Justice Watch Discussion Board "Katie interviewing Lin Wood now" [ Main ] [ Post New Thread ] [ Help ] [ Search ] Table of Contents ................................................................... Katie interviewing Lin Wood now, CommonSense, 05:22:18, 5/10/2000 I saw this, Watching you, 05:26:53, 5/10/2000, (#1) OMIGOD!!!, Cassandra, 05:45:43, 5/10/2000, (#2) JR doesn't have a career, Watching you, 07:04:34, 5/10/2000, (#3) over a cliff, ace21214, 13:24:23, 5/10/2000, (#31) Lin Wood's Ethical Obligations to Burke, CommonSense, 07:05:22, 5/10/2000, (#4) Commonsense, Gemini, 09:20:47, 5/10/2000, (#5) While I agree Gemini,, canadiana, 09:24:59, 5/10/2000, (#6) uh, Gem, Watching you, 09:38:18, 5/10/2000, (#7) And, while I'm, Watching you, 09:50:35, 5/10/2000, (#8) lest we forget, Edie Pratt, 10:01:17, 5/10/2000, (#9) my 2 cents, starry, 10:18:06, 5/10/2000, (#14) Just pisses me off, Watching you, 10:07:55, 5/10/2000, (#10) canadiana, Gemini, 10:13:43, 5/10/2000, (#12) You're probably right, Gem, Watching you, 10:18:25, 5/10/2000, (#15) well...WY, canadiana, 10:11:23, 5/10/2000, (#11) Yes,they have, Watching you, 10:15:24, 5/10/2000, (#13) The Ramsey's , momo, 10:47:02, 5/10/2000, (#17) Burke, Seashell, 10:38:15, 5/10/2000, (#16) Human Carnage, sarah, 10:49:28, 5/10/2000, (#18) Is anyone here a lawyer..., judgen, 10:59:09, 5/10/2000, (#19) If the Ramseys Were Truly Interested in Burke . . . , CommonSense, 11:20:11, 5/10/2000, (#20) But CommonSense, Ryder, 12:02:23, 5/10/2000, (#24) The "Settled" With the Star, CommonSense, 12:23:41, 5/10/2000, (#26) that's it right there, Edie Pratt, 11:28:33, 5/10/2000, (#22) Damn straight, Watching you, 11:25:26, 5/10/2000, (#21) Watching You and Common Sense,, gaiabetsy, 11:58:51, 5/10/2000, (#23) gaiabetsy, Watching you, 12:02:51, 5/10/2000, (#25) Gee thanks, Watching you, , gaiabetsy, 11:48:25, 5/11/2000, (#42) The settlement with the Star, SJ, 12:41:24, 5/10/2000, (#29) WY, Gemini, 12:40:52, 5/10/2000, (#28) Gem, gaiabetsy, 11:52:04, 5/11/2000, (#43) Wow, Gemini,, gaiabetsy, 13:02:06, 5/10/2000, (#30) Yo, watch''in you, , gaiabetsy, 12:37:20, 5/10/2000, (#27) Transcript, Chris, 07:10:55, 5/11/2000, (#32) PEOPLE...Show some compassion!, Cassandra, 07:24:37, 5/11/2000, (#33) Lin Wood's prior experience with FBI polygraphs, CommonSense, 07:41:22, 5/11/2000, (#34) More Detail about Jewell Polygraph set up by Lin Wood, CommonSense, 07:43:52, 5/11/2000, (#35) How conveeeeeenient!, Cassandra, 07:48:58, 5/11/2000, (#36) So, CS, does this, Watching you, 07:51:35, 5/11/2000, (#37) Why don't we have these questions from a reporter?, CommonSense, 07:58:24, 5/11/2000, (#38) One more question, Watching you, 08:13:09, 5/11/2000, (#39) Watching You, CommonSense, 09:52:16, 5/11/2000, (#40) I don't have a clue, Watching you, 09:54:33, 5/11/2000, (#41) Missed the interview,, Ev, 12:39:14, 5/11/2000, (#44) Thanks for the transcript, Chris.., LurkerXIV, 13:04:24, 5/11/2000, (#45) Thanks Chris , Gemini, 14:34:54, 5/11/2000, (#46) ................................................................... "Katie interviewing Lin Wood now" Posted by CommonSense on 05:22:18 5/10/2000 She showed their footage where they claimed that would take the polygraph. Then she questioned Lin about FBI and American Polygraph Association. [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 1. "I saw this" Posted by Watching you on 05:26:53 5/10/2000 earlier this morning (east coast). I wanted to reach in that television screen and beat the living crap out of him. It will be interesting to see the fallout from this one. He basically said on national television that he and the Rams do not trust the FBI, and the Rams have "had enough." Also, they have only begun suing - they will sue for themselves, too. Yea, right. I see nothing good looking about that slime bucket, Woods. Looks like jameson in drag. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 2. "OMIGOD!!!" Posted by Cassandra on 05:45:43 5/10/2000 Entertainment for YEARS TO COME!!! The stuff in the lawsuits about Burke is disgusting and sickening, and I think it is a damned shame to parade all that crap out in public, BUT John and Patsy stuff! My God! This will never end! YEARS AND YEARS OF LAWSUITS!!! They will have to live another lifetime to file all those! Geraldo has GOT to be on their short list! Cassie [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 3. "JR doesn't have a career" Posted by Watching you on 07:04:34 5/10/2000 anymore, he has to make money some way, and we must remember his promise to change the way the media reports its news, or whatever the hell he said. See, he is the