Does It Make ANY Sense that Lucy Would Hide Her Own Child?

[LittleRickyII]

This woman is still at it.  This sentence gets me:  "Revealing a pregnancy would have been a devastating blow to her career."  The claim is that the child, born in 1946, was the daughter of Lucy and Desi, so how would revealing a pregnancy by her own husband be "a devastating blow to her career"?  And what if she had been found out -- discovered to have hidden her own child?  Wouldn't THAT be the biggest blow possible to her career?  That's an awfully big risk to take.  This makes for an interesting story, but I can't get past what possible and plausible motive she could have had to do this.

 

http://www.free-press-release.com/news-lucille-ball-conceals-first-born-child-to-advance-her-career-1247776742.html

 

http://snn.bz/celebrities-denying-offspring/

 

Incidentally, the second article claims that Wikipedia "invited" them to post it there, but I can't find it anywhere on Wikipedia.

[Luvsbway]

Plus Lucy worked pretty steadily at this time. We know she got huge when pregnant, so when did she have time to hide it?

 

Getting pregnant with Lucie didn't happen at a good time,causing her to drop out of a movie she wanted to do and when they were embarking on TV but Lucy kept her.

 

At a time when magazine articles mentioned they were so desperate to have a child they were thinking about adoption, and after miscarriages clippings talked about them and sent condolences, why on earth would she give up a kid she desperately wanted. Magazine articles wanted to see her pregnant. This never would have been bad for her career.

[Luvsbway]

That's second link is all kinds of wackadoodle. What is up with his dad and his second wife? I didn't think there was any question on them being married.

 

The first article has so many wrong facts and is clutching at straws to try to make something out of nothing.

[Brock]

I'm speechless over the second link.

[LittleRickyII]

That's second link is all kinds of wackadoodle. What is up with his dad and his second wife? I didn't think there was any question on them being married.

 

The first article has so many wrong facts and is clutching at straws to try to make something out of nothing.

 

In the first article, I thought WTF when I read this: "Years later in March of 1951, the I Love Lucy pilot was filmed. During the viewing of the only original surviving copy of the I Love Lucy pilot, it became visibly noticeable that Ms. Ball was indeed six months pregnant just as reported in many publications including œA Book by Mr. Arnaz. Thus, making this the second pregnancy successfully hidden from studio executives."

 

OMG!  What does that mean?  Successfully hidden from studio executives?  LOL!  There was never any intent to HIDE that pregnancy from studio executives or ANYONE.  And that pregnancy resulted in Lucie Arnaz.  She's not secret.  Nor was her pregnancy in 1950 hidden from the public.  It got announced to the entire nation by Walter Winchell. 

 

They imply that she hid the alleged 1946/47 pregnancy because "it was common practice for the studios to dictate over a woman's career, contracts, ¦and their livelihood."  Wasn't she already working as a free agent at that point?  No studio would have been in control of her.  And even if she were contracted to a studio, what possible motive would a studio have to make a married woman hide her pregnancy (and child) when the father is her own husband?  This is the question I can't get past.  Why? Why? Why?  Please provide one credible reason she would have done something so extreme.

 

As for that second article, it's wackadoodle indeed.  I posted the link hoping somebody can tell me what it says.    I think whoever wrote it flunked English class.  Granted, I was very tired when I read it, but it's all over the place, talking about the elder Arnaz never actually marrying the woman people believed was his wife, to tales of Jerry Lewis and Clint Eastwood and others hiding some of their offspring or harboring other big secrets.  I could not figure out what point they were trying to make.  I'm guessing the business about the second "Mrs." Arnaz not actually being married to Desi's father was that some documents regarding this baby were mailed to the home of a woman who had the same name as unmarried name of Mr. Arnaz's spouse?  So therefore, it's more proof that the baby was connected to this family?  And therefore I guess that means Desi was also in on this plot to hide his and Lucy's offspring?  Weird.

 

As for Clint Eastwood, Jerry Lewis and the others, I guess the point is that, if these other celebrities of the era were keeping big secrets, Lucy must have been as well???

[LittleRickyII]

I'm speechless over the second link.

 

Well if you can get your speech back, I would appreciate if you could translate it for us because I'm thoroughly confused. 

[Lucy79]

In one Tabloid I saw in the grocery store a few days ago said Lucy gave up a son for adoption because she was 17 and forced to give him up.

[Luvsbway]

That's this week's newest kid claim. Story was it was her and Johnny and they gave the kid up because of her age. Of all these so called Lucy kid stories that's the only one that has some probability. But the article doesn't even have a kid saying that yep, she's my mom. Just speculation from an unnamed person and no knowledge on who the boy is.

[Neil]

well......I hate to say this because sometimes these things take on a life of their own, but.....this 1946 pregnancy/birth: very VERY unlikely. But in answer to the question, WHY would she give up a child she professed to be longing for? What if she knew Desi was not the father? There are stories (spread by such unimpeachable sources as Herbert Kenwith) that, as Desi was philandering on the road, Lucy wasn't sitting home in frustration....

[LittleRickyII]

well......I hate to say this because sometimes these things take on a life of their own, but.....this 1946 pregnancy/birth: very VERY unlikely. But in answer to the question, WHY would she give up a child she professed to be longing for? What if she knew Desi was not the father? There are stories (spread by such unimpeachable sources as Herbert Kenwith) that, as Desi was philandering on the road, Lucy wasn't sitting home in frustration....

 

Check my 11:29 AM post above.  This alleged scheme involved Desi's father's "mistress."  That implies Desi KNEW about the baby.  And in the articles, the woman has made a HUGE point that, she, her mother, and her own children, all resemble DESI.  This is not about Lucy hiding a child fathered by someone else; it's about her (AND DESI) hiding DESI'S child from the public.

 

From the article:  "Cassandria Lucianna Carlson is moving forward on behalf of her mother as well as her three children who bare a striking resemblance to both the Ball and Arnaz' families."

 

I should add that when this story first broke about six or seven years ago, the articles were claiming that Lucy hid the child because it was born out of wedlock in 1947.  That had not done the simple research to realize that Lucy and Desi had been married since 1940.  This more recent incarnation is implying the studios forced her to hide the baby.  Which takes me back to my question:  WHY???

[LittleRickyII]

LOL!  I'm looking at the "evidence" in the second link.  The part where they're trying to link the address where the "baby documents" were sent to the second wife of Desi's father, Anna M.  Take a look at the tombstone.  It says Anna M. was born in 1902.  Then scroll down to the 1940 census record showing who resided at the address where the documents were allegedly sent.  It has the name Anna M. Wilson, but it shows she was 69 years old!  If she was 69 years old in 1940, then this Anna M. was born in 1870 or 1871.  Desi's father's wife at that time would have been only 38 years old.  It's not the same person!  Am I missing something?

[Brock]

Check my 11:29 AM post above.  This alleged scheme involved Desi's father's "mistress."  That implies Desi KNEW about the baby.  And in the articles, the woman has made a HUGE point that, she, her mother, and her own children, all resemble DESI.  This is not about Lucy hiding a child fathered by someone else; it's about her (AND DESI) hiding DESI'S child from the public.

 

 

I think she and her children look more like Wayne Newton than anybody.

 

  Am I missing something?

 

No. Unfortunately the same can't be said of her.

[Taylor]

I think true Lucy fans know this woman is batshit crazy.  She has come up with an elaborate story because WHY?  She's f^^^ing crazy!  There doesn't have to be a reason why except that simple fact.  Lucy would never have given up a child, especially Desi's.  Let it go, stop giving Ms. Batshit Crazy any kind of attention, that's what she craves.  Unfortunately she has convinced a few people but they are just as nuts as she is and don't do any sort of research.  I am so sick of hearing about this woman and her lies, it's so disrespectful to both Lucy and Desi's memories.  Honestly I hope she gets hit by a bus.  I wouldn't want to be on the other side when Lucy gets ahold of her either.    

[Luvsbway]

Just to elaborate on Taylor's post. This woman is using the Arnaz name as part of her name on Facebook and Instagram. She's commented on mine and other's post saying things about her "grandparents" that are just factually wrong.

[Taylor]

Julia Arnaz is still being stalked by this woman.  I wish there was something more the family could do legally about this woman...or maybe just find a good hitman.  

[JoeySanJoaquin]

Such garbage.  If Lucy & Desi had actually produced a child (to term) pre-Lucie, they would have shouted it from the rooftops, not tried to sweep it under the rug -- and in Long Beach yet!! The leaps of logic if not faith you need to make to follow all this nonsense are quite huge...if not downright impossible/implausible.

 

Can't wait for the Enquirer to jump on THIS one! Eesh!

[HarryCarter]

There's also the fact that Lucy was on the East Coast in rehearsals for her opening in Dream Girl at the McCarter Theatre in Princeton, NJ when this baby was born in California on June 18, 1947. 

[JoeySanJoaquin]

There's also the fact that Lucy was on the East Coast in rehearsals for her opening in Dream Girl at the McCarter Theatre in Princeton, NJ when this baby was born in California on June 18, 1947. 

Facts!?? What a novel concept!! Never stopped rags, tabloids and bottomfeeders before from creating something out of nothing!!

[Luvsbway]

There's also the fact that Lucy was on the East Coast in rehearsals for her opening in Dream Girl at the McCarter Theatre in Princeton, NJ when this baby was born in California on June 18, 1947. 

 

Lucy in front of the poster for Dream Girl at the McCarter Theatre.  Doesn't look 9 months pregnant to me.

 

[LittleRickyII]

 Honestly I hope she gets hit by a bus. 

That's exactly what happened to her mother (Lucy and Desi's alleged daughter) back in 2003: got hit by a bus. 

[LittleRickyII]

Facts!?? What a novel concept!! Never stopped rags, tabloids and bottomfeeders before from creating something out of nothing!!

 

Several years ago I replied to one of this woman's "articles" with facts showing that Lucille Ball was either making live radio appearances (in front of studio audiences) or on movie sets filming movies during every single month of the alleged pregnancy.  This woman replied back to me that my comments (just laying out some facts) were defaming her and she threatened to sue me.

[Taylor]

That's exactly what happened to her mother (Lucy and Desi's alleged daughter) back in 2003: got hit by a bus. 

 

Dang it, it hit the wrong one!

[Taylor]

Several years ago I replied to one of this woman's "articles" with facts showing that Lucille Ball was either making live radio appearances (in front of studio audiences) or on movie sets filming movies during every single month of the alleged pregnancy.  This woman replied back to me that my comments (just laying out some facts) were defaming her and she threatened to sue me.

 

  You should've let her.  Take her to Judge Judy.

[LittleRickyII]

  You should've let her.  Take her to Judge Judy.

 

Oh boy, Judge Judy would have a field day!  I seem to recall this woman had someone representing her in the very beginning who ultimately dropped her like a hot potato because she couldn't make sense of her claims.  That individual posted a comment basically apologizing and saying that after researching all the records, had concluded there was no connection between Cassandria and the Ball/Arnaz families.  But she appears to have found another attorney.  Which makes me think of that attorney Jack Carter played on The Lucy Show.

 

__________________________________________________________________________________

UPDATE:  I found the comment I was referring to.  This person (Johnna Paradis) is not a former attorney of Ms. Carlson, but someone who had been in contact with her at some point trying to help her obtain DNA evidence.  She posted her comment in 2010, two years after the first articles were posted.  This is the link:  http://eplay.typepad.com/eplay_online_sports_fanta/2008/09/is-cassandria-l.html

 

And this is her comment:

 

"Dear Readers,

I wanted to state my findings on this topic since I was close to the sources invloved and worked on the case extensively. I spent countless amounts of hours in conversation, researching and placing facts against fiction.

 

What were my findings? I found that although Mrs. Carlson is indeed searching for the truth about her mother and the events that surrounded her birth, there are little or no factual basis connected to her claims.

 

I read countless amounts of books, periodicals and spent hours upon hours scouring historical records online in addition to conducting interviews with individuals who are close to the sources and I could not link my findings with real life truth. I was very disappointed in the end since I feel for those who are disjointed form their lineage and I wanted to help this woman and her family. My advice would be that Mrs. Carlson and family come to terms with the reality that her mom was not the daughter of the legendary Lucille Ball and that there is a real family out there connected to her mother biologically that might be looking for her as well.

 

I am glad this is over and happy to move on. I hope I helped in solving some people's curiosity on this story.

 

July 10, 2010 at 08:06 AM"

[Brock]

Unfortunately, she has a stake in this "Syndicated News Network" (or, is on the payroll at the very least) so she has an unlimited mouthpiece in the realm of faux media.