From Sony DOOL board:

STEVE TO KAYLA: "I REMEMBER!"

"Steve is faking getting his memories back to keep Kayla alive," explains HS. "Steve is hoping that will keep her hanging on. He's doing it mostly for Stephanie, who keeps telling him he can't let her [mother] die, that he has to make her hold on."

It works. Kayla hears her husband's loving words and clings to life. "Steve has gone out on a limb, and it's going to get him stuck," says HS. "Steve will begin having snippets of real memories. But it's a while yet before that happens. Ultimately, it will lead to him and Kayla finding each other again."

http://boards.sonypictures.com/soaps/showthread.php?t=74272

SALEM SHAKE UP! (Hogan speaks - love that guy & miss him on ATWT!)

Who's Reuniting? Who's Returning? And Who's Going Down?

(pics of John/marlena, EJ, Hope/Bo, Steve/Kayla, Belle/Phillip/baby, Stefano)

With new HW Hogan Sheffer at the helm, DOOL fans can expect big changes in the months ahead. Here's a sneak peek from the man who's really pulling the strings in Salem now.

JOHN & MARLENA EXPOSE EJ

"Obviously you're going to find out who EJ is," says HS. So are John & Marlena, who make a key discovery about the cocky con man. "Late in November, J&M are going to make a trip to Italy for the purposes of sniffing out the DiMeras and finding out how EJ is connected and what he wants. They'll make the final connection between Stefano and EJ Wells."

Sheffer won't comment on the rumors that the mystery man is in fact Susan and Stefano's son, Elvis. "I'm not allowed to speak about that," demurs the scribe.

BABY SURPRISE!

Bo and Hope will get a Christmas miracle when they learn what viewers have known for weeks - Bo, not Patrick, is the father of her baby.

Leading up to the baby surprise, Bo will try to expose patrick with the help of the Salem P.D. "They turn their attention from Patrick to the guy they think is the brains behind the outfit, which is EJ Wells," previews HS. "They get onto EJ by making a connection between him and Patrick.They realize these two guys may have been involved with all The Gloved Hand (lol) stuff."

While Bo inches closer to nailing Patrick and presenting the facts to Hope, Chelsea hatches yet another scheme. "After walking in on Bo and Billie comforting each other, Chelsea miscontrues it as sex," says HS. "She takes a cell phone picture of them. She's going to send the picture out to a few choice people."

But even Chelsea and Patrick can't ruin Bo and Hope's Christmas. They will get the best present ever and learn they are having a baby.

PHILLIP COMES HOME

Phillip gets his backbone back when he returns to Salem in January.

"One of the things we're pushing toward is giving this next generation the power and the sway," outlines HS. "Phillip needs to be the new Victor. He needs to be a man of power and passion and amorality."

Phillip's first order of business will be rectifying the situation with Claire, the baby he was led to believe was his daughter. There will be "a nasty custody battle," reveals HS.

Victor will play a role in it, and Belle and Shawn will be forced to make a drastic move.

STEFANO RETURNS

The Phoenix will rise again in Salem, assures HS. But is Joseph Mascolo reprising the role?

"I wish I had a definitive answer for you," says the scribe. While there have been 'conversations' between the show and Mascolo, nothing had been worked out at press time. "Whether we can get that actor to play the part, we still don't know."

So the show has a plan. "In its first incarnation, Stefano will not be used very much, but his presence will be felt. It will be known," hints HS.

Does that mean the show would reacst? "No," hedges HS. "There's another way we'd do it."

Stefano's reappearance is a pivotal step in setting up the resurgence of the DiMera family. "Ultimately, we'll make EJ the new power to be reckoned with," confides HS.

***********************

MARLENA IS BACK!

Hogan Sheffer's first order of business when he took over as HW at DOOL was repairing Marlena.

"What they've done to Marlena on this show is horrible," declares the scribe. "Just horrible. My thing was, 'first of all, reunite her with John and rekindle that love affair. Make her the heroine she was, not this nutball who keeps getting kidnapped." (LOL!!)

So look for Marlena "to be very prominent in both Belle's and Sami's lives," promises HS. "She's got some great heroic moments coming in November."

And in 2007 - "One of them in February is going to be stunning," touts the scribe.

http://boards.sonypictures.com/soaps/showthread.php?t=74274

Sneak Peeks

Week of Nov. 6

Patrick wants to leave town with Hope.

The Brady family rallies around Kayla.

Bonnie steals from Patrick to pay off Lauren.

Kate spies on EJ

Can't Miss - Weds. Nov. 8 - Lexie "toasts" Sami

Week of Nov 13

John and Marlena face danger as they race to Canada to save Kayla.

Things get messy with Sami, Lucas and EJ.

********************

IN: Smokey Robinson appears on Nov. 15

Clay Aiken tapes his appearance on Nov. 14

http://boards.sonypictures.com/soaps/showthread.php?t=74266

Sounds good.

I am sick of seeing the same thing over and over and over in print. Time to see it on-screen!

Hmm wonder if Shawn and Bellle marry to provide a united front. Also how can Phillip who has no rights to Claire sue for full custody against Belle who's done nothing but be a good parent?

All of it sounds great.

Phillip can definitely sue for custody of Claire because he's the father of Claire, that is, the one who has raised her since she has been born. He was married to Claire's mother, Belle. That gives him some legal rights. And what if Phillip is the REAL father of Claire afterall and that teh DiMera's changed the DNA tests. I hope so, I always thought it was stupid as hell to make Shawn the father.

This sounds all too exciting! I dont believe Phillip could sue for custody ... Claire IS Shawns, theres no way around it. Plus just b/c he had one year with her doesnt mean anything ... Shawn will have the rest of her life!

From a legal standpoint, Phillip is Claire's father. So he does have grounds to sue for custody. He is on the birthcertificate, and was legally married to Belle while she was pregnant and when she gave birth. I'm not saying that Shawn does not have any rights because of this, because he does.

Sheffer won't comment on the rumors that the mystery man is in fact Susan and Stefano's son, Elvis. "I'm not allowed to speak about that," demurs the scribe.

I hope that he wants to keep the fans guesing, and he will turn out to not be Elvis. Stupid move if he is!

As of now, Phillip has more rigths to Claire than Shawn. Phillip is Claire's legal father. He is still married to Belle, so he could sue for custody of Claire. Now whether he'll win or not is another story.

As of now, Phillip has more rigths to Claire than Shawn. Phillip is Claire's legal father. He is still married to Belle, so he could sue for custody of Claire. Now whether he'll win or not is another story.

If Shawn & Belle would get together I doubt he would stand a chance. JT's biological parents won that battle with Bo & Hope, and they were complete strangers. Then of course, Philip will no longer be the Philip we've seen all these years. So who knows what he'll pull.

Anyway. Things are looking good. I'm actually quite bored with the show right now. EJ is such a snooze... So I'm hoping for some action this month. Loving the Bope stuff!

Wow, the writers have done a pretty good job at portraying the law accurately with regards to the Phillip spoiler. The Supreme Court has found that the presumptive father (the legal term for person in Phillip's status) has greater rights than the putative father (the legal term for a person in Shawn's status) under the Constitution if that's what a state's law is.

A situation not exactly like Belle/Phillip/Shawn but close enough happened in California, except in that case the "Belle" in that scenario went back to "Phillip" and "Shawn" sued for visitation rights and the state court denied him visitation. The Supreme Court agreed with the state's decision.

For people interested in Michael H case, here's the facts from the case as reported by Justice Scalia:

The facts of this case are, we must hope, extraordinary. On May 9, 1976, in Las Vegas, Nevada, Carole D., an international model, and Gerald D., a top executive in a French oil company, were married. The couple established a home in Playa del Rey, California, in which they resided as husband and wife when one or the other was not out of the country on business. In the summer of 1978, Carole became involved in an adulterous affair with a neighbor, Michael H. In September 1980, she conceived a child, Victoria D., who was born on May 11, 1981. Gerald was listed as father on the birth certificate and has always held Victoria out to the world as his daughter. Soon after delivery of the child, however, Carole informed Michael that she believed he might be the father.

In the first three years of her life, Victoria remained always with Carole, but found herself within a variety of quasifamily units. In October 1981, Gerald moved to New York City to pursue his business interests, but Carole chose to remain in California. At the end of that month, Carole and Michael had blood tests of themselves and Victoria, which showed a 98.07% probability that Michael was Victoria's father. In January 1982, Carole visited Michael in St. Thomas, where his primary business interests were based. There Michael held Victoria out as his child. In March, however, Carole left Michael and returned to California, where she took up residence with yet another man, Scott K. Later that spring, and again in the summer, Carole and Victoria spent time with Gerald in New York City, as well as on vacation in Europe. In the fall, they returned to Scott in California.

