The Case of JonBenet Ramsey-CBS Sept. 18 # 3

[UKGuy]

JonBenet’s brother files suit against pathologist

Corey Williams, Associated Press 12:04 a.m. EDT October 7, 2016

Detroit — The brother of JonBenet Ramsey filed a defamation lawsuit Thursday against a Michigan forensic pathologist who told a Metro Detroit media outlet that Burke Ramsey killed his 6-year-old sister.

The complaint alleges that Dr. Werner Spitz said in a Sept. 19 interview that 9-year-old Burke bludgeoned JonBenet to death in 1996.

“Spitz made this accusation without ever examining JonBenet’s body, without viewing the crime scene, and without consulting with the pathologist who performed the autopsy on JonBenet,” the complaint filed in Wayne County Circuit Court in Detroit says...

http://www.detroitnews.com/story/ne...nets-brother-files-suit-pathologist/91713662/

BetteDavisEyes,
I'll bet this case goes nowhere. Its probably a public cease and desist warning to journalists, publishers, etc. it should get tossed at its first hearing: BR is a public figure, Spitz's comment is free speech regarding both BR's public performance and the CBS Special. Reverse the chronology and BR has a slim chance.

Who killed JFK, think of the suits that should have brought, or all the crime shows that name suspects, Spitz will likely claim on the media outlets public insurance policy?

The curious side effect is that it generates more Burke Ramsey Killed His Sister headlines!

.
.

 

[SCHMAE]

When I read this...something popped in my mind. Maybe this has been discussed before.
Is it possible that maybe Burke was wearing her favorite gown and the crown that was found in the WC?
Could the family secret or at least part of the secret be that Burke cross dressed? This might kind of tie into the PJs found in her room with feces in it that weren't JonBenet's size.
Maybe mama bought Burke panties to match JonBenet's but his needed to be a larger size maybe hmmm 12-14?
Could Burke have in a sick way wanted to be just like JonBenet? Could this have lead to confusion and inner turmoil within Burke and he always lashed out at his nemesis/sister/beauty queen? Maybe he really wanted to replace her with himself.
Not sure what to think of this idea.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

Wow! I like this post ! Things to think about for sure.

 

[SCHMAE]

But this was just opinions , right? I watched it and don't recall anyone ' DECLARING" Burke as guilty. It 's opinion and anyone can give an opinion. " I think Burke is guilty'' is way different than " Burke is definitely guilty''. I think this was a big mistake on Burke's part. There was not much said IIRC that has not already been known and discussed in various books and what not for 20 yrs. So why is this show getting Burke so riled up ?

ETA If he had sued to stop it from airing that would be one thing. It's already aired. The information is out there. You cannot put it back in the box.

 

[dizzychick]

But this was just opinions , right. I watched it and don't recall anyone ' DECLARING" Burke as guilty. It 's opinion and anyone can give an opinion. " I think Burke is guilty'' is way different than " Burke is definitely guilty''. I think this was a big mistake on Burke's part. There was not much said IIRC that has not already been known and discussed in various books and what not for 20 yrs. So why is this show getting Burke so riled up ?

ETA If he had sued to stop it from airing that would be one thing. It's already aired. The information is out there. You cannot put it back in the box.

you know that ole saying " where theres smoke theres fire". Well I think there is enough smoke surrounding Burke that one might be tempted to think he did have something to do with that evening.

1. Burke admits to being up that night playing with his new x mas toy. ( isnt that new info?)

2. Pineapple on table, with Burke's prints denied by Patsy

3. Parents deny voice on 911 but experts say its there

4. Flashlight with no prints on it denied by patsy, ( did Burke say he used a flashlight? )

5. Parents never even wake Burke to ask if he saw anything, thats odd!

Please feel free to add anything else regarding Burke and that night, I know I am forgetting something

All of this IMO adds up to some fact we have not been told

 

[dizzychick]

Makes me wonder, if Burke really did have something to do with her murder then he was fully and completely sheltered by the parents and therefore this lie had to be carried on forever. He never could get the proper treatment if there is any and that is sad and scary! What would that do to your mind to have your parents tell you to never talk of this again.?? The movie Psycho comes to my mind

 

[keyleigh]

But this was just opinions , right? I watched it and don't recall anyone ' DECLARING" Burke as guilty. It 's opinion and anyone can give an opinion. " I think Burke is guilty'' is way different than " Burke is definitely guilty''. I think this was a big mistake on Burke's part. There was not much said IIRC that has not already been known and discussed in various books and what not for 20 yrs. So why is this show getting Burke so riled up ?



ETA If he had sued to stop it from airing that would be one thing. It's already aired. The information is out there. You cannot put it back in the box.

The lawsuit is about the radio interview Spitz did.

 

[dizzychick]

The lawsuit is about the radio interview Spitz did.

