ANIMAL PEOPLE is the leading independent newspaper providing original investigative coverage of animal protection worldwide. Founded in 1992, ANIMAL PEOPLE has no alignment or affiliation with any other entity.

ESSENTIAL DESTINATIONS

CLICK HERE Most Recent Issues The Eberle Mess Search this Site! Important Materials Cool Links Watchdog Report Subscribe Online (safe) Spanish Edition French Edition Editorial Sampler AP articles Sampler AP Masthead The LEWYT Awards EMAIL US

The Watchdog monitors fundraising, spending, and political activity in the name of animal and habitat protection—both pro and con. His empty bowl stands for all the bowls left empty when some take more than they need.

October 2007

Who was really behind "Your Mommy Kills Animals"

LOS ANGELES--Producing a video about the animal rights movement in 2005-2006 called Your Mommy Kills Animals, Minneapolis documentarian Curt Johnson, 39, spent much of 2007 and may spend much of 2008 fighting lawsuits for allegedly misrepresenting the project to both anti-animal rights investors and animal rights advocates Shane and Sia Barbi, who are credited in the video as associate producers.

Johnson lost the first round to Center for Consumer Freedom founder Richard Berman and Speakeasy Video company owner Maura Flynn, wife of former Center for Consumer Freedom employee Michael Flynn.

Alleging copyright infringement on January 12, 2007, Berman and Flynn contended that Johnson violated their intent to produce a documentary attacking the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.

Summarized Virginia Lawyers Weekly, "Johnson worked with Flynn on the movie, Michael Moore Hates America. In 2005, Flynn and Johnson discussed co-producing two documentaries, one on smoking," which was eventually issued and contends that bans on smoking in public places violate civil liberties, "and one on PETA and the animal rights movement. Flynn prepared a 'treatment' of the PETA film...Berman invested $300,000 in the production."

Johnson and Flynn both interviewed sources who were to appear in the documentaries, but Johnson "At some point in 2006," according to Virginia Lawyers Weekly, "instructed Flynn not to travel with the crew working on" the project that became Your Mommy Kills Animals.

"Over time," Virginia Lawyers Weekly continued, "Johnson accepted less and less input from Flynn and finally ceased all communication with her. Johnson began screening and promoting a substantially complete version of the film."

A version of Your Mommy Kills Animals was shown to the Virginia jury, one of several versions in circulation, according to the Barbi lawsuit.

"Roughly 80% was devoted to a favorable portrayal of the SHAC-7, members of an animal rights group called Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty, who were tried and convicted for violations of the Animal Enterprise Protection Act," Virginia Lawyers Weekly said. Reviews of Your Mommy Kills Animals published by the Los Angeles Times and L.A. Weekly gave similar descriptions of the documentary, which is not presently in public distribution.

Berman and Flynn were unlikely funders of a project defending SHAC. Six SHAC defendants were convicted in March 2006, of conspiracy to commit "animal enterprise terrorism." Five were convicted of "interstate stalking." Later in 2006 the convicted SHAC members were sentenced to prison terms ranging from three to six years.

Berman, the Center for Consumer Freedom, and an ancestral organization he headed called the Guest Choice Network became aggressively critical of animal rights activity in early 2002. Berman appeared to have been best known previously for opposing legislation that holds hotel and restaurant owners liable if they knowingly or negligently allow guests to drive drunk, and for opposing laws that require hotels and restaurants to pay at least the minimum wage to waiters and waitresses, instead of requiring them to work for tips alone.

Maura Flynn, as Maura Whalen, appears to have first become prominent in 1993 as spokesperson for the Individual Rights Foundation. This organization sued the University of California at Riverside, after the university issued a three-year suspension to a fraternity chapter for producing a t-shirt bearing an allegedly racist caricature.

An out of court settlement reinstated the fraternity, required two university administrators to take First Amendment sensitivity training, and included the fraternity chapter writing letters of apology to offended ethnic groups, other fraternities and sororities, and the national headquarters of the fraternity.

Michael Flynn, though not directly involved in making Your Mommy Kills Animals, and not a party to the lawsuit brought by Berman and his wife, may have had the longest history of interface with animal advocacy, as director of policy and legislative activities for the American Legislative Exchange Council before joining the Center for Consumer Freedom. Founded in 1973, ALEC has pushed state-level pro-hunting and anti-"animal enterprise terrorism" bills since circa 1992.

The Virginia jury agreed that Johnson had breached his contract with Berman and Maura Flynn, and awarded Berman damages of $360,000.

