Justice Watch Discussion Board "Ramseys sue the GLOBE" [ Main ] [ Post New Thread ] [ Help ] [ Search ] Table of Contents ................................................................... Ramseys sue the GLOBE, New York Lawyer, 09:02:27, 5/09/2000 The Rams, Watching you, 09:09:39, 5/09/2000, (#1) I guess, Ruthee, 09:20:55, 5/09/2000, (#2) If it ever gets, Watching you, 09:26:47, 5/09/2000, (#3) WY, Ruthee, 09:34:03, 5/09/2000, (#4) I certainly hope, Watching you, 09:47:40, 5/09/2000, (#5) new to me, Kelly, 10:03:16, 5/09/2000, (#6) Why all the lawsuits now?, Greenleaf, 10:27:26, 5/09/2000, (#11) Actually,, AutumnBorn, 10:17:51, 5/09/2000, (#9) once again, sabine, 10:12:51, 5/09/2000, (#7) Yeah Sabine, momo, 10:20:32, 5/09/2000, (#10) ?, 1000Sparks, 10:17:14, 5/09/2000, (#8) Poor Burke, Cassandra, 10:38:19, 5/09/2000, (#13) Patsy finally figured , Colorado-an, 10:36:47, 5/09/2000, (#12) I had to think about this one, Gemini, 11:11:51, 5/09/2000, (#17) Gemini, v_p, 18:10:21, 5/09/2000, (#32) Colorado-an...I never even thought of that!, Cassandra, 10:41:27, 5/09/2000, (#14) Enemies, Starling, 10:50:13, 5/09/2000, (#15) don't have a cash cow, Edie Pratt, 10:57:03, 5/09/2000, (#16) one of the only defenses to , SJ, 11:34:56, 5/09/2000, (#19) Gemini, Colorado-an, 11:31:36, 5/09/2000, (#18) I gotta tell ya,, gaiabetsy, 12:28:14, 5/09/2000, (#21) Colorado-an, Gemini, 11:48:43, 5/09/2000, (#20) Also,, gaiabetsy, 12:33:33, 5/09/2000, (#22) Gemini, Colorado-an, 12:55:17, 5/09/2000, (#23) Poor Burke, Cassandra, 14:07:20, 5/09/2000, (#24) Gem, Seashell, 14:57:02, 5/09/2000, (#25) Colorado-an, Kelly, 15:25:23, 5/09/2000, (#27) The Main Point, Ruthee, 15:13:18, 5/09/2000, (#26) Yes Colorado-an, Gemini, 15:46:04, 5/09/2000, (#29) I would feel a lot better, Longhorn, 15:40:36, 5/09/2000, (#28) Longhorn, Gemini, 15:52:23, 5/09/2000, (#30) Who did what to Burke?, canadiana, 17:09:04, 5/09/2000, (#31) Right, canadiana--, fiddler, 18:39:21, 5/09/2000, (#33) ................................................................... "Ramseys sue the GLOBE" Posted by New York Lawyer on 09:02:27 5/09/2000 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION BURKE RAMSEY, a minor, by his ) next friends and natural parents, ) JOHN RAMSEY and PATSY RAMSEY, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) CIVIL ACTION v. ) ) FILE NO. 1-00-CV-1164 GLOBE INTERNATIONAL, INC., and ) GLOBE COMMUNICATIONS CORP., ) ) Defendants. ) COMPLAINT FOR LIBEL COMES NOW Burke Ramsey, a minor, by his next friends and natural parents, John Ramsey and Patsy Ramsey, and respectfully states his Complaint for Libel against Globe International, Inc. and Globe Communications Corp. as follows: 1. Plaintiff Burke Ramsey, age thirteen (13), is a minor child as defined by O.C.G.A. § 39-1-1. 2. John Ramsey and Patsy Ramsey are the natural parents of Plaintiff Burke Ramsey and pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-11-17(c), bring this action against Defendants on behalf of Plaintiff Burke Ramsey as his next friends. 3. Plaintiff Burke Ramsey resides in Atlanta, Georgia with his natural parents. 4. Plaintiff Burke Ramsey is a citizen of the State of Georgia for purposes of diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. 5. Defendant Globe International, Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Canada with its principal place of business in the United States being located at 5401 N.W. Broken Sound Boulevard, Boca Raton, Florida. 6. Defendant Globe Communications Corp. is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business being located at 5401 N.W. Broken Sound Boulevard, Boca Raton, Florida. 7. Defendant Globe International, Inc, is a citizen of a foreign state for purposes of diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. 8. Defendant Globe Communications Corp. is a citizen of the State of Delaware for purposes of diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332. 9. Defendant Globe International, Inc. will acknowledge service of summons and complaint by and through its authorized agent, Michael B. Kahane, 5401 N.W. Broken Sound Boulevard, Boca Raton, Florida. 10. Defendant Globe Communications Corp. will acknowledge service of summons and complaint by and through its authorized agent, Michael B. Kahane, 5401 N.W. Broken Sound Boulevard, Boca Raton, Florida. 11. This Court has original subject matter jurisdiction with respect to this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 as there exists complete diversity of citizenship between Plaintiff and Defendants and the amount in controversy exceeds Seventy Five Thousand Dollars ($75,000.00), exclusive of interest and costs. 12. Defendant Globe International, Inc. is subject to the jurisdiction of this Court pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-10-91(3) with proper venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391. 13. Defendant Globe Communications Corp. is subject to the jurisdiction of this Court pursuant to O.C.G.A. § 9-10-91(3) with proper venue pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391. 14. In November of 1998, Defendant Globe International, Inc. and Defendant Globe Communications Corp. owned, operated and published a weekly supermarket tabloid magazine known as GLOBE. 15. In November of 1998, Defendant Globe International, Inc. and Defendant Globe Communications Corp. distributed GLOBE throughout the nation on a regular basis, including regular distribution to subscribers in the State of Georgia and to retail magazine stands in numerous stores located throughout the State of Georgia. 16. In November of 1998, Defendant Globe International, Inc. and Defendant Globe Communications Corp. owned, operated and maintained an Internet worldwide website known as the Globe Web Site and located at www.globeonthenet.com (hereinafter "the GLOBE website"). 17. The cover of each issue of GLOBE is published worldwide on the GLOBE website. 