If you’re a fan of “Tiger King” and all the drama that came along with the wildly popular Netflix series, you are most likely aware that Carole Baskin recently filed a lawsuit over the upcoming sequel. That sequel, of course, is “Tiger King 2. ” It too will stream on Netflix.
“I first heard about (the sequel) when everyone else heard about it – when they released the trailers,” Carole Baskin said.
Watching the trailer led to another surprise for the famous animal advocate. “I was shocked to see that I was in them because they had reached out to me before. And they were going around a few months ago – the producers were – trying to get people who had been in ‘Tiger King 1’ to sign new release forms,” Baskin also said.
She also claimed that she had no desire to take part in the “Tiger King” sequel. “And I said, ‘Lose my number.’ I didn’t even want to talk to them,” she also claimed.
Baskin also continued to argue that the shots of her that appear in the sequel were not filmed with her “permission.”
“Then, to see that I was in their trailer, I was like, ‘What the heck is that?’ They didn’t get my permission to use any of that old footage. And they sure didn’t film any new stuff. And so, that was why we ended up filing suit against them. Because they don’t have my permission to do that,” she said.
You can listen to what Carole Baskin had to say below.
Judge Shot Down Suit Filed Over ‘Tiger King 2’
Earlier this month, Baskin and her husband, Howard Baskin, filed a suit in Tampa, Florida, in order to stop the release of the sequel on Nov. 17. Both Netflix and the production company, Royal Goode Productions, were named in the suit.
As she said during the Nov. 10, Carole Baskin argued in the suit that footage of her was being used in the sequel without their permission. The couple said that it was “unauthorized.”
The suit didn’t go very far, however. Only a few hours after the Baskin couple filed their suit over “Tiger King 2,” Judge Virginia M. Hernandez in Florida shot down their suit.
“While the Court understands the Baskins’ frustration, it does not appear that inclusion of Defendants’ footage of the Baskins will cause any immediate harm that cannot be compensated with monetary damages. Importantly, the Court merely finds that the Baskins are not entitled to the extraordinary remedy of a temporary restraining order, which would be entered before Defendants have had an adequate opportunity to respond,” Judge Hernandez also wrote.