Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
But you wonder, if he was making defamatory statements then why not just sue? And why is this statement, "I hired Mr. Klein to find my grandson, not to make public statements concerning his opinions on this case, writes Kunz," not worded to say "...not to make defamatory statements..."
Maybe they are different than me, but if someone was defaming me in a missing child case, making it sound like I had something to do with it, and I didn't, I would not be having an attorney sending a letter to the perpetrator, I would be having my attorney filing suit for defamation of character.
I've seen others file "intent to sue" also. It must be some legal maneuver, but I'm not sure what.
This PI is middle aged, been around a long time, been doing this job a long time. I'm pretty sure he knows what his duties are as a PI and what can get him sued. This was a very deliberate statement, not something off the cuff that just slipped out. I hope that his statement wasn't deliberately misleading.
I guess it's just wait and see now. I hope they find the boy, and I hope he gets justice no matter who is responsible.
I know, they can write letters that notes an intent to sue if the statements are not publicly retracted, etc. However, I don't believe the letter stated that.
But regardless, I'm just going on what I would guess anyone, who is NOT responsible for a possible crime would do, and that is to sue if you have a case. A lawsuit serves a major purpose; other than monetary gains, if you win, it can show to the public the person was lying in his statements.
Interview with Nate Eaton, the reporter who's done the most coverage of this case.
Quote:
Question: Are you tainting a potential court case by sharing so much information about this case?
Answer: This question could be asked about any case that receives lots of publicity. There has always been some tension between the First Amendment and a defendant’s right to a fair trial. The judicial system works to balance these competing rights.
We asked a handful of Idaho judges, prosecutors and law enforcement for an opinion on our coverage. Overall, none of them expressed any major concerns and many applauded our work.
Media coverage can create challenges in finding an unbiased jury and should anyone be charged in this case, a judge has the option of moving the trial.
A child from our community is missing. We maintain the public has the right to know as much as they can about him and the circumstances surrounding his disappearance.
This is right out of David Paulides " Missing 411" series of books. Children go missing in national or state parks with alarming frequency and some just seem to vanish into thin air and its a pateern. Then other cases are where young men go missing and then turn up in bodies of water or in areas that have already been searched and seem to have been put there more recently than would be logical based on when they disappeared. He's on "Coast to Coast AM" all the time and is also on Youtube.
Nope, I just searched all the eastern Idaho news sites a couple days ago and nothing. Strange case! After the second PI confirmed what the 1st had said, that he thinks the parents were involved, I thought an arrest was imminent. Guess not.
I dunno about this 2nd PI, Klein. Is there something strange about him? He seemed to spill the beans early on and made claims that not even law enforcement made. Could his comments be hindering the investigation? Law enforcement has been quiet.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.