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.
I am quoting some of Schiller's thoughts on the case that he wrote in the epilogue (pp 583-4) below, in italics
"I still wanted to verify whether anyone I interviewed could offer some indication the the Ramseys might have questioned each other's innocence. It wasn't long, however, before I was fairly certain once again that John would never raise the subject. If he actually knew Patsy was involved in their child's death, then there was no need for discussion. If he was merely suspicious, he would still refrain. And if he doubted Patsy's word, then why ask?"
They were both interviewed about whether, if they ever suspected each other, one would cover for the other....transcripts posted somewhere on this forum.
I think the son just settled is defamation case against CBS.
I guess you don't mess with Lin Wood.
Lin Wood, the Atlanta-based attorney for Burke and his father, John Ramsey, is limited in what he can say about the resolution of the case. But he tweeted: "After handling many defamation cases for them over the past twenty years, hopefully this is my last defamation case for this fine family."
...Author Jim Kolar penned a book called Foreign Faction that made similar assertions about Burke — but according to Wood, he hadn't targeted it for legal action because "it was self-published. It had no credibility. No mainstream publisher would touch it. I know for a fact that Jim Kolar approached a number of members of the mainstream media in New York seeking interviews to publicize the book, and they refused to interview him. They refused any attempt to give publicity or credibility to his book... . And that book is the cornerstone of the CBS docu-series. So while Jim Kolar was not worth a lawsuit a few years ago, because I did not feel he had any credibility and I did not want to give him the appearance of credibility that would publicize his book by filing a lawsuit against him, obviously things have changed now, because CBS used this book as part of its script for the docu-series."
The central theory espoused by the CBS program was that Burke had killed his sister with a blow to the head and his parents covered up the crime. But Wood rejected this supposition.
"I can't tell you in strong enough words: There is absolutely not one iota of physical evidence that links this young man to the murder of his sister," he said. "It's not even a matter of exonerating him. It shows that he is not even a legitimate suspect, as acknowledged by law enforcement authorities publicly in 1998 and 1999. So in order to accuse this young man, you've either got to intentionally misrepresent the evidence, intentionally ignore the evidence, or manufacture evidence to come up with the sensational, for-profit headline that Burke Ramsey was somehow involved in the murder of his sister.".................
The fact is, he'll live the rest of his life knowing that people Googling him will see that he has been falsely been accused of murder, to see that he has been falsely portrayed as a killer since age nine. That will impact every business and social relationship this young man will ever engage in."
.....For Wood, this wasn't simply another case. "If you can't tell how pissed off I am, I am not apparently able to adequately express myself," he told us in that email interview two years ago. "I didn't fall off the truck yesterday. I've been around the block with some of the largest media companies in the country in significant libel cases. This one is, among those I've represented, the most egregious libel case I've ever seen. I can't imagine what a judge or a jury's reaction would be. I think I know. I think I got a taste of it in the earlier cases I filed on behalf of Burke. But those defendants had the good sense to promptly settle their cases with Burke and not repeat the foolishness, the unlawful accusations."
Some people are vultures, no insult intended to the avian vultures. In their righteousness they think nothing of the devastating lifelong effects of false or unproven accusations against people.
Lets not forget where the majority of public influence originated. People who dont have the time or inclination to research depend on law enforcement statements. But of course, 'thats their opinion'.So, its okay to miscontstrue facts. l
Settled as in what? Maybe the settlement is they won't replay the show.
Some day I think Burke will slip up. In fact, I was hoping this went to court just to see Burke and hopefully John on the stand. Of course team Ramsey wants no part of that
Settled as in what? Maybe the settlement is they won't replay the show.
Some day I think Burke will slip up. In fact, I was hoping this went to court just to see Burke and hopefully John on the stand. Of course team Ramsey wants no part of that
Maybe he didn't do it? In that case it would be hard for him to slip up. What evidence do you think could convict him. What evidence proves his guilt in your mind?
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 8 days ago)
35,633 posts, read 17,968,125 times
Reputation: 50655
Quote:
Originally Posted by CA4Now
See post #3322.
Unless a poster has info that hasn't been made public, we don't know whether CBS agreed not to air the show again as part of the terms of the settlement.
Unless a poster has info that hasn't been made public, we don't know whether CBS agreed not to air the show again as part of the terms of the settlement.
None of the terms have been made public.
How likely do you think it is, after reading what Lin said, that airing the show that brought the lawsuit would be allowed as part of the settlement? Not a chance in hell...that would mean they agreed to allow them to continue to defame his client which would make no sense at all.
There is zero chance of that.
How likely do you think it is, after reading what Lin said, that airing the show that brought the lawsuit would be allowed as part of the settlement? Not a chance in hell...that would mean they agreed to allow them to continue to defame his client which would make no sense at all.
There is zero chance of that.
Exactly. (And my reply to that poster wasn't in reference to re-showing the docu-drama, anyway.)
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.
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.