18. The GLOBE website provides visitors to the website with information on how to subscribe to GLOBE, including the ability to subscribe to GLOBE online via the Internet. 19. Defendant Globe International, Inc. and Defendant Globe Communications Corp. (hereinafter "Defendants") regularly did or solicited business in the State of Georgia, engaged in a persistent course of business conduct in the State of Georgia and derived substantial revenue from the distribution and sale of GLOBE in the State of Georgia. 20. In November of 1998, Joe Mullins was an individual employed by Defendants as a reporter and writer for GLOBE. 21. At all times pertinent and relevant to the incidents described in this Complaint, Joe Mullins was acting within the scope of his employment relationship with Defendants. 22. The acts and omissions of Joe Mullins, as an employee of Defendants, are imputed to Defendants as a matter of law. 23. In November of 1998, Craig Lewis was an individual employed by Defendants as a reporter and writer for GLOBE. 24. At all times pertinent and relevant to the incidents described in this Complaint, Craig Lewis was acting within the scope of his employment relationship with Defendants. 25. The acts and omissions of Craig Lewis, as an employee of Defendants, are imputed to Defendants as a matter of law. 26. On the night of December 25, 1996 or during the early morning hours of December 26, 1996, while Plaintiff Burke Ramsey was sleeping in his family's home in Boulder, Colorado, his six-year-old sister, JonBenét Ramsey, was brutally murdered. 27. At the time of his sister's murder, Plaintiff Burke Ramsey was nine (9) years old. 28. Since the date of her death, the murder of JonBenét Ramsey has been the subject of an intensive investigation by law enforcement officials in the State of Colorado, including members of the City of Boulder Police Department and the Boulder County District Attorney's Office. 29. The investigation of the murder of JonBenét Ramsey has included a grand jury investigation in Boulder County, Colorado, commencing in September of 1998 and ending in October of 1999 without criminal charges or indictments being brought against any individual. 30. As of the date of the filing of this Complaint, no criminal charges have been filed against any individual in connection with the tragic, untimely and brutal death of JonBenét Ramsey. 31. Since the date of her death, the murder of JonBenét Ramsey and the investigation into her murder have been the objects of local, national and international print and broadcast media coverage of an unparalleled magnitude. 32. Since the date of her death, GLOBE has published over 100 items related to the murder of JonBenét Ramsey and the investigation into her murder. 33. In the year prior to her death, GLOBE boasted a total paid circulation of its weekly editions exceeding 1 million seven (7) different times. 34. In the year following the death of JonBenét Ramsey, GLOBE boasted a total paid circulation of its weekly editions exceeding 1 million twenty-two (22) different times. 35. Prior to the murder of his sister, and at all times subsequent thereto, Plaintiff Burke Ramsey has been a private citizen. 36. Plaintiff Burke Ramsey has never attained the status of a public figure for purposes of filing and prosecuting a defamation action. 37. In the Fall of 1998, the editors of GLOBE concluded that the only stories related to the death of JonBenét Ramsey that were producing increased sales were stories related to, or implicating, her brother, Plaintiff Burke Ramsey. 38. Consistent with their conclusion that stories about Plaintiff Burke Ramsey would increase sales and profits, the editors at GLOBE requested their reporters and writers to submit sensational stories about Plaintiff Burke Ramsey. 39. On the cover of its November 24, 1998 issue, GLOBE published a picture of Plaintiff Burke Ramsey and his sister, JonBenét Ramsey, accompanied with the following sensational, banner headline: NEW JONBENET CHARGE: BROTHER, 11, IS THE KILLER And Burke will NEVER stand trial! 40. The November 24, 1998 GLOBE cover story headline was libelous in falsely accusing Plaintiff Burke Ramsey of killing his sister. 41. A true and correct copy of the November 24, 1998 cover of GLOBE is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part hereof. 42. On pages 8 and 9 of the November 24, 1998 issue of GLOBE, Defendants published a story referenced on the cover under the byline of Joe Mullins and Craig Lewis (hereinafter "the November 24 story"). 43. Joe Mullins and Craig Lewis wrote the November 24 story in connection with their employment by Defendants as reporters and writers for GLOBE. 44. The November 24 story published a picture of Plaintiff Burke Ramsey along with the following sensational, banner headlines: JONBENET 'It's clear the boy was hiding something...he would cover his face & cower' and INVESTIGATORS' SHOCKING CHARGE: CUB SCOUT BROTHER BURKE, 11, IS KILLER 45. The November 24 story headlines were libelous in falsely accusing Plaintiff Burke Ramsey of hiding something and being the killer of his sister, JonBenét Ramsey. 46. A true and correct copy of the November 24 story is attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and by reference made a part hereof. 47. The gist of the November 24 story was that Plaintiff Burke Ramsey was a disturbed child who killed his sister, JonBenét Ramsey, in connection with an act of sexual molestation. 48. The gist of the November 24 story was false and libelous. 