There’s still time to nominate local icons for Best of D.C.
Re: “Posthumous Harassment,” (5/22) by Adrian Havill:
I represent Katherine Thrift in her pending lawsuit against the Executors of the Estate of Jack Kent Cooke, and I sat in on Ms. Thrift’s interview with Adrian Havill for his story in the Washington City Paper. While Mr. Havill’s story is entertaining, and for the most part accurate, it contains several factual inaccuracies that should be corrected.
First, Mr. Cooke did not rub up against Ms. Thrift when she refused his sexual overtures. Mr. Cooke rubbed up against Ms. Thrift on different occasions than those on which he directly asked her for sex.
Second, although the article’s phrasing might suggest a different meaning, the “private parts” Mr. Cooke “pawed at” were Ms. Thrift’s breasts and buttocks.
Third, Bill and Barbara Anderson ordinarily were not present when Ms. Thrift was forced to watch Redskins games with Mr. Cooke.
Fourth, although Mr. Cooke did drink wine while watching the Redskins games, “several bottles of wine” is an overstatement.
Fifth, Mr. Cooke did not give Ms. Thrift “a feel of his woody” on May 6, 1996, when she refused to
shower in Marlena Cooke’s dressing room and model one of Ms. Cooke’s gowns. He did, however, sit up in bed and move the covers in such a way that his erection was plainly visible.
Finally, Debra Katz, with whom I work, is misquoted in the article. Because the referenced conversation occurred during confidential settlement negotiations, I will leave it at that.
I appreciate the interest Mr. Havill and your publication have taken in Ms. Thrift’s case. As her attorney, however, I feel compelled to point out the few factual errors in Mr. Havill’s article.
Bernabei & Katz