But the U.S. District Court for Virginia in October 2007 refused to give Berman the exclusive right he had sought to promote Your Mommy Kills Animals, holding that the award of damages satisfied Berman's claim for copyright violation.

The Barbi twins sue too

Shane and Sia Barbi, better known to celebrity media as "The Barbi Twins," ask in a lawsuit filed on August 27, 2007 in Los Angeles County Superior Court that the distribution of Your Mommy Kills Animals"in all forms and versions should be enjoined until there is a final version that meets the editing approval of the plaintiffs. The current visions at this time do not portray animal organizations in a truthful and unbiased way as promised [by Johnson]," the Barbi Twins contend.

"The celebrities and organizations who participated in the filming have only given conditional agreement to be in the film," the Barbis add, "as they were promised that they could be removed if it did not remain unbiased or took on an anti-animal agenda."

Known to the world as actresses and former Playboy models, the Barbi Twins were known to ANIMAL PEOPLE as animal advocates who asked frequent serious questions about issues and organizations for some time before ANIMAL PEOPLE had any idea of their celebrity status.

"On or about early 2006," the Barbi case begins, "plaintiffs were informed by several others involved in the animal rescue movement that a producer, Curt Johnson, was making a movie about animal rights organizations and wanted to talk to them because of their breadth of experience."

After plaintiff Shane Barbi agreed to be contacted, defendant Curt Johnson provided this plaintiff with many magazine articles including articles from Hollywood Reporter and Variety." The articles stated Johnson's claimed credentials. An August 2005 item by Claude Brodesser of Variety stated that "documentarian Curt Johnson's Gotham- and Dallas-based production shingle Indie Genius has secured a $30 million financing commitment that will allow it to produce, co-finance and acquire finished projects," said to have been "brokered by Georgia-based attorney William Slater Vincent."

The Barbi Twins believed this reported deal was Johnson's source of funding for Your Mommy Kills Animals, but only after trying to verify the information.

States their lawsuit, "Plaintiff Shane Barbi contacted several Variety reporters whose names were on the articles" that Johnson gave them, "and was told that Variety investigates their facts and stands by their articles...Had the plaintiffs Shane and Sia Barbi been aware of the truth of how this film came to be, they would have never even taken Curt Johnson's phone calls, let alone agreed to play any role in his film.

"Before becoming involved with defendant Johnson," the lawsuit continues, "plaintiffs approached and questioned him about a rumor connecting Johnson's film to organizations like the Center for Consumer Freedom that supported anti-animal and anti-animal rights campaigns. Johnson persuaded the plaintiffs that this was totally untrue. He denied all connections to CCF or any other anti-animal rights organizations. He declared that he was the sole funding source for his film, that not one cent came from any anti-animal rights groups. He admitted, however, that it was difficult or impossible for him, on his own, to get any representatives from animal organizations to cooperate or participate in his yet unnamed film, because they were boycotting him based on these rumors."

Trying to help Johnson produce a documentary that they believed would be favorable to animal advocacy, the Barbi Twins "entered into a verbal agreement with defendant Johnson," their lawsuit contends, "that plaintiffs would bring celebrities and representatives of organizations who work for the benefit of animals to the film. For bringing celebrities and animal organizations into the film, plaintiffs the Barbi Twins were both to receive credit as associate producers, and editorial control over the entire film."

The Barbi Twins assert that they "used their contacts and connections to get all of the nationally and internationally known celebrities who appear in the film. In addition, they got most of the representatives of the animal organizations who appear in the film."

However, "On or about February 1, 2007, defendant Johnson abruptly stopped communicating with plaintiffs," the lawsuit explains. "Plaintifss learned that Johnson was not personally funding the film, as they were told, but that he had received $300,000 from Maura Flynn," which she had received from Richard Berman, whom the Barbi Twins contend "was silently exercising editorial control over portions of the film."

Johnson's approach

ANIMAL PEOPLE repeatedly asked Johnson for his response to both the Berman/Flynn and Barbi Twins lawsuits, but received no reply.

Claiming to be producing a documentary history of the animal rights movement, Johnson introduced himself to ANIMAL PEOPLE in much the same manner as to the Barbi Twins, and at about the same time. Johnson interviewed ANIMAL PEOPLE editor Merritt Clifton and publisher Kim Bartlett at the ANIMAL PEOPLE office in Clinton, Washington, on January 24, 2006, en route to interview Sea Shepherd Conservation Society founder Paul Watson in Friday Harbor, Washington, the following day.