I cannot remember exactly what this lawyer told me about Casey Anthony, but it was something about how she couldnt sue due to the fact she has become a public figure. Something like a private citizen has a better chance to win a defamation suit but public figures do not have that same benefit. Its like their fair game . I wish we had someone who knows this law to chime in...

 

[keyleigh]

I cannot remember exactly what this lawyer told me about Casey Anthony, but it was something about how she couldnt sue due to the fact she has become a public figure. Something like a private citizen has a better chance to win a defamation suit but public figures do not have that same benefit. Its like their fair game . I wish we had someone who knows this law to chime in...

So BR has to try and convince the court that he hasn't courted the attention at all then huh? Pity he did that little interview with Dr Phill. :laughing:

 

[Denlawyer]

If you're a public figure, you have to prove actual malice to prevail on a defamation claim. Actual malice, in general, means that the person making the defamatory statement did knowing that the statement was false or made the statement with reckless disregard for the truth. So it's much harder to win a defamation lawsuit if you are a public figure (which is generally someone like a celebrity, but some states have what's called a "limited purpose" public figure in which an otherwise private person is recognized as a public figure on a particular topic/subject) . If the plaintiff is a private figure, then he or she only needs to prove the statement was made negligently.

I glanced at BR's lawsuit and LW is trying to get around Burke being a limited public figure due to his appearance on Dr. Phil by arguing it was a legally justified response to the anticipated CBS show. I don't know what the law is on this in Michigan, but I'm sure LW knows Spitz's lawyers will argue BR is a limited public figure who opened the door by appearing on Dr. Phil and that is why BR is alleging that he only did it to preemptively answer the allegations made by CBS. The fact that the CBS series came after the fact may or may not hurt BR's argument on this issue.

 

[Denisedyann]

I have a question after seeing Burke's interview with DP. Burke states that his mom came in his room, saying "where's my baby, where's my baby", turning on lights, and "acting psycho" However, when reviewing Patsy's statement, she never mentions going in Burke's room. She says she came down the spiral stairs, found the note, screamed to John & told John to check on Burke. No mention of HER going into Burke's room. What do you make of that? I have read everything, watched every show, special, rerun, interview, etc. and I don't recall her ever mentioning going into his room at all!!

ETA: I've followed this case since it broke and said from day one that it was Burke who did it. Jealousy and rage. I've been a lurker forever, and never posted until now. RIP Jon Benet you deserved better from those that "supposedly" loved you!

 

[Sparko96]

Lawyers on board here should offer pro bono support to the good doctor and help put Burke on trial. I hated the US story because it was factually incorrect and defamed Spitz.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[PositiveLight]

This is why they're suing an individual: it's less likely to get to the deposition phase. The defamation case I was involved in took more than a year before it got to depositions and the woman being sued had, at that point, racked up six figures in legal fees. It's a long, drawn-out and exhausting process. It's easier (and less expensive) to just settle.

They're suing Dr. Spitz in particular, IMO, because they want the retraction, so they can later use it as "proof" that BR is innocent, as well as to discredit the CBS program: the expert Dr. Spitz says Burke didn't do it.

Also, it would make a lawsuit against CBS easier if they first forced Dr. Spitz into a retraction.

I hope Dr Spitz gives them the finger and says I'm 90! I don't care what you sue me for! I stand by my findings! Dr. Spitz doesn't seem the type to back down.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[dogperson]

If "SBTC" means anything, I think the best idea that's been suggested for it is Saved By The Cross. As a Christian, this would be meaningful to Patsy, plus she even had some photos made while she was nearly bald from cancer treatments and at least one of those photos featured a large cross which she stated had "saved her". I've seen her wearing crosses in some family photos too. This was something very important to her and a part of her personality, so Saved By The Cross makes sense to me. I used to think maybe she just signed some random initials at the bottom of the ransom letter but now I think maybe she was reminding herself that she can ask forgiveness for the cover-up she's taking part in. (For the record, my theory and opinion is that BR did it all except the ransom note and the redressing.) She would have felt God would understand that she desperately has to do whatever necessary to save BR now that a terrible thing has already happened and she may have been praying for God to forgive her for not seeing an attack like this coming.

The problem with signing ANYTHING at the bottom of the ransom note is that a real kidnapper would probably not do it. Who would put initials that might point back to their identity? Writing SBTC is a mistake a person would make who knows nothing about crime or ransom notes.

Her sister saying she got "victory" when she died may simply mean she was released from her illness. As an evangelical Christian, I've heard similar things said at funerals, that the person "is healed in heaven", has "moved on up", has "graduated", has "overcome", has "won the battle". Or it could have meant more, if Patsy's sister was privy to what really went on in the Ramsey house Christmas night.

 

[carolinea]

Lawsuits like this aren't filed to WIN. They're filed because they expect to settle.

