FOX News Wins! Ramseys LOSE!

[RiverRat]

Denver, CO
Friday, January 07, 2005

Ramseys' suit against Fox News dismissed

Family claimed TV report implied involvement in JonBenet's murder

By Alicia Caldwell
Denver Post Staff Writer

A federal judge has dismissed the libel and defamation case filed by the family of JonBenet Ramsey against Fox News Network.

In an order dated Thursday, U.S. District Judge Phillip Figa wrote that the totality of a broadcast by the news outlet did not defame the parents or brother of the slain child beauty queen.

The Ramseys had claimed that a December 2002 segment by Fox News reporter Carol McKinley had implied they were involved in the murder of the 6-year-old JonBenet.

Dori Ann Hanswirth, Fox News' lawyer, was ecstatic today upon receiving word of the decision.

"We're thrilled," Hanswirth said. "It's a great day for the First Amendment."

Lin Wood, the Atlanta lawyer representing the Ramseys, could not immediately be reached for comment today afternoon.

In an elegantly written order that quoted Shakespeare, Figa wrote about the importance of upholding constitutionally protected rights of free speech.

"Plantiffs may well have filed this case more for vindication than for money, and perhaps vindication is what they deserve," Figa wrote.

"But they have a better chance for meaningful vindication in the court of public opinion through vigorous debate about the background and details of this heinous crime than by suing those whose reporting may arguable include some less than favorable references about them," the order said.

[VespaElf]

Although I left the JBR forum on here I cant help but post about this wonderfull news!!!!!!!!!! :dance: :dance: :dance: :dance: :dance:

As you know from FFJ ,RR,the tides are turning and it seems the case is getting a "second wind"-ABOUT TIME ISNT IT????? :)

[Casshew]

Anyone know how much they were suing for?

[englishleigh]

Cass, where'd you get that creepy photo of Patsy at JonBenet's grave??

[Show Me]

Good for Fox the case was dismissed, bad for justice it didn't go to trial.

Geeee Woody LOST...I thought he was supposed to be a hot shot lawyer....I think that might be the last case he tries for the Ramseys.

[Casshew]

Cass, where'd you get that creepy photo of Patsy at JonBenet's grave??
huh? :waitasec:

[englishleigh]

huh? :waitasec:


Oh, sorry...DUH, it wasn't you....long day. :doh:

[BlueCrab]

"But they have a better chance for meaningful vindication in the court of public opinion through vigorous debate about the background and details of this heinous crime than by suing those whose reporting may arguable include some less than favorable references about them," the order said.


Thank you RiverRat,

I love the above sentence in the judge's order. VIGOROUS DEBATE is the way to gain public vindication, not lawsuits that intimid and violate the First Amendment that guarantees free speech.

BlueCrab

[RiverRat]

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs, John Ramsey, Patsy Ramsey and Burke Ramsey, demand:

(a) Trial by jury;

(b) That judgment be entered against Defendant, Fox News
Network, L.L.C., awarding compensatory damages to each Plaintiff
in an amount not less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000.00);

(c) That judgment be entered against Defendant, Fox News
Network, L.L.C., for punitive damages in an amount not less than
Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000.00) to punish and penalize said
Defendant and deter said Defendant from repeating its unlawful
conduct; and

d) That all costs of this action be assessed against
Defendant.
:loser:

[Show Me]

Still waiting for Woody's statementl! Come on Woody give us beer can collectors a statement!

Sooooooooooooo John Ramsey is a LOSER again this year! And the year has hardly begun.

I expect more 'freedom of expression' from the media from now on. :crazy:

[DebE]

This is such great news, although I would have loved to have seen this case go to trial.
Way to go Fox News! Guess what Limp Woodie? You lost, LOL!

[Casshew]

They wanted 6million for compensation for a news story? :doh:

[Show Me]

I thought I read it was 16 million total.

Remember John can't seem to find or buy his way into a job. :loser:

Well I'm willing to do my part to help and express my opinion in the court of public opinion, like the judge says.

A Ramsey killed their daughter, probably accidentally, and have been covering up the truth ever since! Which is why all their interview transcripts read... I don't know, I can't remember, I don't recall....when questioned by LE on details of that morning. (Amazing Patsy, who didn't read beyond the first few lines of the 3 page ransom note, told the 911 operator SBTC was the name at the end of the note! How'd she do that if she didn't write it?)