Johnson recited a list of previous interview subjects that included, as well as prominent figures, many little-known people who were involved in the early phases of the animal rights movement. That he had found and talked with them significantly reinforced his credibility.

Johnson in preliminary conversation asked Clifton for background about anti-animal rights organizations, including the Center for Consumer Freedom. Johnson mentioned having interviewed Center for Consumer Freedom staff writer David Martosko, whose name appears on the Your Mommy Kills Animals cast list, but did not demonstrate exceptional familiarity with CCF.

Johnson did, however, indicate that he tended to accept the SHAC defendants claim that they were charged with criminal offenses for exercising freedom of speech.

The SHAC trial concluded five weeks later. In the interim, individuals targeted by SHAC testified that they "they were besieged by screaming protesters outside their homes at all hours, deluged by threatening phone calls, and were sent pornographic magazines they had not ordered," according to Wayne Parry of Associated Press, who attended the trial. "One woman said she received an e-mail threatening to cut her 7-year-old son open and stuff him with poison. A man said he was showered with glass as people smashed all the windows of his home and overturned his wife's car."

The Barbi Twins in e-mail discussion with Clifton had already expressed their strong disapproval of violent and threatening tactics.

Distribution blocked

While not responding to questions about the court cases, Johnson on November 14, 2007 forwarded to ANIMAL PEOPLE a link to , a film news web site. "According to a statement released by representatives of distributor Halo-8 Entertainment," Cinematical offered, "Curtis Johnson's documentary Your Mommy Kills Animals has been pulled by 'several' retailers, including Internet giant Amazon.com, in advance of its scheduled release date. The statement quotes an unnamed retailer who claims that this is 'due to legal threats from a well-known Washington lobbyist who represents major corporations in the tobacco and food industries.'"

Halo-8 Entertainment president Matt Pizzolo told Cinematical that, "Our understanding is that there is no legal restriction on the film whatsoever. Some retailers are buckling under threats that have no legal basis."

Said Amazon.com director of corporate communications Patty Smith, "Our understanding is the film is subject to active litigation between the parties, and as a result we removed it from our catalog as per our usual practice when we receive notice of an allegation of copyright violation. We are in the process of investigating whether in fact, that dispute still exists. If the matter has been resolved, and the seller has been given the rights to sell the title, we'll happily list it on our site."

Cat-killing bill may be stalled

WASHINGTON D.C.--HR 767, a bill that if passed would allow the National Wildlife Refuge system to authorize hunters to shoot feral cats, unanimously cleared the U.S. House of Representatives on an October 23, 2007 voice vote, and entered the Senate without organized opposition.

Then, after page one exposure in the October 2007 edition of ANIMAL PEOPLE, HR 767 ran into Lee "The LocoMotive" Zucker, owner of The LocoMotive vegetarian restaurant in Eugene, Oregon. Zucker called many of the national animal advocacy groups and regional humane societies whose first word was that HR 767 could not be stopped.

ssigned to the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works on November 8, HR 767 had not emerged a week after Thanksgiving. Alley Cat Allies president Becky Robinson was guardedly optimistic that it would not be acted upon before the end of the first session of the 110th Congress.

"My D.C. folks tell me its being held in the Senate committee, not to be brought forward," American Humane president Marie Wheatley told ANIMAL PEOPLE.

Friends of Animals on November 13 issued the first nationally distributed electronic activist alert about HR 767, and began calling Senators. "We've got a chance to stop this bill," decided FoA president Priscilla Feral. "Let's do it."

Titled the Refuge Ecology Protection, Assistance, and Immediate Response Act, or REPAIR Act, HR 767 was introduced by Representative Ron Kind, of LaCrosse, Wisconsin-where birder Mark Smith in 2005 organized a campaign to seek state legislation to allow hunters to shoot feral cats. Passed by the Wisconsin Conservation Congress, the proposal died due to the threat of a gubernatorial veto.

HR 767, potentially doing the same thing at the national level, was pushed by the American Bird Conservancy, an organization built on opposition to neuter/return feral cat control HR 767 "sneaked under the radar because they did not use any of our usual search words, like feral or even animal," said Wheatley.

Instead, HR 767 mentions "harmful nonnative species" and "invasive species." A cursory look at HR 767 suggested to most readers that it was a routine reauthorization of ongoing refuge conservation programs.

The devil was in the details--and may still be, as even if the Senate does not act on HR 767, a similar measure could be slipped through as a rider on any Interior Department appropriation bill, the avenue that former Senator Conrad Burns of Montana used in 2004 to undo key provisions of the 1971 federal law that protected wild horses from sale to slaughter.