Defamation lawsuits are long, drawn-out affairs, unless you live in a state with anti-SLAPP legislation and can prove that it's a SLAPP lawsuit. In a non-SLAPP state, even if a case has little chance of being won, it will go through all the motions.

That's why most of these suits end in settlements.

 

[PositiveLight]

I have a question after seeing Burke's interview with DP. Burke states that his mom came in his room, saying "where's my baby, where's my baby", turning on lights, and "acting psycho" However, when reviewing Patsy's statement, she never mentions going in Burke's room. She says she came down the spiral stairs, found the note, screamed to John & told John to check on Burke. No mention of HER going into Burke's room. What do you make of that? I have read everything, watched every show, special, rerun, interview, etc. and I don't recall her ever mentioning going into his room at all!!

ETA: I've followed this case since it broke and said from day one that it was Burke who did it. Jealousy and rage. I've been a lurker forever, and never posted until now. RIP Jon Benet you deserved better from those that "supposedly" loved you!

Welcome!!! *Waves* I've also felt from day one Burke did it. My family thought I was crazy at first but as days went on they too came to the same conclusion. Now with everything else coming to light (especially for me) it cements it even more for me.
All three of the Ramsey's stories are different in regards to Burkes activities that morning. That tells me that they are trying to cover up the most important part of that morning...Burkes activities.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[CoreyRocks]

Look at this on eBay http://www.ebay.com/itm/361711243419

Just found this book. Thoughts?

 

[CoreyRocks]

Look at this on eBay http://www.ebay.com/itm/391559096305

Any thoughts on this book? Anyone read it? I haven't seen this one either.

Thanks in advance for any information.

 

[dizzychick]

Look at this on eBay http://www.ebay.com/itm/361711243419

Just found this book. Thoughts?

I wanna know who the "peripheral character " is ????

 

[No it's not]

If "SBTC" means anything, I think the best idea that's been suggested for it is Saved By The Cross. As a Christian, this would be meaningful to Patsy, plus she even had some photos made while she was nearly bald from cancer treatments and at least one of those photos featured a large cross which she stated had "saved her". I've seen her wearing crosses in some family photos too. This was something very important to her and a part of her personality, so Saved By The Cross makes sense to me. I used to think maybe she just signed some random initials at the bottom of the ransom letter but now I think maybe she was reminding herself that she can ask forgiveness for the cover-up she's taking part in. (For the record, my theory and opinion is that BR did it all except the ransom note and the redressing.) She would have felt God would understand that she desperately has to do whatever necessary to save BR now that a terrible thing has already happened and she may have been praying for God to forgive her for not seeing an attack like this coming.

The problem with signing ANYTHING at the bottom of the ransom note is that a real kidnapper would probably not do it. Who would put initials that might point back to their identity? Writing SBTC is a mistake a person would make who knows nothing about crime or ransom notes.

Her sister saying she got "victory" when she died may simply mean she was released from her illness. As an evangelical Christian, I've heard similar things said at funerals, that the person "is healed in heaven", has "moved on up", has "graduated", has "overcome", has "won the battle". Or it could have meant more, if Patsy's sister was privy to what really went on in the Ramsey house Christmas night.

As crowns and awards had played big roles in patsy's life, they have played a major role in JBR's life as well and possibly in her death. The "crown of life" as the most significant spiritual crown in heaven, I am wondering if VICTORY SBTC could also mean SHE BEARS THE CROWN ?

Someone commented on Patsy's sister saying 'She (Patsy) got her "victory" (when she passed away) on Saturday'. That just kept ringing in my ears.

-Nin

 

[PositiveLight]

I don't think Dr. Spitz will back down and I hope he doesn't. He's 90 and got nothing but time left. If in his heart he wants true justice for JBR (and I believe all who were involved in the CBS doc do seek it truly) he will stay true to his findings and not budge. I wouldn't! I'd follow it all the way through. Many in other places have stated that Dr. Spitz inserted himself into the case but IIRC he was asked by Boulder Police correct? And he wanted to see the location so he could put together the scene forensically with the autopsy and the family refused to let him see it.
Also any good ME will supply a good autopsy report so that any other ME could look over it and clearly see in writing what the first ME saw with their own eyes. It's just like cold cases. If a good detective did good reports, then there should be a good foundation for any detectives following the case later could completely understand what was initially found.
There was enough evidence for them to review to make a fair and just assessment of the findings. The ME knew it was a homicide and knew his words would be needed to describe the body fully. So there's more attention given to homicide victims because the coroner is the victims voice.
I feel imho that Spitz was on the money with his findings.
I'm sure the CBS experts knew ahead of time what could likely happen if they followed through with this documentary. They were willing to go through with it and it tells me, as professionals in their fields, they followed the clues thoroughly and came to the logical conclusion. I hope they are holding on to those last two hours of the show to use in court. I think the Ramsey's just sunk their own ship. They just are too vain to see it yet.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk