EXCLUSIVE: Vivica Fox's Manager Calls Mo'Kelly!
January 7th, 2008
Mo’Kelly had a pretty extensive and refreshing conversation with Lita Richardson today, manager of actress Vivica Fox. It started out a bit chippy, but ended very pleasantly. Although Ms. Richardson gave a brief statement to the New York Daily News, she spoke at length with Mo’Kelly.
The Mo’Kelly Report…does it again.
NY Daily News…one sentence. The Mo’Kelly Report, 20 minute conversation.
Heretofore, the only official “statement” made by Richardson for Vivica Fox was that the alleged sex tape in question was…
“It’s not true.”
From there, wide speculation began to grow as to whether Richardson was playing a semantics game with legalese, hinting that Richardson was preparing to lash out with a lawsuit or carefully choosing words to be consistent with certain “shades” of the truth.
Today (1.7.08) Mo’Kelly emailed Ms. Richardson and she promptly called him back (within the hour) to clear the air. As always, The Mo’Kelly Report is fair and always gives his column to any media figure who wishes to rebut or disprove anything published here.
Though certain portions of the conversation can not and should not be divulged out of respect to Ms. Richardson and Vivica Fox, this much can be said. In no uncertain terms, Richardson was unequivocal that the alleged videotape depicting Fox in the midst of an oral sex act is not Fox. Going further, she said, there is no sex tape of any sort in existence and there will be nothing of the sort to “appear” in the future.
Whereas Richardson’s public statement heretofore was “it’s not true,” with no clarification; she went into great depth and detail to explain how and why that the published reports by Sandra Rose (and Mo’Kelly for that matter) contained zero facts and why she (and Fox) had little to say in response.
“None of it is true. There is no tape. There is no sex tape with Vivica Fox and one is not going to appear. The video floating around is not her but a porn star. I don’t know how else I can say it or more powerful I can make it sound to satisfy people. So I just left it at ‘it’s not true.’”
- Lita Richardson
(Manager for Vivica Fox)
Mo’Kelly is now paraphrasing, not quoting…but according to Richardson, the reason (in part) why Fox had not been more aggressive in her denial thus far was the desire to not give further life to a non-story. Although Richardson finds it “unfortunate” that her phone is ringing off the hook and more life is being given to something like this, it’s not all that big of deal to her/them in the grand scheme of things.
Richardson went on to say that people truly interested in what Vivica is doing “on film” should be looking forward to her work with Bill Duke as “Zahara Milton” in the indie thriller Cover and reprisal of her role as Shanté Smith in the upcoming sequel, Three Can Play That Game. In “Game,” Fox is also one of the producers of the project, moving beyond just acting.
Well there you have it…Mo’Kelly will now take his beating from readers accordingly. Mo’Kelly dished it out, now he has to take it. But as promised, Mo’Kelly is always fair.
Damn! Damn! Damn!
Let the beatings begin!
(But before Mo’Kelly takes this beating you gotta admit Lita…Mo’Kelly was very funny nonetheless. Very, very funny.)
Posted in 
Tags: 5 Responses to “EXCLUSIVE: Vivica Fox's Manager Calls Mo'Kelly!”
Leave a Reply
Saturday and Sunday nights from 8pm - 9pm PDT on XM 244.
I just have one question to ask. Dont you think that blogs play it a little too fast and loose with the facts? Even if it turns out that it is Viv, none of the blogs that ran with the story (including yours) had any idea if it was true. Most of you ran the story before even seeing the video. I dont think anyone, celebrity or average Joe, deserves to be put out there like that.
In all honesty…I don’t think so. And you generalize WAY too broadly to say “blogs”…there is little uniformity. Some play more fast and loose than others.We all have different rules and standards. Mine is very specific. Something that is widely reported and is also carried by a mainstream news source (as this story was by a number of mainstream sources) then it’s within my realm to comment on.Remember, this story broke New Years day or the 2nd. In terms of me, I didn’t comment until the 3rd, waiting to see where else the story appeared. It’s a case by case, blog by blog basis.But in all seriousness, when it runs in multiple mainstream sources, it’s fair and appropriate to report the story. That’s the essential difference between retractions and updating stories.It was a ‘story’ regardless. And in terms of my comment…that’s why I always cite a primary source first.Does that answer your question?
And in terms of “who deserves” or who doesn’t “deserve” to be put out there…I’m adamant in my opinion that when you are a public figure, your private life is up for public consumption…within the limits of the law.You can’t run to the media to promote your movies, books and CDs but ask the public to stay away beyond that. Can’t have it both ways. If I were a public figure and I did something similar…I fully expect to be “exposed.”
In all honesty…I don't think so. And you generalize WAY too broadly to say "blogs"…there is little uniformity. Some play more fast and loose than others.We all have different rules and standards. Mine is very specific. Something that is widely reported and is also carried by a mainstream news source (as this story was by a number of mainstream sources) then it's within my realm to comment on.Remember, this story broke New Years day or the 2nd. In terms of me, I didn't comment until the 3rd, waiting to see where else the story appeared. It's a case by case, blog by blog basis.But in all seriousness, when it runs in multiple mainstream sources, it's fair and appropriate to report the story. That's the essential difference between retractions and updating stories.It was a 'story' regardless. And in terms of my comment…that's why I always cite a primary source first.Does that answer your question?
And in terms of "who deserves" or who doesn't "deserve" to be put out there…I'm adamant in my opinion that when you are a public figure, your private life is up for public consumption…within the limits of the law.You can't run to the media to promote your movies, books and CDs but ask the public to stay away beyond that. Can't have it both ways. If I were a public figure and I did something similar…I fully expect to be "exposed."