49. The November 24 story was libelous in its entirety and by virtue of the following false and defamatory statements, among others, published therein: IN a shocking new twist on the sensational JonBenet Ramsey murder, cops are now trying to piece together a case that the girl's brother Burke killed the 6-year old beauty queen, reveal sources. Police are investigating a scenario that one or both of the children's parents aided the then-9-year-old boy by covering up a heinous crime with a phony kidnapping story and ransom note, say well-placed sources. Insiders close to the case tell GLOBE that Boulder, Colo., cops plan to use the power of the grand jury, convened on Sept. 15, to probe the murder to try to dig up evidence confirming their suspicion that Burke, now 11, is the killer. . . . Initially, cops looked to JonBenet's parents Patsy and John, publicly stating that the mother and father were "under the umbrella of suspicion." But the focus of the investigation shifted as the probe progressed, say insiders. And voice detection expert Martin Markowitz, who spent 35 hours poring over a tape of John and Patsy Ramsey's 1997 interview with CNN, concluded that the then 9-year-old is responsible for JonBenet's death. "Burke did it - there's no doubt in my mind," Markowitz said. After reviewing video tapes of Burke as he was questioned about his sister's death, one source inside the investigation told GLOBE the boy's behavior seemed odd and it was possible he was involved in the killing. "I decided it was indeed possible," he said. "My first impression of Burke was that he was 'squirrely.' "There were certain questions, particularly those directly dealing with JonBenet's death, where he would hide his face, cower away, duck or look away and shrug. It was clear he was hiding something." The source was also convinced that Patsy, the 41-year-old former Miss West Virginia, was not being truthful. If the cops' belief about Burke is on target, then she, or John, or both are probably accessories to the crime, say sources. . . . As GLOBE revealed last week, the police have built up a file on Burke and are convinced that he has not told all he knows, say sources. Insiders say the facts that have aroused their investigation are: Within days of JonBenet's death, sources say Burke told cops a knife was involved. But that wasn't known publicly until 21 months later, when GLOBE revealed that the boy's Swiss Army knife was used to cut duct tape that gagged the little princess. Although his parents said he was in bed when Patsy first made a frantic call to police on Dec. 26, an enhancement of the 911 tape proved he was in the background, asking questions. Shortly after the call and immediately after his attorney friend Mike Bynum told John to get legal counsel for himself and Patsy, Burke's dad took the boy into a room for a private meeting. Sources say Burke played "doctor" with JonBenet and, according to other sources, showed signs of being disturbed when he smeared feces in his bathroom. Injuries to JonBenet's genitals were consistent with her being molested by a finger, rather than a penis, say sources, something that experts say might have been done by a prepubescent boy. . . . One scenario discussed by investigators is that Burke and JonBenet - who, as sources recently told GLOBE, were sometimes caught playing doctor by house guests - were using a garrote in a "choking game" that went too far. . . . 50. On pages 8 and 9 of the November 24, 1998 issue of GLOBE, Defendants also published a second story related to Plaintiff Burke Ramsey (hereinafter "the second November 24 story") under the following headline: CHILD EXPERT BARES CHILLING PROFILE OF KIDS WHO KILL 51. The gist of the second November 24 story was that Plaintiff Burke Ramsey murdered his sister, JonBenét Ramsey, because he suffered a rage disorder. 52. The gist of the second November 24 story was false and libelous. 53. The second November 24 story was libelous in its entirety and by virtue of the following false and defamatory statements, among others, published therein: A BOY is perfectly capable of killing his younger sister in an act of rage, child abuse investigator David McCall tells GLOBE. The author of the book Crimes Against Childhood believes Burke, now 11, could have flown into a white-hot fury and murdered his 6-year-old sister. "Don't let Burke's rich family and affluent lifestyle fool you:" says the North Carolina expert. "This type of thing can happen in the best of families. "Burke could suffer a rage disorder. "It's been documented that he once accidentally hit his sister with a golf club. "He may have blown up at JonBenet - and his rage cost the little girl her life." Therapist Dr. Lillian Glass says that if Burke is the killer, it would explain the reluctance of his parents to help police solve the case. "It would put a lot of pieces in this strange puzzle in order," says the psychologist. "Their lives were torn to shreds when JonBenet died, and they don't want to lose another child." 54. Plaintiff Burke Ramsey did not murder his sister, JonBenét Ramsey. 55. Plaintiff Burke Ramsey did not sexually molest his sister, JonBenét Ramsey or engage in sex games with her. 56. Plaintiff Burke Ramsey and his sister JonBenet were not using a garrote in a choking game that went too far. 57. Plaintiff Burke Ramsey has never suffered a rage disorder. 58. Plaintiff Burke Ramsey did not blow up at his sister JonBenet and kill her and did not fly into a white-hot fury and kill her. 59. The law enforcement officials investigating the murder of JonBenet Ramsey were never trying to piece together a case that Plaintiff Burke Ramsey killed his sister. 60. The law enforcement officials investigating the murder of JonBenet Ramsey never held a suspicion that Plaintiff Burke Ramsey was the killer of his sister and never planned to use the grand jury to try to dig up evidence to confirm any such suspicion. 61. Prior to the publication of the November 24, 1998 issue of GLOBE, officials with the City of Boulder Police Department had publicly stated that Plaintiff Burke Ramsey was a witness, not a suspect, in connection with the investigation into the murder of his sister. 