In November 1982, rebuffed in his attempts to visit Victoria, Michael filed a filiation action in California Superior Court to establish his paternity and right to visitation. In March 1983, the court appointed an attorney and guardian ad litem to represent Victoria's interests. Victoria then filed a cross-complaint asserting that if she had more than one psychological or de facto father, she was entitled to maintain her filial relationship, with all of the attendant rights, duties, and obligations, with both. In May 1983, Carole filed a motion for summary judgment. During this period, from March through July 1983, Carole was again living with Gerald in New York. In August, however, she returned to California, became involved once again with Michael, and instructed her attorneys to remove the summary judgment motion from the calendar.

For the ensuing eight months, when Michael was not in St. Thomas he lived with Carole and Victoria in Carole's apartment in Los Angeles and held Victoria out as his daughter. In April 1984, Carole and Michael signed a stipulation that Michael was Victoria's natural father. Carole left Michael the next month, however, and instructed her attorneys not to file the stipulation. In June 1984, Carole reconciled with Gerald and joined him in New York, where they now live with Victoria and two other children since born into the marriage.

In May 1984, Michael and Victoria, through her guardian ad litem, sought visitation rights for Michael pendente lite. To assist in determining whether visitation would be in Victoria's best interests, the Superior Court appointed a psychologist to evaluate Victoria, Gerald, Michael, and Carole. The psychologist recommended that Carole retain sole custody, but that Michael be allowed continued contact with Victoria pursuant to a restricted visitation schedule. The court concurred and ordered that Michael be provided with limited visitation privileges pendente lite.

On October 19, 1984, Gerald, who had intervened in the action, moved for summary judgment on the ground that under Cal. Evid. Code § 621 there were no triable issues of fact as to Victoria's paternity. This law provides that "the issue of a wife cohabiting with her husband, who is not impotent or sterile, is conclusively presumed to be a child of the marriage." Cal. Evid. Code Ann. § 621(a) (West Supp. 1989). The presumption may be rebutted by blood tests, but only if a motion for such tests is made, within two years from the date of the child's birth, either by the husband or, if the natural father has filed an affidavit acknowledging paternity, by the wife. §§ 621© and (d).

On January 28, 1985, having found that affidavits submitted by Carole and Gerald sufficed to demonstrate that the two were cohabiting at conception and birth and that Gerald was neither sterile nor impotent, the Superior Court granted Gerald's motion for summary judgment, rejecting Michael's and Victoria's challenges to the constitutionality of § 621. The court also denied their motions for continued visitation pending the appeal. It found that allowing such visitation would "violat[e] the intention of the Legislature by impugning the integrity of the family unit."

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f...w/michaelh.html

Ademption: The facts of the case sound like a soap opera right? Basically, when the case got to the Supreme Court, Scalia said that California's law presuming that the married man is the father of the children of his wife was ok and the putative father should have no visitation rights b/c after all the putative father (Michael H) engaged in an adulterous affair. Why should he expect any rights?

We do not accept Justice Brennan's criticism that this result "squashes" the liberty that consists of "the freedom not to conform." It seems to us that reflects the erroneous view that there is only one side to this controversy -- that one disposition can expand a "liberty" of sorts without contracting an equivalent "liberty" on the other side. Such a happy choice is rarely available. Here, to provide protection to an adulterous natural father is to deny protection to a marital father, and vice versa. If Michael has a "freedom not to conform" (whatever that means), Gerald must equivalently have a "freedom to conform." One of them will pay a price for asserting that "freedom" -- Michael by being unable to act as father of the child he has adulterously begotten, or Gerald by being unable to preserve the integrity of the traditional family unit he and Victoria have established.

Therefore, Scalia upheld California's law and Michael H was out of luck....

If the state where Salem is located has similiar laws as California, then Shawn could potentially be out of luck as well. But wait a minute!! Is Phillip sterile? Can he have kids? B/c that might be a loophole for Shawn/Belle in a custody battle!!

Phillip can definitely sue for custody of Claire because he's the father of Claire, that is, the one who has raised her since she has been born. He was married to Claire's mother, Belle. That gives him some legal rights. And what if Phillip is the REAL father of Claire afterall and that teh DiMera's changed the DNA tests. I hope so, I always thought it was stupid as hell to make Shawn the father.

