‘She has less than flattering nude pictures of him that she plans on leaking, says a well-placed source. Rihanna says he’d be really embarrassed by them.’And that isn’t the only way that Rihanna, plans to retaliate against her ex, who’s been accused of leaving her bruised after a beating in February. Shes out to hurt his street credibility too:
Another thing she’s been talking about is spreading rumors about Chris,’ says the friend. ‘She wants to ruin his sexy image by letting it be known that he was a bit of a novice in the bedroom when they met and that she taught him everything he knows.
The singer's attorney, Donald Etra, told E! News that Rihanna will be called to testify at the June 22 preliminary hearing in Brown's felony assault case.Things Chris Brown Should Probably Not Do During Rihanna's Testimony:
"The judge advised me that there will be a subpoena for Rihanna as a witness at the preliminary hearing," Etra said following a morning hearing. "She will definitely comply."
And she will be doing so while facing her alleged attacker.
"He has to be here anytime a witness is called," Brown's attorney Mark Geragos said, confirming that the "monster"-denying R&B star will indeed be present to hear the testimony.
The celebrity gossip blogger claims "Chris Brown must be responsible for this!"
A spokesperson for Brown has released a statement to ESSENCE.com denouncing any connection to the photos. "This is both a false and defamatory statement. Chris has not released or 'leaked' any photos of Rihanna (or anyone else for that matter)."
Geragos states, "I'm informed and believe that on or about February 19, 2009, a photograph taken by the LAPD depicting physical injuries on Ms. Fenty's person was illegally leaked to the media. Specifically, I am informed and believe that this highly prejudicial photograph was sold by an LAPD officer to the entertainment website, TMZ. The photograph was immediately viewed by hundreds of thousands of viewers and was displayed on every news channel for several weeks. In fact, the photograph still remains on the TMZ website. The purpose of the leak was necessarily for profit and to vilify Mr. Brown and poison the potential jury pool."
Geragos further states "If the instant motion reveals evidence of dishonest conduct on any of these officers' part, I intend to use such evidence at the preliminary hearing to attack their credibility. The defense intends to prove and argue that the afore-mentioned officers are not credible and that the Court should not believe any or all of their testimony. If the Court does not believe these statements, I believe there is a reasonable likelihood that the case will be dismissed at the preliminary hearing."
Geragos goes on to say, "In this case specifically, the leaking of a photograph (whether for profit or not) of a complaining witness violates a variety of criminal and regulatory prohibitions. In and of itself these actions would not only constitute demonstratable bias on the part of the involved officers but could potentially be the basis for a Motion to Dismiss Outrageous Governmental Misconduct."
Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Patricia Schnegg today set a preliminary hearing for May 28 on Brown's double felony case--the result of Geragos pushing for as late a court date as possible to allow him adequate time to respond to the still-pending investigation into just how Rihanna's police photo was released.
Should the gruesome photos' appearance prove to be the result of a police transgression, Geragos told E! News that he will move to have Brown's entire case dismissed.
"The leaks can form the basis for a motion to dismiss the case in regards to outrageous governmental misconduct," Geragos said.
According to a motion filed Tuesday by her attorney Donald Etra, police seized a pair of earrings and three rings as evidence after the Feb. 8 attack in Los Angeles, the Associated Press reports. Her attorney said the bling was on loan - and the four companies want the items back.I don't know anything about policing, but why would the cops take all her jewelry? Were her earrings really evidence? Why didn't they just rummage through her purse? "Hey, sorry, we're gonna have to take this $300 in cash. As evidence. This is very important stuff."