Oh yeah and Patsy wrote the ransom note.

[BrotherMoon]

(Amazing Patsy, who didn't read beyond the first few lines of the 3 page ransom note, told the 911 operator SBTC was the name at the end of the note! How'd she do that if she didn't write it?)

Oh yeah and Patsy wrote the ransom note.

S.B.T.C is THE, THE, THE ...I tell you, THE central factor in Patsy's motive for ending the life of her daughter.

(Oh ya, Victory! too.)

[TexMex]

Another report from the Daily Camera:


Judge dismisses Ramseys' Fox suit
Tossed defamation claim family's first legal defeat

By Christine Reid, Camera Staff Writer
January 8, 2005

A Denver district judge has dismissed a $16 million defamation lawsuit against the Fox News Network filed by the parents of slain Boulder 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey.

John and Patsy Ramsey filed the suit over a story that aired Dec. 27, 2002, in which Denver-based reporter Carol McKinley said there has "never been any evidence to link an intruder to her brutal murder."

In the Ramseys' first legal defeat since their daughter's death, Denver District Judge Phillip S. Figa this week granted Fox News' motion to throw the suit out.

"Taking the broadcast as a whole, it did not hold up any member of the Ramsey family to public contempt or ridicule or accuse any of them of participating in the murder (of) their youngest family member," Figa wrote in his ruling.

He wrote that the Ramseys may have wanted "vindication" more than money, and may deserve it.

"But they have a better chance for meaningful vindication in the court of public opinion through vigorous debate about the background and details of this heinous crime than by suing those whose reporting may arguably include some less than favorable inferences about them," he wrote. "Plaintiffs cannot have the public discourse playing field entirely to themselves."

Ramsey attorney L. Lin Wood said he was disappointed by the ruling but not completely surprised.

"To me it is an unfortunate fact that the state of defamation law in this country has reached a level that is extremely difficult to have these cases decided by juries," Wood said. "I believe the jury would have had a different view if the judge hadn't decided the matter himself."

Since JonBenet's death, her family has filed nearly a dozen multimillion-dollar lawsuits alleging various publications wrongly blamed family members. Before the Fox lawsuit, all of them have been settled out of court.

"Obviously we're delighted with the ruling," Fox attorney Dori Ann Hanswirth said. "It's a great vindication for the news channel and for Carol McKinley."

JonBenet was found beaten and strangled in her parents' Boulder basement on Dec. 26, 1996. A grand jury investigation ended with no indictments, and no arrests have been made.

In 2003, a federal judge who dismissed a lawsuit against the Ramseys said there is considerable evidence showing that an intruder killed the child. Boulder County District Attorney Mary Keenan, whose office now heads the aging investigation, said she agreed with the judge's ruling.

Keenan said Friday that she was relieved by the Fox suit's dismissal because it freed her investigators from subpoenas by Fox attorneys to turn over documents from the voluminous case file.

"It really will save a lot of resources in our office," she said.

[VespaElf]

A Ramsey killed their daughter, probably accidentally, and have been covering up the truth ever since! Which is why all their interview transcripts read... I don't know, I can't remember, I don't recall....when questioned by LE on details of that morning. (Amazing Patsy, who didn't read beyond the first few lines of the 3 page ransom note, told the 911 operator SBTC was the name at the end of the note! How'd she do that if she didn't write it?)

Oh yeah and Patsy wrote the ransom note.


:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:
Amen and thank you!!

[Cain]

A very good day for freedom of speech and plain common sense. The suit against Fox has been vigoriusly dismissed by the judge.

[Britt]

Awesome. :D

[DebE]

Isn't it grand that Keenan is so concerned about her investigators? Now these investigators are free to look for JonBenet's killer, right?

[Show Me]

Isn't it grand that Keenan is so concerned about her investigators? Now these investigators are free to look for JonBenet's killer, right?

I don't think Keenan asked for any funds to continue the investigation!

[K777angel]

The Ramseys lost because Carol McKinley and FOX News were RIGHT when they stated that there has NEVER been any evidence developed that links to an intruder. There HASN'T been!! And the Ramseys know it.
They simply scrounged around for "circumstances" they attribute to "the killer" that in reality had absolutely nothing to do with the crime. This happens in EVERY murder case. There are always things surrounding a crime that might appear to be connected - but are in fact not. Like the DNA they love to tout.
Nada.

What the Ramseys do NOT do, of course, is point out all of the things that DO point to them having been invovled in the crime. (Which dismisses their pitiful list of "intruder did it" so-called evidence.)
Afterall - they have NEVER been cleared of this crime. EVER. For good reason.

The lawsuit that needs to take place is from the citizens of Boulder and Colorado against the District Attorney's office in Boulder for miscarriage of justice!

By the way, in the "nearly a dozen" lawsuits filed for defamation by the Ramseys, how come not a single one was ever filed on behalf of Mr. John Ramsey???????? He was certainly fingered as the perp many, many times by tabloids etc. I have always found this extremely curious........ :confused:

~Angel~

[Camper]

The Ramseys lost because Carol McKinley and FOX News were RIGHT when they stated that there has NEVER been any evidence developed that links to an intruder. There HASN'T been!! And the Ramseys know it.
They simply scrounged around for "circumstances" they attribute to "the killer" that in reality had absolutely nothing to do with the crime. This happens in EVERY murder case. There are always things surrounding a crime that might appear to be connected - but are in fact not. Like the DNA they love to tout.
Nada.

What the Ramseys do NOT do, of course, is point out all of the things that DO point to them having been invovled in the crime. (Which dismisses their pitiful list of "intruder did it" so-called evidence.)
Afterall - they have NEVER been cleared of this crime. EVER. For good reason.

The lawsuit that needs to take place is from the citizens of Boulder and Colorado against the District Attorney's office in Boulder for miscarriage of justice!

By the way, in the "nearly a dozen" lawsuits filed for defamation by the Ramseys, how come not a single one was ever filed on behalf of Mr. John Ramsey???????? He was certainly fingered as the perp many, many times by tabloids etc. I have always found this extremely curious........ :confused:

~Angel~




---------->>>K777Angel, has a BINGO, lets all check our cards,

Under the B, sue for Burke $$.
Under the I, I don't remember, that spoon?
Under the N, Need the money!
Under the G, Escaped to GA.
Under the O, Oh my, John still under the umbrella, no suits fer him.

Good eye K777Angel.

Carol McKinly is a great reporter, really a digger. I listened to her grow up in Denver radio. :clap::clap: for Fox!



.

[BlueCrab]

The score is 1 to 0.

Lin Wood said this is the first Ramsey case he lost. He fails to add that he has never WON a Ramsey case. They were all settled, with the terms of the settlements sealed. I don't think the Ramseys have collected as much as a nickel from all those settled lawsuits, other than from the one over Steve Thomas' book.

JMO

[Miss Daisey]

Blue Crab,

You, I or nobody knows what the Ramsey's have collected upon settlement of any case or the terms of the settlement.....and that's a fact.

I'd like to make a statement to the effectiveness of a skilled lawyer like Lin Wood. You might THINK or refer to him as a "small town Southern lawyer" with no particular skill but I can assure you there's a good deal of trembling before most would go up against him. Lin Wood is an advocate on behalf of a client. Whether they're innocent or guilty is not his job.

One would only hope.. should you find yourself in circumstances such as the Ramseys.. you would find one that went to bat for you like he has for the them.

[TLynn]

Let's see..... :waitasec:

That's 30% - 40% of NOTHING!!!!!!!!! For Wood.

[K777angel]

Blue Crab,

You, I or nobody knows what the Ramsey's have collected upon settlement of any case or the terms of the settlement.....and that's a fact.

I'd like to make a statement to the effectiveness of a skilled lawyer like Lin Wood. You might THINK or refer to him as a "small town Southern lawyer" with no particular skill but I can assure you there's a good deal of trembling before most would go up against him. Lin Wood is an advocate on behalf of a client. Whether they're innocent or guilty is not his job.

One would only hope.. should you find yourself in circumstances such as the Ramseys.. you would find one that went to bat for you like he has for the them.

Lin Wood is a prime example of why lawyers have a bad reputation.
He is not "defending" them, he is PROMOTING them!. They have NOT gone to trial for a crime. (yet)
Instead, he is basically an ambulance chaser.
He SUES people. For big money.
Big whoopin' deal.

He manipulates the truth - leaving out many facts.
Omission of the truth is no different than a blatant lie. They are both DISHONEST.

Frankly the man disgusts me.

[Show Me]

I gotta agree with K777 angel...

Woody doesn't want to go to court, he'd rather the big guys settle to appease his clients. It's not about honor with the Ramseys, we've all seen this happen year after year....it's about MONEY.

Woody distorted the truth and lied to the public...., the Rams were cleared thru DNA and not suspects... are lies.

[BlueCrab]

Miss Daisey,

Lin Wood is far from being a small town lawyer. Atlanta was a megalopolis the last time I looked.

Investigations are supposed to be a search for the truth. This is not what occurred during the 2000 interviews in Atlanta. Lin Wood filibustered the interviews with nonsensical comments and objections that went on endlessly. It's almost impossible to dig out the facts from all of the garbage lectures that Lin Wood purposely spit out in an attempt to obfuscate the findings. About 75% of the 2000 interview transcript was about Lin Wood, not about John and Patsy.

JMO

[Camper]

Talk about slam dunkie deals. Lin Wood made a media case for himself, when he defended the poor fellow who FOUND the bag with the bomb at the Olympic thingie in Atlanta. I donut remember his name, BUT the media was on this poor guys back for having PLANTED the bomb, which he did not do.

SOOOOOOOOO, here comes Lin Woods reputation hitting WORLD newss, defending the fellow, WHO NO DOUBT spoke in clear words, AND OFTEN, to Mr. Wood that HE DID NOT DO IT, HE WAS INNOCENT, WELLLLLLLLL, even I could do a good court presentation and get the mans reputation back for him.

I would suspect that many (now this is a term that my MOM used often when I was a toddler, she learned it from her mom during the late 1800's) MEALY MOUTHED conversations have occurred between the Ramseys and Mr. Wood. He is operating on blind faith.

My mental definition of MEALY mouthed, is that your words are NOT spoken clearly with great defined accuracy about JUST why I would be innocent, BUT the issue would be skirted with around the bush definement.

I never knew my grandma, but I just bet when she spoke words, you knew PRECISELY what she meant.



.

[Miss Daisey]

Camper, Blue Crab

Hold your fire. My comments in defense of Lin Wood were to point out the function of a good criminal defense lawyer. For Heavens Sake !

And the myth of the "search for truth" ...more often than not...only happens on Law and Order....as we've seen it play out on too many high profile cases.

[TLynn]

Wood is now representing another poor victim of the media - Gary Condit - the man who wouldn't come forward when it meant life or death for Chandra Levy. The man who was too busy dumping a watch across town than to be forthright with information.

Condit is slime and Wood is right there with him.

How long will Wood's reputation from Richard Jewell last him...until he becomes known as a shyster (a term used by MY mom, camper).

I lost all respect for Wood when he knowingly misspoke the facts re: the Ramseys.

[Nehemiah]

It appears to be all about money, and only money. Wood has a job to do and by his own admission, he's made lotsa money off the Ramsey case.

[BlueCrab]

It appears to be all about money, and only money. Wood has a job to do and by his own admission, he's made lotsa money off the Ramsey case.



Nehemiah,

It's doubtful Lin Wood and the Ramseys made any money on the Burke defamation lawsuits. They all settled because, IMO, the courts wouldn't let them go forward to trial as it would violate the Colorado Children's Code protecting the identities of child perpetrators under the age of 10. Wood knew ahead of time the Burke lawsuits couldn't go anywhere because of the Children's Code, so they were obviously filed solely for propaganda purposes.

Wood and the Ramseys likely made some money off Steve Thomas' book when they sued Thomas, co-author Don Davis, and the publisher, St. Martin's Press, because Burke wasn't a part of that lawsuit. The book, "JonBenet, Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation", fingered Patsy as the killer, but Thomas was unable to prove it, was caught in lies, and he lost his ass.

Lin Wood was bull****ting Darnay Hoffman when he bragged about making big money off the Ramsey cases. He likely made some money from St. Martin's Press, and maybe Don Davis, but that's all. Steve Thomas didn't have any money.

JMO

[K777angel]

Camper, Blue Crab

Hold your fire. My comments in defense of Lin Wood were to point out the function of a good criminal defense lawyer. For Heavens Sake !


May I remind you that Lin Wood is NOT a "criminal defense lawyer"! So you cannot call him a "good" one.
He is a civil attorney. Someone whose expertise is SUING.
Not defending clients in criminal cases. The Ramseys let go those attorneys years ago.

Lin Wood is ALLLLLLLL about $$$$$$$$$$$$.

There is a special place in hades IMO for people like that. :banghead:

[TLynn]

Of course money was made from Burke's lawsuits. Settlement probably meant more profit than going to trial.

The Ramseys even sold themselves to the Enquirer as part of a $ettlement.

The cases not going forward had nothing to do with the Colorado "children's code" protecting their identity - if so, then the case could not have been filed - it never would've gone to settlement. Settlement meant a conclusion - agreement on both parties - not the state overriding the two parties.

Keep in mind, it was about Burke - the defense would've been evidence that he was involved - but the facts had nothing to do with it - it was $$$$ - damage control.

The Colorado law states a child cannot be prosecuted for a crime under the age of 10. That's all! Nothing else!

[gaia]

The Rams and Lin Wood took the tragic death of JB and used it as a tool to try to get damaged reputations back, punish those who didn't agree with them or thought they were guilty, and make MONEY. The Rams will never get their reputation back. Their child is still dead. Punishing others will never help them have true peace of mind or really protect their son (if he needs protection). ALAS, GUESS THAT ONLY LEAVES MONEY!!! :twocents:

[Show Me]

The Rams and Lin Wood took the tragic death of JB and used it as a tool to try to get damaged reputations back, punish those who didn't agree with them or thought they were guilty, and make MONEY. The Rams will never get their reputation back. Their child is still dead. Punishing others will never help them have true peace of mind or really protect their son (if he needs protection). ALAS, GUESS THAT ONLY LEAVES MONEY!!! :twocents:

Yep...the failed political campaign in which John ran on the platform of his dead daughter. Kept him from answering hard political questions...even on national tv.

Hmmm....anyone know if the Rams coughed up the money for a donation to their kid's camp? 'Member the one Patsy claimed they already donated to it? Yah know, the one the Rams kept patting themselves on the back and giving themselves kudos for being so generous, after Tricia remarked on TV how the JB foundation wasn't doing a thing, had fake phone numbers and email addresses?

[gaia]

Shades of OJ. I suppose they're working as hard as he is to find "the real killer". Or maybe they're too busy running for office and enjoying the good life - once again. Hey, if they can do that, more power to them. I'd hate to think two innocent people would not be able to fully participate in a meaningful life again, but their track record after the murder leads me to believe they may not do what they say - ex. the camp.

Shucks, if my daughter had died tragically and I'd been misidentified as the murderer, it would be hard to live life the way I used to. Yet, these guys just pick up, Patsy gets a "life coach", John runs for office, they keep piling up dough, and seem to be back in the swing of things. I wonder why I don't admire them? Seriously. I just don't understand what they do and because of that, they seem self-centered and narcissistic. Oh well. Guess it's just me.

[Nehemiah]

I have three very close friends who have lost children to tragedies. I suppose if outsiders viewed their lives/actions, they would think all three have moved on to the point that they no longer even think of their deceased children. But that is quite the contrary when you know them really well and they talk to you heart to heart about their children's birthdays, Christmas, and weddings that will never be. Outsiders view them as moving on, having good lives; some have more children now, new spouses, new homes, new careers, etc... All this to say that at some point it seems that those who have endured this type of event have to move on or totally go insane. That's what they have said to me, anyway, that there comes a time in one's life when one must do that in order to survive.

I remember reading (somewhere) that Patsy presented a check to the kids' camp after they declared they had already done so. Like the next day or two. Kind of "a check is in the mail" situation. LOL I honestly think that they or someone close to them must read these forums because their actions so often follow what has been posted.

[Show Me]

The Rams have never done anything from the heart...they only contribute to charity for the publicity. And forget JonBenet as 'that' child has only a bogus foundation to remember her by.

Actions speak louder than words and the Ramseys actions scream... WE ARE GUILTY.

[Jayelles]

I
LOL I honestly think that they or someone close to them must read these forums because their actions so often follow what has been posted.
A web page was registered last October at www.websleuthers.com (http://www.websleuthers.com) It appears to have a similar graphic to the ramseyfamily webpage and is registered to someone who lists themselves as living in PA, but sabrina checked it out and says it may be a false address. Someone with a similar name lives in Mi.

[gaia]

Really! Love to know their posting name!