was ignorant of Angelo’s background when they met - that is false, she was well acquainted with his family.
“He has said he is now a law-abiding citizen.”
A credible assertion. There has been no charge in recent decades against a man who would obviously be the subject of FBI scrutiny.
“In 2003, the Sun newspaper in London reported: “(Bertolotti) was found guilty of racketeering, being involved in organized crime and was also convicted of a counterfeiting scam. Bertolotti spent three stretches at the Federal Penitentiary in Atlanta in a criminal career said to cover 20 years.”
This is the article to which block refers. The Sun is Britain’s leading tabloid newspaper, and is owned by News International, the British division of Rupert Murdoch’s NewsCorp. News International’s abysmally low journalistic standards were the dominant story of 2011 in Britain, leading to the closure of one of its titles and a parliamentary inquiry which is ongoing. Nobody has ever denied Angelo’s criminal record, but it is worth noting that the tabloid phrase “a source said” translates as “we just made it up”. Ask yourself how the writer could have gained access to a genuine source other than by going through Brittany’s handlers, who would gladly add official authenticity if they were so authorized by her. A celebrity who feels animosity toward a parent will gladly allow a story to that effect in order to punish them, and at the same time generate always-important tabloid publicity. The reason this did not occur in the case of Brittany and Angelo is that there was no such animosity. The shoddiness of the Sun article is illustrated by the writer’s inability even to report even Angelo’s age correctly (as is the case with Block’s article). Note also that Brittany is described as dating Ashton “Hunker”. Citing this laughably inept article does nothing to enhance the credibility of Block’s.
“While he saw Brittany briefly over the years after she moved to Los Angeles as a teenager, says a source, he was not a factor in her life and none of her close friends in L.A. ever met him.” “Bertolotti has said that he did not see Murphy at all after she married Monjack in 2007”
That source being Sharon Murphy no doubt. Despite presenting himself as being like a father to Brittany, Block admits in this article that he himself did not see her much after she got married. Brittany and Simon became reclusive and few people saw them except when Brittany was working. Block also has not met close friends of hers - despite his living locally, whereas Angelo lived in Florida before her death. Does anyone necessarily meet family members’ friends anyway?
“After her death, Bertolotti took legal action to force the coroner to put his name on her death certificate as her father. That was done without the agreement of Sharon Murphy.”
What possible relevance does Sharon’s agreement have to do with the fact of paternity? Obviously she was against recognizing Angelo as Brittany’s father, or she would not have given instruction that he name be left off the death certificate in the first place. And there was no force involved, it was simply or matter of producing documents and paying an administrative fee.
“Since her death, Bertolotti has been vocal about his unhappiness about being denied access to her funeral and not being consulted about other matters. He has made his unhappiness public in a series of media interviews”
The only interview of which I know concerns his being denied subsequent access to the grave, not to the funeral.
“In recent months, Bertolotti, now in his 70’s, has re-located to Southern California and taken up the cause of Brittany’s death. He has announced plans to write a book called Britt about her life to be co-authored by Julia Davis, a screenwriter who formerly worked for the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.”
As with the Sun interview, Block does his credibility no favors by failing to research even simple facts like Angelo’s age. This can easily be found online (entry #5)
“Davis and her husband last year produced a documentary that has yet to be distributed called The Terror Within in which she recounts being forced out of her government job by unnamed officials in Homeland Security. She says she was fired because she was a whistleblower who found out that the U.S.-Mexican border was not being properly guarded.”
Here we have a contradiction - Julia was both forced out of her job AND fired. The first statement is true. She has repeatedly named Jeffrey Deal and Herbert Kaufer http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=jeffrey+Deal+herbert+kaufer http://youtu.be/tyGhD_1mikU. Block must have fallen asleep when he attended a screening of the film.
NOTE:Since I posted the original comment, a new press release has been issued which contains many other names. I would add to its criticism of Block’s deliberate silence by stating that I regard Hayley Taylor, Eric Balfour, Haylie Langseth, Ashley Johnson and Kathy Najimy to be equally guilty in this regard. I will happily correct this if they assure me otherwise.
“She also says in the documentary that through a connection involving Brittany Murphy, while she was still alive, Homeland Security also harassed the actress and her husband. However, Davis has not been able to come up with any solid evidence to back up her claims about Murphy.”
That implies that Block DOES accept Julia’s evidence with regard to herself - hardly surprising, as it is supported by federal judgement. Since we have evidence that Julia was pursued by Kaufer and Deal as a result of a grievance, and bearing in mind that they attempted a marriage fraud prosecution against her (a naturalized U.S. citizen), it obviously becomes highly credible that Brittany and her British-born husband would be similarly targeted as a means to punish her for refuting the charge against Julia. Thus it is not tenable for anyone who claims to have been a friend of Brittany’s to ignore “The Terror Within” - either they must support it or condemn it for exploiting Brittany’s name for publicity. Furthermore, Julia has alleged here, that Block is in possession of taped interviews with Brittany and simon in which they recount being surveilled. He has failed to respond to this allegation both publicly and in his email replies to me, I am therefore forced to asume that he does indeed have such tapes and is withholding them for some unknown motive.
“Last year, when this first came, up a Homeland Security spokesman denied the charges by Davis and raised questions about her credibility”
Hardly surprising on both counts, although I would like to know where Block obtained this alleged DHS statement. What does “when this first came up mean”? I wasn’t aware of any previous investigation of the matter by Block. He referred to Simon Monjack’s surveillance claim in this article, but did not name the DHS as being responsible.
A call to Davis and Bertolotti on Wednesday at a number on the lawsuit was not returned. A cell phone used by Bertolotti in recent months is no longer accepting calls.
This is laughably disingenous considering that Block has Angelo’s email address and the two are mutual Twitter followers.
To sum up: The article was prompted by Angelo and Julia’s statement, and is simply a PR statement on behalf of Sharon Murphy, masquerading as journalism. To allow itself to be used in this way does the Hollywood Reporter no credit.
#brittanymurphy. We have been advised that Julia Davis and Angelo Bertolotti will issue a press release in response to Alex Ben Block’s Hollywood Reporter article.
#brittanymurphy @abblock I posted a response to Alex Ben Block’s latest article written in his capacity as Sharon Murphy’s unofficial spokesman. After several hours the comment was deleted despite containing no profanity or insult - beyond questioning his impartiality and due diligence in researching facts, which accusation I believe stands up. I will repeat and expand upon my response to the article here after consulting with my fellow admins.
Do you have details? I’m aware that he himself made a number of fanciful claims about his life.
#brittanymurphy I believe that Eric Balfour (@ericbalfour on Twitter) made at least two of the now-deleted anonymous comment posts here. I answer them here on that basis and invite him to correct me if the posts were in fact made by another.
Okay, all I have to say is all you Birttany-stalker-fans (sic) are effing nuts! I love how you all try to find your own sense of “fame” in ripping appart (sic) the people who actually KNEW her!
Brittany’s father DID know her, we are supporting him and some among us know HIM. And we are anonymous.
You all cry “responsibility,” but isn’t the responsible thing to let her soul rest in peace?!
What does that mean? Do you believe her soul exists and is tormented by our actions? I’m certain that her father is tormented by yours.
And talking about the foundation that Simon tried to start…well let’s review here…Simon suffered the same illness as Brittany did and unfortunately is not here to do the foundation. And Sharon? Why doesn’t she start it? Can you imagine losing your daughter and son-in-law within 6 months of each other?
Not to mention suffering from feelings of guilt that you failed to summon medical aid in both cases. And possibly Simon was more than a son-in-law to Sharon - he called her “baby” in the Larry King interview.
Do you really think she is thinking about you crazy stalkers? Or do you suppose she is just trying to breathe?!
Sharon seems to have become reticent in the last year since her reported angry response to Alex Ben Block’s article - that is, leaving aside bizarre statements attributed to her by her then-publicist Roger Neal…
By the way - do you agree with Sharon that Angelo is not Brittany’s father, despite his being recorded as such on her birth and death certificates and showing an obvious physical resemblance?
Sharon was quite happy to do two television interviews within a month of Brittany’s death, Larry King and Today. At the 11 minute mark in the Today interview, she says “WE are starting a foundation” - if she was sufficiently composed to take part in the foundation then, why not now?
Oh…and you’re all bitching about her “father?” Well where was her father her entire life? Why are all the pictures he posts on twitter pictures that are on the internet, or pictures from when she was born? There were 30 other years in there that he has no pictures of! AND if he was such a part of her life, where was he in the years, months, weeks, days before she died? Get a grip on reality people, if she wanted him to be a part of her life, she would have had him in her life.
Clearly they were on good terms when this photograph was taken. What can have happened to change that if he wasn’t in her life? Your argument doesn’t make sense. He was not aware of Brittany’s poor health due to his being excluded By Sharon - along with the rest of the Bertolotti family. Brittany was exceptionally close to her mother and would always abide by Sharon’s decision. As you were so close to her, you should know for sure how she felt about her father - ARE you alleging hostility toward him on her part?
Okay. Question, do any of you guys know Angelo personally? I’m not talking about reading his stuff and seeing his pictures on the Internet and what not. I’m asking you, do you know him personally?
See my previous answer.
And I’m not even talking about meeting him a couple times. If you don’t know him personally, pardon my crassness, shut up. And also, did you know Brittany personally? Were you in her life? Did you spend time with her? Know her? Not just as a fan? I realize her fans were beyond important to her. She loved them and you love her.
Don’t form opinions on situations without personally knowing the people involved? That precludes any involvement in politics, for example. You don’t believe in the First Amendment? You are free to respond to our arguments - my original issue was, after all, that you didn’t respond.
And that’s wonderful. But what are you proving by all this? That the people left behind didn’t truly love her or weren’t there for her?
Since you ask, my opinion is indeed that you failed to support her.
That there’s a big conspiracy of something that “really” happened? Get a life. If you’ve lost someone before, someone you love, do you go around telling the world about it to get attention? Posting, twitter-ing, Facebook-ing or whatever other stupid superficial shit kids do these days?
If my suspicion is correct as to your identity, obviously that’s a tad hypocritical.
If so, Then I will tell you again, get a life. Someone’s life is more important than a mere post, tweet or whatever else. And that’s the truth. It’s not ignoring. It’s not pushing it under the rug.
If there were controversies about that person’s death and the circumstances leading up to it, I would not blame anyone for asking my opinion on the issues.
It’s called PRIVACY. You have no idea, no clue what everyone left behind does to honor her.
So tell us.
It absolutely infuriates me that you people sit there behind your computers and judge. It’s rude. It’s disrespectful.
I’m not judging anyone, I merely question you in an attempt to ascertain the facts. Maybe you’re judging yourself.
And that comes with a lack of knowledge. How dare you. You weren’t there. You weren’t in her life. You didn’t know her personally. So you can piece together what you read and make up in your mind, if that’s what you enjoy doing, but it will never be the truth.
So tell us the truth.
If you enjoy living in a world of gossip, by all means continue.
Quite the opposite, I’m trying to get past the gossip.
But just know, it’s rude and it’s false. And yes, Britt loved her fans, but she also loved her privacy. A lot. So don’t sit there and say “Tell us the truth!” or “She would want her fans to know,” which I’ve read in other blogs and message boards. Don’t hide under that just because YOU want to know. That disgusts me.
It’s not what I want to know as much as what I want others to know about Brittany. The one thing we all agree on I think, is that she was a beautiful person and that, one way or another, she got a raw deal.
Bottom line, none of you actual knew Britt (besides her public persona) so quit judging something and someone you actually know NOTHING about.
So you’re saying her public persona was not a true reflection of her private one? Funny, everyone else says the opposite.
I do not blame Haylie and Eric and Hayley Taylor for telling you freaks to move on! You’re internet stalkers! MOVE ON!
I believe you ARE Eric. Again, I refer you to the First Amendment.
The rest of the deleted comments including our answers can be found here.
The foundation’s website states…
THE BRITTANY MURPHY FOUNDATION is a 501c3 Non-profit organization that was created by Brittany Murphy to fulfill her dream of making sure that any child who wants to learn the arts be it music,arts,composing,acting,dancing,or wanting to learn to play an instrument and cannot financially afford it will be able to do so through the BMF and the top professionals that will be volunteering to teach.
In fact, the foundation was established after Brittany’s death by Sharon Murphy, Simon Monjack and Roger Neal. It would seem likely, given his reported comment at 2:15 in this video (he has not challenged the report) that Roger Neal was it’s prime architect. Certainly Neal answered an email to it on the only occasion of which I know when an email was answered at all. I myself received no reply to any of the emails I sent to the foundation, but was at one stage corresponding with Neal via his personal email address. He told me that he was handling correspondence and forwarding it to Sharon as she had no email address. Shortly after that he resigned as publicist for Sharon personally and for the foundation. I advise anyone to demand evidence as to how their money will be spent when considering a donation.