62. Prior to the publication of the November 24, 1998 issue of GLOBE, no employee of GLOBE attempted to contact the City of Boulder Police Department or officials in that department to seek confirmation as to the truth of the defamatory headlines, stories and statements published about Plaintiff Burke Ramsey. 63. Prior to the publication of the November 24, 1998 issue of GLOBE, no employee of GLOBE attempted to contact the Boulder County District Attorney or officials in his office to seek confirmation as to the truth of the defamatory headlines, stories and statements published about Plaintiff Burke Ramsey. 64. Subsequent to the publication of the November 24, 1998 issue of GLOBE, the Boulder County District Attorney issued a public statement that Plaintiff Burke Ramsey was not a suspect in the death of his sister, JonBenét Ramsey, and was not being looked at as a possible suspect. 65. Plaintiff Burke Ramsey has been formally and officially cleared by the City of Boulder Police Department and the Boulder District Attorney in connection with the death of his sister, JonBenét Ramsey. 66. Defendants negligently published the false and defamatory headlines, stories and statements about Plaintiff Burke Ramsey. 67. Defendants knowingly published the libelous headlines, stories and statements about Plaintiff Burke Ramsey without any reliable, trustworthy or credible sources for said statements. 68. Defendants published the false and defamatory headlines, stories and statements about Plaintiff Burke Ramsey with actual malice in that they published said headlines, stories and statements with actual knowledge of falsity or with a reckless disregard for the truth or falsity of said headlines, stories and statements. 69. Defendants intentionally published the libelous headlines, stories and statements about Plaintiff Burke Ramsey in an effort to increase sales of GLOBE and increase corporate profits by falsely sensationalizing GLOBE's coverage of Plaintiff Burke Ramsey's role in the investigation into the murder of JonBenét Ramsey. 70. By letter dated November 18, 1998, legal counsel for Plaintiff Burke Ramsey demanded that Defendants correct and retract the November 24, 1998 libelous headlines, stories and statements in full and strict compliance with the statutory requirements of O.C.G.A. § 51-5-11. 71. Defendants failed to correct and retract the libelous headlines, stories and statements as required by law. 72. The false and defamatory headlines, stories and statements published about Plaintiff Burke Ramsey proximately caused permanent injury to his reputation. 73. The false and defamatory headlines, stories and statements published about Plaintiff Burke Ramsey proximately caused held him to be exposed to public hatred, contempt and ridicule. 74. By virtue of the subject matter of the false and defamatory headlines, stories and statements published about Plaintiff Burke Ramsey, their publication by Defendants constitutes libel per se. 75. Plaintiff Burke Ramsey is entitled to recover actual damages from Defendants for his injuries. 76. The conduct of Defendants establishes actual malice and demonstrates willful misconduct and that entire want of care which raises a presumption of conscious indifference to consequences. 77. Defendants' exploitation of and accusations of murder against a 9-year-old child for corporate profit demand the recovery of significant punitive damages to punish these corporate tabloid publishers and deter them from ever again sensationally publishing false headlines, stories or statements accusing children of committing heinous crimes in order to increase profits. 78. Plaintiff Burke Ramsey is entitled to an award of punitive damages from Defendants in order to punish, penalize and deter Defendants from repeating their unlawful conduct. WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Burke Ramsey, by and through his next friends and natural parents, John Ramsey and Patsy Ramsey, demands: (a) That judgment be entered against Defendants, Globe International, Inc. and Globe Communications Corp., jointly and severally, for actual damages in an amount not less than Ten Million Dollars ($10,000,000.00); (b) That judgment be entered against Defendants, Globe International, Inc. and Globe Communications Corp., jointly and severally, for punitive damages in an amount not less than Twenty Five Million Dollars ($25,000,000.00) to punish and penalize Defendants and to deter Defendants from repeating their unlawful conduct; and (c) That all costs of this action be assessed against Defendants. TRIAL BY JURY DEMANDED. WOOD & GRANT L. Lin Wood Ga. State Bar No. 774588 Suite 2140 The Equitable Building 100 Peachtree Street, NW Atlanta, Georgia 30303 404/522-1713 Attorneys for Plaintiff Burke Ramsey and His Next Friends and Natural Parents, John Ramsey and Patsy Ramsey [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 1. "The Rams" Posted by Watching you on 09:09:39 5/09/2000 are getting tedious and are beginning to look really stupid. Their arrogance is also coming across loud and clear. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 2. "I guess" Posted by Ruthee on 09:20:55 5/09/2000 That the Ramseys will have to state in a depo why they said that Burke was doing fine and getting good grades in school. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 3. "If it ever gets" Posted by Watching you on 09:26:47 5/09/2000 to that stage, Ruthee. It's cheaper to just pay the Rams off than it is to fight the bustards. I thought the STAR would not back down to the Rams, but money is the name of the game, you kow. Makes me sick. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 4. "WY" Posted by Ruthee on 09:34:03 5/09/2000 I think the free ride on the money train may be coming to an end. Who is next? I have a feeling that there are many who will help with this latest "goose chase", because they don't want to be next. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 5. "I certainly hope" Posted by Watching you on 09:47:40 5/09/2000 you are right, Ruthie, because I am getting damn sick of these people trying to control everyone and everything and getting away with it. It's time someone stepped up to the plate and said, enough - the Rams will no longer abuse the system, which is what they have been doing since day one. They have found every loophole in our laws and used them for their own protection while at the same time using them to hurt other people. I'm damn sick of them. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 6. "new to me" Posted by Kelly on 10:03:16 5/09/2000 There are some things in this latest suit of the Ramseys that I hadn't even read. I guess they want to be sure we didn't miss anything by repeating it for everyone again. No way are they doing what's in Burke's best interest. What a horrible, nightmare of a childhood he's having. I wish he could live away from John and Patsy, and with people who could provide him with what's in his best interest. I wish he could move away, to the country somewhere, attend a small school and hopefully not be judged, to spend the next 5 years peacefully growing up. I can only see the five years he has left until he's 18 being a continual nightmare if he stays in their home. Why must they continue to ruin his life? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 11. "Why all the lawsuits now?" Posted by Greenleaf on 10:27:26 5/09/2000 This may seem "far out," but I think, perhaps, the Rams are suing everybody now because: They have reason to believe that after Hunter leaves office they'll be arrested. They probably won't be able to file lawsuits from jail, so they are doing all their suing now. Since Patsy is probably poised to "make a deal" with Hunter before he leaves, Burke's "involvement" becomes moot. So, why not sue the pants off anyone who claimed that Burke was involved? If the newspapers agree to settle, the Rams will have much needed cash to pay their legal fees. The lawsuits, imho, are being made now because it may not be possible for them to be made later. I believe that if the newspapers fight, the Rams will drop their suits. That silly new lawyer of theirs had better get his law license before rushing into an Atlanta Court. Otherwise, the Judges there may treat him like "My Cousin Venny." Something is coming down, folks, and all these lawsuits are just a prelude of things to come. Greenleaf [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 9. "Actually," Posted by AutumnBorn on 10:17:51 5/09/2000 I'm thinking that the Rams aren't doing a disservice to Burke. They are going to clear his name entirely in this matter and for those who think that he might actually have had something to do with this murder, it *should* put matters to rest. Just look at past posts on the forums. There are still people who won't give up on their theory that Burke did it. I think they love him very much. I just wish they'd loved JonBenet to the same degree. The saddest part is that I doubt that boy will see all the money gathered in his name. Poor kid. His parents are using him because he's now their sole source of income. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 7. "once again" Posted by sabine on 10:12:51 5/09/2000 it shows - once again - what dispicable people the rams are - only concerned about themselves! No concern about their children - no concern for JonBenet's justice, nor for staying out of the news for Burks sake - just their own selfish pathetic egos! And once again - they make me puke! The ramseys may own money - but they sure lack all the class, dignity and respect in the world. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 10. "Yeah Sabine" Posted by momo on 10:20:32 5/09/2000 and that is one thing money can't buy. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 8. "?" Posted by 1000Sparks on 10:17:14 5/09/2000 Since John can't get a job, how else do you people expect them to make money? Has anyone figured out just how much money they have "pending" with these lawsuits? I mean, can you really blame them for wanting to live in the manner they have grown accustom to? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 13. "Poor Burke" Posted by Cassandra on 10:38:19 5/09/2000 All that stuff out in public like that. The tabs stories are long gone and forgotten, and it was wrong to say all that about him, but to rehash it all now and make it public in a lawsuit, is unimaginable. Guess what? The tabs will have it all on tape, the sources, etc. Somebody's squirming. What can the Ramseys be thinking, to subject the kid to all this? I understand that they are angry about the things that were written about him, but to bring it all up and spew it out again, is deplorable. How can it help him to be subjected to all that in public? He was probably not even aware of it at the time, but he will be now! Poor Burke. Cassie [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 12. "Patsy finally figured " Posted by Colorado-an on 10:36:47 5/09/2000 out how to get herself center stage again. She wasn't satisfied dressing up her daughter and putting her out like that so now she has finally figured out how she can use her son to her advantage too. Anything for the attention! One sick woman, in my opinion. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 17. "I had to think about this one" Posted by Gemini on 11:54:05 5/09/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 11:54:05, 5/09/2000 a LOT. AutumnBorn, I read your exchange with pavement ... the one about having the ability (or not) to jump into someone else's skin. Both of you had excellent posts, and the subject was very interesting to me. Of course, you were talking about empathy ... a rare gift indeed. My husband is the empath in this family. He's not a 'bleeding heart', but seems to be able to see things through others' eyes to an astonishing degree. This attribute often puts him in a peacemaker role. I'll never be able to claim my mate doesn't understand me, but then, he understands where most people he knows are coming from. I'd love to be able to say I'm empathetic, but it doesn't come naturally to me ... though I'm working on it. This forum has been a helpful arena to practice using empathy as a path toward tolerance. It may be a long haul, but I'm, at least, more mindful of it now :-) . The one area where empathy comes more easily is my maternal instinct. Parents' feelings toward their children usually come through loud and clear. Hey! I can relate. So! If my child had been the target of these world wide news stories, would I sit back and hope it all dies down, or would I take the offending publications by their (collective) thick neck and squeeze? Conclusion: I'd squeeze ... and pinch and punch and kick and bite ... with every opportunity open to me. Burke Ramsey will eventually benefit from a sound and thorough public clearing via the media that attempted to convict him in public opinion. What's more, if some of the realized gain was, in my best judgement, needed to recoup the ability to provide for his needs immediately, I'd set aside enough to be sure it was covered. Then, I'd sock the remaining monies in a secure investment or trust fund for his future. From this mom's POV, the media, not the Ramseys, are the bad guys in this instance. If they'd publically and falsely labeled YOUR child ... what would you do? Greenleaf, I suspect these suits are coming in a bunch to beat the statute of limitations time line. Some seem to be just under the wire. (don't mind me ... just thought I'd take a sec to do the proofing I forgot when I posted) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 32. "Gemini" Posted by v_p on 18:10:21 5/09/2000 <<<....would I take the offending publications by their (collective) thick neck and squeeze? Conclusion: I'd squeeze ... and pinch and punch and kick and bite ... with every opportunity open to me. Burke Ramsey will eventually benefit from a sound and thorough public clearing via the media that attempted to convict him in public opinion<<<< Wonder where all that venom and anger were for the past three years. Having a rag publication defame your son is one thing, but someone brutally murdering your daughter...well, that's quite another ... where was all the fire for her? Greenleaf -- I think you are exactly right, they're getting it all settled before they are sent away. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 14. "Colorado-an...I never even thought of that!" Posted by Cassandra on 10:41:27 5/09/2000 My God! Is he going to be her cash cow? Cassie [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 15. "Enemies" Posted by Starling on 10:50:55 5/09/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 10:50:55, 5/09/2000 In the past 24 hours, the Ramsey's have made many enemies. Pretty soon, nobody will have anything nice to say about America's most infamous couple. Nothing they do changes the facts though. John and Patsy Ramsey stand alone under the umbrella of guilt. Even if a third, fourth, or fifth party get shoved under there with them, I can guarentee you the Ramsey's won't slide out from under it. I think their heads are velcroed to it's top.Flol Starling [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 16. "don't have a cash cow" Posted by Edie Pratt on 10:57:03 5/09/2000 the irony in all this is, Burke's name would never have been tab fodder had his parents not killed his sister in the first place. I wish the tabs could somehow use that little fact in their defense. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 19. "one of the only defenses to " Posted by SJ on 11:34:56 5/09/2000 libel and slander charges is the truth. If the media can show that they had legitimate sources to back their sensationalized headlines, it will help. I personally think that the media should do a class action against the Ramseys. Regardless of sensationalized headlines, etc.,there were sources behind those articles. They did quote professionals who based their opinions on their tests and expertise of whatever they were using. As for Burke not being a public figure, excuse me? He is the brother of one of the most publicized murder victims in the past several years. Does that not make him a public figure? Who doesn't know who Burke Ramsey is anyway? Everyone has at least heard of him, even if they don't follow the case the way we do. I sincerely hope someone has the balls to take these people to court on one of these lawsuits. They will never survive the trial. They cannot prove that Burke didn't do it unless one of them admits to doing it themselves. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 18. "Gemini" Posted by Colorado-an on 11:31:36 5/09/2000 I loved your post and I first want to say that I am also a "work in progess" when it comes to empathy. I wish it were a strong point of who I am but I am working on it! I have a hard time getting into the shoes of these people. First of all I find it very difficult to understand what sort of parents these two are. I sense, maybe incorrectly, that at least John is embarrassed at the way they paraded poor little JonBenet around. Patsy is so proud of it. It is one thing to "costume" a child but when you go to the lengths of coloring hair, etc. it is over the top of good parenting. So from that point of view I find it hard to have much empathy for these parents and worry about their true motive in doing this. Is it in Burke's best interest? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 21. "I gotta tell ya," Posted by gaiabetsy on 12:28:14 5/09/2000 I'm someone usually labeled "the compassionate and empathic one" and I feel my whole body repell these two people. Honestly, my body won't give them "the time of day". The way my body reacts tells me to trust how I feel. I think these two obviously grieved for the loss of their child, and I honestly think I felt that too, but these two are scary to me. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 20. "Colorado-an" Posted by Gemini on 11:48:43 5/09/2000 I know what you mean (LOL, this I can relate to) ... when it comes to the Ramseys. My problem is compound by the fact that I actually KNOW people who are quite similar to JR and PR. The JR type males are occasionally annoying but pretty good people. The two PR types make me want to shriek ... and, possibly, I have the same effect on them :-) . When it comes to the lawsuits on behalf of Burke, you could certainly be right. The Ramsey motives ... and, especially, the Lin Wood motives ... may have more to do with a personal vendetta and material gain than about BR's best interests. For this one, I didn't try to get into their skins, just wondered how I would react to seeing my child slandered and libeled. Honestly, I have to say I'd be vicious. Therefore, there IS a possibility that's where they're coming from. In any case, I see the media moves as irredeemable crap. They took the Burke dunnit concept and ran with it on the basis of something they heard from somebody (G2 ?), simply because the public had become numb with John and Patsy overkill (no pun intended), and they needed something new to move the rags off the stands. IMO, they need the smack. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 22. "Also," Posted by gaiabetsy on 12:33:33 5/09/2000 I knew a couple that was worth several million dollars in the health-fitness-spa world. When their son was arrested, they left him in jail. The father was seen in the parking lot of a local night spot drunk as #ell and picking a fight with a kid of 21 or so. It was ugly to see how low this man had sunk. It turns out he had watched his father commit suicide when he was a teenager. No wonder he was such a frightful individual, and no wonder he had no lessons on upbringing of his own children. He "often used his children" to play out ideas about how to act with the rest of society, and he expected these kids to go along with it. The really scary part is there was a wife and mother in this bunch. She bought the biggest house and decorated it to the hilt. She helped to continue the business, and she ignored her husband's problems. It was crazy. Sound familiar? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 23. "Gemini" Posted by Colorado-an on 12:55:17 5/09/2000 I totally agree with you. I should have gone further with my thoughts regarding the R's motive in this case. If I were the parent involved in such a thing I would go to all lenghts to right the wrongs done to my child. But then you know you would also have to say, yeah I would have helped in the investigation and on and on. And in regards to the tabs I also agree with you that they take a small bit of truth and embellish it as though it were fact. And on the other side of the equation you have journalists, ei Lisa with the two last names, who twist it all to what they want you to believe. Sometimes they report what they believe as though we are all forced to believe it also. I guess I am getting at that it used to be tabs who were untrustworty in reporting but now we need to all question the motive of mainstream media. They need to all be accountable. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 24. "Poor Burke" Posted by Cassandra on 14:07:20 5/09/2000 was put in this position through no fault of his own. I would defend my child too, and would feel BEYOND AWFUL if he were in this position because of something I had done. I would have to find some way to atone, but I don't think lawsuits would salve my conscience. Cassie [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 25. "Gem" Posted by Seashell on 14:57:02 5/09/2000 "Greenleaf, I suspect these suits are coming in a bunch to beat the statute of limitations time line. Some seem to be just under the wire." There's a statue of limitations? You mean the Rams can't just go on suing ad infinitum? (News Flash: "Fast" Eddie Edwards, mentioned in Boyles packet, has been convicted of fraud and exhortion having to do with casinos.) By claiming that Burke is innocent, they are saying either they did it or know who did it. If they hadn't lied about the 911 tape, he'd never have been a high profile focus. If they hadn't rushed him out of the house that morning, he wouldn't have been suspected; at least not much nor for long. And PR even said that the Maglite was kept at Burke's bedside, which sounded like she was pointing at him. They themselves turned him into a suspicious person and now they're using him to make money. I don't believe for a minute they have his best interests at heart. They're not even looking for the killer and they certainly didn't protect JBR. JR and his money and fancy lawyers have managed to keep him out of jail for over three years, but they haven't been able to ferret out one likely suspect and you can believe they want that. They can twist justice, build houses, influence the media, pervert the truth, make movies but they can't find the killer. With all the resources brought to bear - with all his power, connections and money, you would think that the defense would have found the killer long ago if an intruder really existed. This is not rocket science. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 27. "Colorado-an" Posted by Kelly on 15:28:27 5/09/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 15:28:27, 5/09/2000 I feel like the Ramseys have used their children to put themselves (especially Patsy) in the spotlight more than any couple I've ever seen or heard of. They don't have JonBenet to draw attention to them anymore so now they are using Burke to spotlight themselves. Their childrens needs seem to pale behind theirs. I mean, how much money does anyone need? If they won that one 25 million dollar lawsuit, one would think that would sustain them all. These suits aren't about money or making right what has been done wrong to Burke, the lawsuits are about staying in the spotlight. Some of you who are talking about fighting like tigers to protect your child if they were being slandered like Burke has been, stop and think for a minute. All the Ramseys would have to do is tell everything they know about the night JonBenet was murdered, and Burke would be cleared. If they cared about his needs more than THEIRS, they would talk. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 26. "The Main Point" Posted by Ruthee on 15:13:18 5/09/2000 is that Mommy and Daddy won't sue on their own behalf. They should take the heat....true or false......not their son. Parents of the year. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 29. "Yes Colorado-an" Posted by Gemini on 15:46:04 5/09/2000 I see what you're saying. It's the old biblical pronouncement that the sins of the fathers (read that parents) are passed on to become the burdens of the child. But, in this case, it appears Burke has burdens that can be lightened, if not totally eased. Pressing forward to give the media a whack in the head on his behalf couldn't hurt, no matter the sins of the parents. They used him for fair game and unfair gain. Thanks for tossing in the bit about accountability. If trash media is accountable to no one, we're all in trouble. Cassie, I agree with you in a guarded kind of way. Your last thought gives me pause, though. IMO, my child's best interests would certainly take priority over appeasing my conscience. And, last of all (gotta go do KP), for those of you who hold fast to the arrogance that allows you to believe you KNOW who murdered JBR, sorry, even major empathy efforts can't get me there. Ditto common sense, logic or solid reasoning. The parents may have been involved, but other possibilities exist. If you feel comfortable on that bandwagon, so be it, but (and this is where my conscience gives me a nudge, Cassie) I can't make that leap. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 28. "I would feel a lot better" Posted by Longhorn on 15:40:36 5/09/2000 about these suits that are in Burke's "best interest" if the Ramseys had not put the actual web address of the site that accuses Burke of being the killer in their own book. There was no need to give the public at large the directions to that page. If they felt a need to mention it, fine, make their point by saying it exists. By publishing in their own book, they subjected Burke to greater exposure than the person who created the site itself. They became the web page pimps. I have difficulty believing the reasons given for these suits. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 30. "Longhorn" Posted by Gemini on 15:52:23 5/09/2000 Personally, I'd be happier if the argument put forth by CommonSense were adopted and any thing realized by the suits was immediately put in trust for Burke (not counting a reasonable amount to be used for his needs as a minor. However, I'd rather see things just move forward in his favor as give the media a legal leg to stand on for raking children through the muck. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 31. "Who did what to Burke?" Posted by canadiana on 17:09:04 5/09/2000 I don't agree with the tab(s) stories on Burke; I don't read them (except on here WY!) I THINK IF this had been me, the minute the tab stories came out I would be screaming, sueing, and demanding retractions. I would have been sitting on the steps of the police dept every morning, insisting they clear my son. I would NOT wait this long to become vocal. The Rs made this bigger all by themselves. (I think) this would never have been so popular (wrong word) if they had not gone on CNN. Now, more recently, they included pictures of Burke in their book (although they say little about him), and they have 'film' of Burke fishing or something in their latest 'special'. They alone made their children public spectacles. I still say.....how can you sue when the crime remains unsolved. No one (apparently) really REALLY knows what happened. That said, it better be stipulated that the Rs do not get one red cent of this money. It belongs to Burke and only Burke. They are using him to sue; only he should benefit. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 33. "Right, canadiana--" Posted by fiddler on 18:39:21 5/09/2000 if Burke's reputation were the Rams' primary concern, why not do something LONG before now? JR insisted that his other children--JAR and Melinda--be cleared by the D.A.'s office almost immediately in the investigation. So, the Ramseys obviously had the power to pull some strings, if they'd wanted to do so. WHY DIDN'T THEY???? Part of the reason Burke ever even became tabloid fodder in the FIRST PLACE is that his parents took NO action on his behalf whatsoever--action they DID take on behalf of his siblings. And, in their "settlement" with the Star, why didn't they insist on a public apology? The tabs apologize if they get a celeb's nose job wrong, so why not to a helpless, libelled small child? If Burke's reputation is John and Patsy's primary concern, why didn't they make an apology the cornerstone of their demands--rather than cash? IF they're doing any part of this for Burke's sake, then that's great. But as far as I can see, they got him into this position in the first place, they didn't do anything to get him out of it when they could have, and they didn't do anything to remedy the "damage to his reputation". I doubt if anyone, except us on the forums, knows anything at all about the Star's settlement. If publicizing Burke's innocence was the goal, JR and PR have failed miserably, so far. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ]