Anthony Summers V Donald Spoto and Slatzer’s Legal Antics
Before I decided to pursue Will Fowler’s Papers, I revisited more than a few books in my possession, the ones that I considered primarily to be conspiratorial or written by an author who formulated a conspiracy theory, advanced a murder orthodoxy or quite possibly even believed that Marilyn was murdered. My purpose in so doing was to determine how frequently both Robert Slatzer and Will Fowler appeared within those texts, if at all. Most of the publications that I investigated mentioned Robert Slatzer while only one mentioned Will Fowler: Anthony Summers’ Goddess.
As I reported at the beginning of this section, Anthony Summers invoked Slatzer’s name one-hundred and seventy-nine times in Goddess; but Marilyn’s pathographer invoked Fowler’s name only eleven times. Certainly, the number of times Summers’ literarily incanted Slatzer clarifies just how significantly the Goddess writer relied on Slatzer as a source; but, the number of times Donald Wolfe, on the pages of his 1998 publication, literarily incanted the Ohioan’s name, two-hundred and sixty-six times, suggests that Wolfe considered the word Slatzer to be some sort of scribe’s amulet. Will Fowler, however, did not appear in Wolfe’s book. Also enthralled with Slatzer’s assertions, almost as enthralled as Wolfe, Lionel Grandison, Jr. and Samir Muqaddin, in their 2012 publication, literarily invoked Slatzer’s name two-hundred and forty-eight times; but Fowler’s name did not even scratch.
Even a few texts pertaining to the life and times of the middle Kennedy brothers mentioned Slatzer. For instance, in Those Few Precious Days, Christopher Andersen called upon the literary amulet twice and offered the following: “Marilyn told me that the President planned to divorce Jackie and marry her,” Slatzer said. “She believed it because she needed to believe it” (Anderson 181-182). Wait a minute. I thought Marilyn planned to marry Bobby. At any rate, Andersen also quoted Jeanne Carmen; but he did not indicate how or when he obtained his Slatzer and Carmen quotations. Andersen published his book in 2013; and by that time, both Slatzer and Carmen had been dead for several years. In his bibliography, Andersen listed authors C. David Heymann, Norman Mailer, Lena Pepitone, Anthony Summers and various books associated therewith, all of which I, along with many others, consider to be dubious at best.1
According to Anthony Summers’ source notes, he interviewed both Robert Slatzer and Will Fowler in 1983, and then in 1985, corresponded with Fowler. Quoting the notes: Slatzer: int. Robert Slatzer and Will Fowler, 1983 (Summers 597). Also: Fowler: corr., 1985 (Summers 602). The first note suggests that Slatzer and Fowler participated in Summers’ interview together while the second note is relatively vague. At any rate, in Goddess, Summers offered testimony allegedly received from Fowler indicating that Slatzer met his writing partner in 1947, indicating also that Fowler met Marilyn through Slatzer that same year and the trio often associated with each other as friends. Summers directly quoted the testimony that he allegedly obtained from Fowler to buttress and corroborate Robert Slatzer’s assertions pertaining to Marilyn, particularly Slatzer’s alleged relationship with the effulgent movie star and their 1952 marriage in Mexico.
Several years later, in diametric opposition to Summers’ stratagem, Donald Spoto employed Fowler’s testimony to rebut and disprove Slatzer’s relationship and marital assertions pertaining to Marilyn. Again, we must confront a common phenomenon frequently encountered during any investigation into Marilyn’s life and death: contradictions contained in discrepant testimony. To Slatzer’s Hollywood friend, a label given to Fowler by Summers, Marilyn’s Irish pathographer attributed several significant testaments regarding Marilyn’s interactions with the frumpy Ohioan.
For instance, according to Summers according to Fowler, while Slatzer and his Hollywood friend visited an intoxicated Marilyn in her apartment one night, she disrobed and entertained her friends by prancing around naked. Even in 1947, according to Summers, Marilyn used her body as a banner to amuse male friends (Summers 60); and Fowler allegedly confirmed for Summers that Marilyn often just took off her clothes. She liked to show her body off to men. She used to do anything that men would ask her, really just as a favor. She just walked around stoned and naked (Summers 48). Also, according to Summers, Fowler testified that Slatzer did, in fact, marry the blonde star; and the Ohioan produced a marriage certificate as proof: Bob told me he was going to slip away to Mexico and marry Marilyn, Summers quoted Fowler. When they got back, I remember Bob showing me the marriage certificate. It looked like a fancy black-and-white high school diploma with a gold seal (Summers 114). Why would Will Fowler contradict the testimony attributed to him by Anthony Summers? And Fowler did exactly that in his 1991 memoir when he wrote that Slatzer made a career of being a pretender, selling gullible TV talk show producers who don’t do their research very well, with the deception that he was married to Marilyn. […] Robert Slatzer was never married to Marilyn Monroe (Fowler 287-288: emphasis Fowler’s). Is it possible to resolve, or at least explain, these startling contradictions? Do the Fowler Papers provide a resolution, a credible answer?
As an introduction to what Fowler asserted pertaining to his testimony as quoted by Anthony Summers, Fowler’s Papers contained the second page of a two page letter written and dispatched to Robert Slatzer by Andrew “Andy” Ettinger, at the time, editorial director for Pinnacle Publishing. I could not confirm the actual date of the letter’s composition; but, based on a facsimile machine printed heading, an unidentified person, very likely Ettinger, faxed the letter to Robert Slatzer on September the 19th in 1991, one day before the LA Times published Howard Rosenberg’s article regarding ABC’s soon to be controversial made-for-TV-movie, Marilyn and Me, which appears in the following subsection. Therefore, we can conclude that Andy Ettinger wrote the letter prior to September the 19th or possibly on that date. Page two began: Damn, the more I think about this the madder I get. Just what in hell is Fowler trying to do? Prove he is some sort of expert? Or protector of truth and justice? Ettinger then included a few choice criticisms of Fowler’s writing ability and then followed with: Bob, you’ve been through this with Fowler before. Then there was the bizarre Ted Jordan episode. Time to get your lawyers involved and get this aggravation nipped in the bud.2
According to Fowler, Slatzer and Ted Jordan engaged in a relationship that can best be described as hostile. The relationship became so rancorous that Slatzer successfully petitioned the court for a restraining order against Jordan. Fowler’s Papers contained a letter he dispatched to Jordan posing several questions about Slatzer; but Jordan notified Fowler that a court order prevented him from providing answers. Fowler’s Papers did not contain a clear or precise explanation of what transpired between the two obsessive combatants; but apparently each delivered violent threats to their counterpart.
Notes in Fowler’s Papers indicated that Ettinger, along with Slatzer, promoted The Life and Curious Death of Marilyn Monroe to ABC-TV as the basis for a movie; so Ettinger’s anger at that time is fairly understandable. Still, Ettinger’s slightly snide questioning comment pertaining to Fowler’s assumed role as protector of truth and justice, and allusions to previous problems with Fowler, suggests, to me at any rate, that Fowler had previously questioned, not only the justice of the literary concoction in which he was then involved, but also its underlying reliability and verity. Fowler noted several times, within his Papers, that Slatzer’s story, his anecdotes, began to change over time as they also veered into implausibility; and as a result thereof, Fowler began to question his partner’s honesty. Finally, Fowler noted, the subject came up if I would write about Slatzer’s being married to Marilyn Monroe […]. Fowler informed those posing the question, possibly Ettinger or others affiliated with Pinnacle Publishing, that he could not conscionably write about those things until he saw the absolute proof.3
Additionally, Slatzer had initially informed Fowler that a thick notebook filled with information about Marilyn could be provided along with numerous personal letters that Marilyn had written to Slatzer; he also asserted that he had tape recorded interviews with the blonde actress; but, as you have undoubtedly already concluded, Slatzer never produced any of that information or provided the absolute proof that Fowler wanted. Soon, Fowler’s relationship with Slatzer and Pinnacle headed south and thereafter, he withdrew from Slatzer’s project. Slatzer headed to New York City where he, and obviously several others, including, more than just likely, Frank Capell, completed Slatzer’s book. With the advent of Marilyn and Me, Fowler contacted Rosenberg, which prompted Ettinger’s suggestion that Slatzer hire an attorney. Eventually, Slatzer followed Ettinger’s advice; but not until March of 1992.
Moton Holt, an associate in the law offices of John Barker, dispatched a most bizarre Cease and Desist Demand letter to Will Fowler. Dated March the 14th, Holt’s 1992 letter began: With your journalistic background, you know full well it would only be a matter of time before an attorney would sharpen his tools to lift your scalp for the malicious renegade attacks on Bob Slatzer. Holt then mentioned Fowler’s previous out of left field advance efforts to interfere with the release and airing of Marilyn and Me on ABC television. The attorney then warned Fowler against attempting the same interference with Slatzer’s next Marilyn Monroe television feature, the 1992 docudrama, The Marilyn Files.
According to the letter, Holt also notified Roundtable Publishing of Fowler’s left field malice and demanded that the publisher remove the libelous three pages from any reprint of The Reporters, Fowler’s memoir. Slatzer’s attorney threatened to seek injunctive relief and damages from Roundtable if the publishing house failed to comply. Since the edition of Fowler’s memoir that I own is a first edition, I do not know how Fowler’s publisher reacted to the attorney’s threats or if the book even enjoyed a second printing.
The aggressive Moton Holt ended his odd letter as follows: Slatzer has let you off the hook on the theory that your vitriolic attacks might have stemmed from the bottle, but, again, be advised, one hint of any further nonsense and Slatzer will see you in court (emphasis mine).4(emphasis by me). It appears as if Fowler wanted to avoid a law suit and allowed Holt’s unethical and denigrating comment to slide. So Fowler did not attempt to interfere with Slatzer’s The Marilyn Files. Still, the preceding was not the last encounter between Fowler and Slatzer pertaining to a literary work about the latter’s alleged weekend wife, an encounter that also involved the minds of many legal eagles.
In 1993, Donald Spoto published Marilyn: The Biography through HarperCollins Publishing, Inc. The following year, sometime prior to July of 1994, Robert Slatzer sued HarperCollins Publishing and Donald Spoto for defamation because Spoto summarily dismissed Slatzer’s book. For all intents and purposes, Spoto called Slatzer a liar and a fraud. Will Fowler participated and assisted in that lawsuit as a witness for HarperCollins and Spoto.
During the discovery phase of Slatzer’s legal action, he produced a 1985 letter that Will Fowler allegedly wrote, dated January the 11th, and mailed to Anthony Summers. Within the body of that letter, Fowler confirmed that he knew Bob and Marilyn had fallen in love and that Bob intended to slip away to Mexico and marry her. Additionally, the letter confirmed that Fowler actually saw the mysterious marriage certificate, or license as it is often called. In that letter, Fowler purportedly explained: When they got back, I remember Bob showing me the marriage certificate. It looked like a fancy black-and-white high school diploma with a gold seal on it.5The letter had the following salutation: Good Luck, Will Fowler; but the salutation was not signed. Still, that letter apparently indicated and apparently proved that Will Fowler, not Robert Slatzer, was the liar; but wait; there is more. According to Fowler, he neither wrote nor sent such a letter to Summers; and according to Fowler, he only participated in one telephone interview with Marilyn’s Irish pathographer and thereby contradicted Summers’ source notes.
In Fowler’s 1991 letter written to Howard Rosenberg and dated August the 7th, Fowler asserted the following, all misspellings repeated:
I had an unfortunate phone interview6with Anthony Summers, Goddess (New Mercury Library, 1985), asking me about MM seen in the nude at a parth, and about the musterious, never seen marriage license. I told Summers it was Slatzer who had told me he’d seen MM nude at some party; that it was Slatzer who described the marriage license to me. It came out, in his avarice, that Summers quoted me, as if I had been the witness. This was the first and last time I allowed any interview on the MM subject.7
In a series of notes entitled, Will Fowler addition to the Marilyn Monroe case, developed during his involvement with Spoto and Slatzer’s 1994 defamation lawsuit,8Fowler noted, with, once again, all misspellings repeated:
I had asked Slatzer to see a copy of his marriage license from Tiguana, Mexico. He kept putting it off, but told me it ‘looks like a high school deploma with a gold seal on it.’ (A Mr. Summers, interviewed me over the phone in, I think, 198?. He was writing a book which was published with the title “Godess.” I told him Slatzer informed me about the marriage license, and that I had not seen it. And, also, that in 1946 or 1947, Slatzer had seen Marilyn walk about at a party in the nude. This became the last interview I would have about Marilyn Monroe because Mr. Summers, in his book, quoted me as having seen the marriage license and been at the party in the 40s with Robert Slatzer. Not true. I never even met Marilyn Monroe.9
A compelling case of he said and he said combined with a compelling but also a questionable letter; but what follows are a few factors to appropriately consider and weigh, factors which might impact any decision you reach regarding whom to believe, Robert Slatzer, Will Fowler or Anthony Summers.
The debated letter contained the following details that Fowler allegedly provided to Summers: 1) Marilyn and Bob had fallen in love […] before Bob went back to Niagra [sic] Falls, N.Y. where Marilyn was on location filming (emphasis mine); 2) Fowler offered to stand as Best Man in Mexico but Bob had already promised a Noble Chissell to do that […]; 3) Marilyn told her hairdresser Agnes Flannigan (sic) […] about the marriage and it got to Zanuck’s office within the hour […]; 4) Zanuck summoned Marilyn and Slatzer unto the studio head’s office where a confrontation resulted and Zanuck demanded that the newlyweds divorce.10
Interesting, for true; but each of the preceding anecdotal details contradicted Slatzer’s 1974 publication. Accordingly: 1) Marilyn and Slatzer fell in love not long after they met in 1946, not during June of 1952 just prior to the filming of Niagara; 2) Slatzer and Marilyn did not make any plans prior to embarking for Tijuana so how did Slatzer know to tell Fowler that the wedding would take place in Tijuana, considering, also, that the couple originally discussed driving to Yuma for the wedding just the day and night before embarking; 3) Nobel Chissell did not stand as Slater’s Best Man, allegedly only as a witness, and encountering the former boxer was coincidental according to Slatzer’s 1974 narrative, not a result of Slater’s invitation for Chissell to stand as the groom’s Best Man; and 4) Marilyn did not return to work before she and Slatzer returned to Tijuana for the yet to be filed marriage certificate’s burning ceremony. Keep in mind, also, according to Slatzer, Marilyn promised to keep the clandestine marriage and its dissolution a closely guarded secret; so why would she immediately start blabbing about it. Further, as far as I know, and have been able to determine, Agnes Flanagan never mentioned Robert Slatzer’s name or his purported marriage to Marilyn Monroe.11
Repeating what I stated earlier, that alleged burning ceremony eventually cost Slatzer fifty USDs; but, since the abogado had not yet filed the marriage certificate with the appropriate Mexican agencies or authorities, even in Slatzer’s novella, the marriage never legally occurred. Slatzer knew the marriage was not legal and so asserted in his narrative’s anecdote about the burning ceremony. So, filing a divorce petition would have been totally unnecessary, not to mention comically nonsensical, along with the Darryl Zanuck confrontation; and just how probable is it that a revelation about Marilyn Monroe’s secret marriage in Mexico could have filtered through Fox Studios on its way to Zanuck without being spilled to many persons and the press along the way? In reality, not very likely; in truth, a complete impossibility. Furthermore, if Will Fowler was closely involved in the composition of Slatzer’s book, as he most certainly was, and he also wrote that letter, why so many odd errors and contradictions? And if Slatzer wrote the letter, then the contradictions become downright inexplicable and yet, commonplace. Keep in mind, Slatzer’s tale about his involvement and elopement with Marilyn was never consistent. In fact, his only consistency was his inconsistency!
Under subpoena, Fowler provided a deposition at 1:30 PM on July the 25th in 1994. Slatzer also provided a deposition; but I could not confirm the exact time or the exact date when Slatzer testified, although a long hand inscription on the debated Summers letter suggests that Slatzer gave a deposition on the 23rd of July in 1994. Fowler’s Papers did not contain any information concerning the original lawsuit, a copy of either man’s deposition or when the case was adjudicated; however, the lower court ruled favorably for the defendants, a ruling Slatzer appealed. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals heard Slatzer’s appeal on April the 8th in 1996. The appellate court affirmed the original court’s ruling, that Slatzer failed to produce any evidence of constitutional malice. In effect, both the ruling of the lower court and the affirmation by the appellate court painted Slatzer and his book with an ugly color.12Logically and legitimately, an argument could be advanced that the ruling by the initial court, combined with the ruling by the appellate court, for all functional and idiomatic purposes, rendered a judgment pertaining to The Life and Curious Death of Marilyn Monroe: the book was fraudulent.
Still, a single question remains: were Robert Slatzer and Will Fowler actually friends?