Because Belle was married to Philip when Claire was born, she is LEGALLY Philip's child and Shawn is the one with no rights. All three would have to go to court and ask for changes in legality and the court would be on the side of what is in the child's best interest before making any changes or determinations. Law's law.

Wow, the writers have done a pretty good job at portraying the law accurately with regards to the Phillip spoiler. The Supreme Court has found that the presumptive father (the legal term for person in Phillip's status) has greater rights than the putative father (the legal term for a person in Shawn's status) under the Constitution if that's what a state's law is.

A situation not exactly like Belle/Phillip/Shawn but close enough happened in California, except in that case the "Belle" in that scenario went back to "Phillip" and "Shawn" sued for visitation rights and the state court denied him visitation. The Supreme Court agreed with the state's decision.

For people interested in Michael H case, here's the facts from the case as reported by Justice Scalia:

http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/f...w/michaelh.html

Ademption: The facts of the case sound like a soap opera right? Basically, when the case got to the Supreme Court, Scalia said that California's law presuming that the married man is the father of the children of his wife was ok and the putative father should have no visitation rights b/c after all the putative father (Michael H) engaged in an adulterous affair. Why should he expect any rights?

Therefore, Scalia upheld California's law and Michael H was out of luck....

If the state where Salem is located has similiar laws as California, then Shawn could potentially be out of luck as well. But wait a minute!! Is Phillip sterile? Can he have kids? B/c that might be a loophole for Shawn/Belle in a custody battle!!

No, Philip is not sterile. His sperm has low motility which means they don't have a long life, but he definitely is not sterile.

Phillip's first order of business will be rectifying the situation with Claire, the baby he was led to believe was his daughter.

Belle and Shawn did not lead Philip to believe that Claire was his child. Phillip's parents committed this fraud. Since Claire is still a toddler , Phillip will never be able to argue that Claire would suffer harm by not having him in her life. Yes she might miss him for a minute, but she does have a father who is more than willing to be there.

Here is the problem: Shawn is a hot head and never commits to anything and his track record will prove it. Driving his motocyle through a church. Driving his car through Victor's house. Working for EJ. He just does stupid things. Having a relationship with a hooker.

And based on past spoilers we know that Shawn and Belle are going to go on the run with Claire. This tells me that Phillip will go for full custody of Claire as punishment/revenge against Belle for loving Shawn. And since we also know that Victor is going to help Phillip, then that means that the judge might be bribed and custody will be awarded to Phillip. Thereby causing Shawn/Belle/Claire to run. IMO.

AWESOME SPOILERS!!!

I hope EJ is not Elvis and I don't think he is. I think he belongs to Tony and Anna.

I just love Hogan and him doing all these previews. Days is going to rock November and I just love the Philip/Victor stuff.

Bope, Steve/Kayla. John/Marlena, etc-LOVE IT!!!

I think Philip has a very good chance at getting custody of Claire. They'll take one look at Shawn's police record and its bye bye Shawn!

This might actually be good. I really hope they cast a good Philip. Please, please...

rem13 the way you summarized the Philip/Belle/Shawn sl, sounds excellent. Belle & Shawn on the run with little Claire? Excellent and the perfect way to reunite the two. Also Philip's transformation sounds intreguing.

I wonder with Philip coming back who could they possibly pair him up with. Mimi (for the time being since she is leaving in 07 right?), or Willow? Though it is said that Willow is supposed to be on the show for a short amount of time.

rem13 the way you summarized the Philip/Belle/Shawn sl, sounds excellent. Belle & Shawn on the run with little Claire? Excellent and the perfect way to reunite the two. Also Philip's transformation sounds intreguing.

I wonder with Philip coming back who could they possibly pair him up with. Mimi (for the time being since she is leaving in 07 right?), or Willow? Though it is said that Willow is supposed to be on the show for a short amount of time.

Probably Stephanie with that conversation that Kate had with Stephanie about promising to be a friend to Philip. It would also create some tension in the Johnson household since Victor and Steve will probably not get along by the time Phil arrives back in Salem.

Thanks DaysFanJean for telling me that Phillip wasn't sterile. Back to the drawing boards to figure out a legal loophole for Shawn to get visitation/custody rights for Claire....

There's rumors that Davetta Sherwood is coming to DAYS. Maybe she'll be a love interest for Philip.