ShareThis Page

Tanya Kach facing possible lawsuit related to memoir

| Wednesday, Jan. 25, 2012

A White Oak therapist may pursue civil action against Tanya Nicole Kach and parties involved in publishing her story.

On behalf of plaintiff Janice Pope, attorney Dennis M. Moskal entered a writ of summons on Jan. 18 in the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas Civil Division. The writ names Kach, Lawrence H. Fisher and Tate Publishing Co. as potential co-defendants and opens the door for a future defamation lawsuit.

The named parties collaborated on the Oct. 11 release of "Memoir of a Milk Carton Kid: The Tanya Nicole Kach Story," a 216-page book that publishers promoted as the "haunting, poignant" story of Kach's decade of imprisonment by school security guard Thomas Hose.

Kach went missing in February 1996 and resurfaced in March 2006 at a convenience store after fleeing the home Hose shared with his parents. Hose had worked as a guard for St. Moritz Security Services at what was Cornell Middle School when Kach was a student.

Hose pleaded guilty in June 2007 to charges of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse with a minor, interfering with the custody of a child and endangering the welfare of a child. He was sentenced in Common Pleas Court to 15 years in state prison.

"Memoir of a Milk Carton Kid" details Kach's years in Hose's custody as well as the timeline following her escape.

Moskal did not respond to voice messages or email by presstime, and the voicemail greeting at Pope's White Oak office indicated she would not be available through Jan. 31.

The writ does not describe directly that the potential defamation suit is in response to Kach's book, but Pope is one of many locals discussed therein.

"The Kach Memoirs are true accounts in all respects, including the unfortunate conduct of Ms. Pope that it details," Fisher said Tuesday afternoon.

"The writ filed by Ms. Pope is regrettable, thoughtless and worthy of no other comment."

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.