Within Slatzer’s 1974 narrative, within a curious chapter entitled “The House that Jack Built,” an esoteric reference to John Barrymore’s aging mansion, the names of Will Fowler and his father, Gene, both appeared. After relocating from New York City to Hollywood, Gene Fowler and his family befriended many of Hollywood’s most famous luminaries and movie stars. John Barrymore was one of those stars. Gene Fowler became very close to Barrymore and wrote a biography about the acclaimed thespian entitled Goodnight Sweet Prince, published not long after Barrymore’s 1942 death. The chapter about Jack’s house, a chapter at least partially written by Will Fowler, suggested that Slatzer knew Fowler well enough to receive a tour of the enormous, neglected and decayed Barrymore estate, well enough also to be the recipient of a few anecdotes involving Will Fowler’s father and Barrymore. However, on August the 16th In 1994, while working to assist Donald Spoto with the Slatzer lawsuit, Fowler wrote to Slade Metcalf, an attorney with the law firm of Squadron, Ellenoff and Plesent. Fowler admitted that he constructed the Barrymore estate’s description from childhood memories of visits there with his father.13
That admission suggests that Slatzer and Marilyn never actually visited the house that Jack built. Also, it is worth noting that Marilyn’s dialogue in that chapter did not include any comment about her alleged friend, Will Fowler, not even after Slatzer mentioned Fowler’s name during a conversation with Marilyn inside the Barrymore mansion. Also worth noting is this: Slatzer asserted that Marilyn considered John Barrymore to be the perfect actor; The Great Profile, Barrymore’s nickname, was Marilyn’s favorite star. I certainly will not contend that Mari-lyn Monroe did not admire John Barrymore; but certainly, it is also common knowledge among Marilyn’s fans that Clark Gable was Marilyn’s favorite movie star, a person she truly admired and during her childhood, a substitute fantasy father.
Notations and other indications in Fowler’s Papers confirm that he and Slatzer were, in fact, friends; but Fowler did not clarify the quality of that friendship. Occasionally, Fowler delivered financial assistance unto Slatzer when the latter faced pecuniary difficulties. I used to give Slatzer things to sell when he was broke, Fowler noted and then added that he sent money from Arizona in 1983; therefore, Fowler and Slatzer must have been at least marginally involved and somewhat friendly as late as the mid-nineteen-eighties.14
Fowler also indicated that he visited Slatzer’s place of residence at least twice while writing the initial two drafts of Slatzer’s book; however, with the exception of a brief appearance and passing mention in the chapter noted above, Fowler did not appear elsewhere within Slatzer’s 1974 book; and Slatzer did not declare his friendship with one of his primary ghost writers. Likewise, Will Fowler did not declare a friendship with his literary partner, either. Certainly, Fowler’s campaign of criticism during his efforts to enlist Howard Rosenberg’s help to quash the made-for-TV movie, Marilyn and Me, ended the friendship, such as it might have been at the time. Apparently the literary partnership had ended long before, and not ceremoniously but acrimoniously. Fowler’s entreaties to Howard Rosenberg appear in the following sub-section.
Roman Hryniszak, co-founder and chief editor of the Marilyn Monroe fan publication, All About Marilyn, reviewed Slatzer’s made-for-TV movie and then wrote a lengthy follow-up article in response to the ensuing furor that followed the movie and the publication of Roman’s original review. Apparently Hryniszak contacted and questioned Anthony Summers about the glaring discrepancies between Will Fowler’s quoted testimony in Goddess and Fowler’s testimony to Howard Rosenberg pertaining to Robert Slatzer’s honesty and his alleged relationship with Marilyn. Hryniszak reported that Summers was quite firm, saying, “I stand by what I wrote in the book.” Of course, I would not have expected Summers to comment otherwise; but his firm stance does not explain the discrepancies and contradictions or disprove Will Fowler’s assertion, that the dubious and also constantly contradictory Robert Slatzer forged that letter, the one not actually signed by Will Fowler.15
Granted, the absence of Fowler’s signature does not prove that the dubious and debated letter allegedly written by Will Fowler was a Slatzer forgery; but personally, based on Slatzer’s less than forthright history of frequent fabrications and distortions of facts, I afford Fowler’s testaments more verity than anything ever uttered or written by Robert F. Slatzer. Even though Anthony Summers may have been duped by his fraudulent star witness, any critical assessment of the Irish pathographer’s use of Slatzer as a credible and an honest source of information about Marilyn Monroe must conclude this: Summers himself failed to critically assess his fraudulent star witness, failed to recognize Slatzer’s evident dishonesty, resulting in a proportional reduction of Anthony Summers’ credibility.