ruler of the world, everyone is going to bow to the almighty Rams. People actually had the audacity to speak out loud the Rams might be involved, and by god, they are going to pay for those words. You have to admit, they have done pretty well so far - stuck it up everyone's bleep they've wanted to, and no one even attempts to stop them, except NYL, who continues to plod along, even though fathead Wood claims NYL's claim is frivolous. Why is it that when the Rams libel or slander someone and that someone sues them, it's frivolous, but when it is vice versa, it is legitimate? I've come to the profound realization that the only conclusion I will accept to this case is when John and Patsy Ramsey drive off a cliff and end up as vulture bait. I do not like that in myself - this intense desire to see these people pay - but, there it is. It didn't start out that way, since I am not normally a vindictive person, and wishing harm to another is not my style. But, they have pushed and pushed, and continued to perpetrate atrocities in the years since their daughter came up dead, and in doing so have stuck the knife ever deeper into my craw, so that now I have nothing for them except the deepest contempt I've ever bestowed upon anyone, with one exeption - Orenthal Killer Simpson. I hold tight to my belief that everyone pays for his actions, sooner or later. It may be later for these people, but I know they will pay ten-fold for what they have done. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 31. "over a cliff" Posted by ace21214 on 13:24:23 5/10/2000 I agree, I'd love to see them go over a cliff too. BUT I also want them to suffer. I want to see them get found out publicly as the killers and co-conspirators they are. I want to see Patsy do the perp walk in front of hundreds of TV cameras from all over the world. I want Jameson to be there watching it. I want the trial televised on Court TV with Geraldo as a commentator. I want a Governor Owens-appointed prosecutor who's the meanest, smartest S.O.B. in the land. I want to see them explain away the 911 tape in open, televised court and of course, the pineapple. I want to see Patsy explain away the 24 out of 26 matched handwriting characteristics. I want to see them backed into a corner like they are now with the the refusal of a polygraph the volunteered to take. These people make me so sick I want them to feel pain. The kind of pain they will feel everytime the news runs a soundbite from the crockumentary. The way to get to them is public humiliation. Death is too kind. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 4. "Lin Wood's Ethical Obligations to Burke" Posted by CommonSense on 07:05:22 5/10/2000 Lin Wood needs to decide who his client is. These stories about Burke were published years ago and the ONLY reason they are being filed now is to take the media heat off the Ramseys for their polygraph mess. There is no way that it is in the best interest of Burke to bring these claims now, and there is no way that the two prime suspects can have his best interest at heart. (Burke's claims will be there until he reaches majority - 18 or 21) If an attorney and the US justice system will allow a boy to be used in this way - I will once again be very disappointed at how people abuse our system and how no one in authority seems to have the strength to stop it. Lin Wood - if I were you, I'd be asking the ethics committee of your state bar if you should have concerns here. The Ramseys are running like rabbits trying to escape arrest and conviction for this crime. They are using this boy and you are supposed to be HIS attorney. If you aren't, if you are only representing the parents, you need to get counsel appointed for Burke. I'd also put my malpractice carrier on notice that a certain young man, upon reaching majority, may have a claim against you for using his name to garner public support for his parents - the two prime suspects in the death of his sister. This is truly disgusting. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 5. "Commonsense" Posted by Gemini on 09:20:47 5/10/2000 Well, that's a nice spin, suggesting the parents and Wood are misusing Burke. It almost distracts from the need for the press to be accountable for this kind of smear against a juvenile ... especially if that's what the reader wants to think. I like you a lot as a poster CS. I even like your idea that Burke needs a court appointed guardian to see to his best interests in connection with these law suits. But, I have to strongly disagree that the suits are, somehow, victimizing Burke. That's been done. This seems to simply be the reaction/response. My guess is you aren't a parent. Correct me if I'm wrong, and I'll rethink. And, that said, I can't even imagine the POV of the parents here who think they wouldn't be intent on smacking back at the named publications for the libel and resulting slander this child has suffered at their whims. A caring parent would not shrug it off as, "oh, that was years ago ... let it go", imo. My attitude would be, "you have attacked my child, brutally and irresponsibly. Now, it's time to take responsibility for your actions and stand accountable." It does not matter one iota whether some of you believe the Ramseys are involved in the murder, or whether you approve of them as human beings. None of the negatives are excuse enough to form a cheering section for a press that has verbally abused a child with total disregard for the problems they may have added to his young life without taking the time and/or trouble to verify the stories. Overall, the free press in this country is a wonder to behold. Unfortunately, the careless reps, the money hungry tabs and the lazy reporters will slowly but surely eclipse the good guys if this kind of journalism is not called to task on occasion. The Burke Ramsey coverage reeked. Good time to call in some accountability, imo. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 6. "While I agree Gemini," Posted by canadiana on 09:24:59 5/10/2000 why IS this a GOOD time? I would have screamed, screeched, hollered, bellowed and SUED a very long time ago. And I am a parent. I agree that the stories about Burke are horrible but why wait this long? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 7. "uh, Gem" Posted by Watching you on 09:38:18 5/10/2000 I'm a parent, three times over, and I agree with CommonSense. While I agree with you that Burke has been treated less than humanely by some of the media, and while I agree with you that I would be irate if someone did that to my kid FOR NO REASON, parents who have stonewalled the investigation into the murder of their own daughter, who have done everything in their power to stymie the investigation and not cooperate, and who (at least one of them) in all probability murdered their own kid and contrived to cover it up, are very much responsible for the speculation that has gone on in this case- even by the newspapers against their surviving (for now) kid. The operative words here are FOR NO REASON. There was a murder investigation going on - one that involved, like it or not, Burke Ramsey. It isn't as if the press just picked this kid out of nowhere - he was in the house that night. It was not wrong for anyone, and I really mean this, to qustion Burke's involvement in the murder. Personally, I never thought Burke had anything to do with it and I still don't. But, put blame also where it belongs - on John and Patsy Ramsey for killing their kid to begin with and for continuing the cover up ever since that led to speculation about their son. These people are despicable. And, oh yes, good old Alex Hunter isn't getting out if this that easily, either. If he had done his job and not kissed the Rams' behinds, all of this would have been moot. Alex Hunter was an easy mark for the Rams because he is gutless. He too is partially to blame for this - I've said it before, I'll say it again - if Alex Hunter had enough evidence to clear Burke Ramsey, he had enough evidence to arrest someone else. Guessing isn't good enough - well, I guess Burke couldn't have done it - there had to be real evidence that Burke didn't do it in order to clear him. The Rams are not sueing because Burke was harmed - they created this mess to begin with. They are sueing to prove a point - that point being, don't mess with the Ramseys. They suck, big time. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 8. "And, while I'm" Posted by Watching you on 09:50:35 5/10/2000 at it, isn't this just the most noble cause, after all. Teach young Burke it's okay to lie and cheat and kill, and the best defense is to sue, sue, sue. None of this would have happened if JBR had not been savagely murdered in her own home by someone in that home that night. That's where it all began. That's where the blame lies. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 9. "lest we forget" Posted by Edie Pratt on 10:01:17 5/10/2000 it was the Ramsey's who sought the media out, not the other way around. CNN? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 14. "my 2 cents" Posted by starry on 10:18:06 5/10/2000 Burke should hire a legion of attorneys and DIVORCE his parents. There! That would be some Justice. WY, I agree with you and I'd be standing right beside you watching that car with John and Patsy go over that cliff. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 10. "Just pisses me off" Posted by Watching you on 10:07:55 5/10/2000 so much - this double standard of theirs - the so-called slander of their son has gotten more action from them and infuriated them more than the murder of their little girl. What hypocrisy. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 12. "canadiana" Posted by Gemini on 10:13:43 5/10/2000 I would have screamed, screeched, hollered, bellowed and SUED a very long time ago. And I am a parent. I agree that the stories about Burke are horrible but why wait this long? Yep, agreed, so would I have. Don't know why they waited unless it had to do with lawyers advice ... and, knowing me, I'd have ignored that, too. But, while that would have been my response earlier, I do not see why it should mean something should not be done now. It may be late, but it isn't too late. Smack 'em again, I say. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 15. "You're probably right, Gem" Posted by Watching you on 10:18:25 5/10/2000 the lawyers probably were advising them to back off, but the Rams know more than anyone else, including their lawyers, so, maybe that's why Hadden et al are no longer their lawyers. I suspect there was a good reason their lawyers told them not to file lawsuits. I hope it all comes back to bite them in the ass. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 11. "well...WY" Posted by canadiana on 10:11:23 5/10/2000 I will say it again. These people have created public spectacles of their children all by themselves. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 13. "Yes,they have" Posted by Watching you on 10:15:24 5/10/2000 canadiana. Thanks for diverting my attention for a second - something got my dander up, I think it was the poor Ramseys thing, don't blame them for one damn thing that's happened, blame everyone else. Once WY's dander is up, she has to blow off steam. Your post gave me a minute to regroup. Stay tuned. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 17. "The Ramsey's " Posted by momo on 10:47:02 5/10/2000 have put Burke in the position he is in today. If it were not for them dragging their heels and being dishonest and uncooperative, Burke wouldn't feel those things that the lawsuit put forth. At least if they were to admit to their crime and get it out in the open Burke could have some closure. Even if he did not witness anything he knows deep down inside that his parents are not being honest. Kids know things. They feel something isn't quite right. Ultimately this is their fault. None of this would be happening if............blah blah blah. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 16. "Burke" Posted by Seashell on 10:38:15 5/10/2000 Who's looking out for HIS best interests? I haven't heard the Rams say that any monies they receive for lawsuits will go into a fund for his therapy which he'll probably need for the rest of his life. That was a half joke, but they aren't protecting him financially even tho they're suing everyone else so they can protect themselves. I think they waited this long becuz it was planned! They saw their money dwindling and needed to somehow pay off their lawyers. Hence the POS and now that that's bombed and polys are in the news, they have to bring out Burke. Ultimately, they are responsible for Burke being in the news. If they had pledged to put money into a trust for him, I could at least admire that. I wouldn't trust that they'd do that tho. Watch! Since their stoolies read us, they next thing they'll announce on national TV is just that. The truly troubling thing is that, up to now, no one has stood up to them except for what's his name - MW's attorney and our own NYL. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 18. " Human Carnage" Posted by sarah on 10:49:28 5/10/2000 If I love my son more than I love money or fame, the LAST THING I would do is thrust him or his name back into the spotlight . I agree with everything WY and CS said.... It isn't enough to say that countless victims have been thrown under the bus because of the Ramseys. The realization begins to emerge that the tossing of human carnage, no matter WHO it is, is simply their way of doing business. These people give a whole new meaning to the term "ruthless". ......"Rollin' rollin' rollin' - keep those busses rollin'. Rollin', rollin', rollin', raw hide.... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 19. "Is anyone here a lawyer..." Posted by judgen on 10:59:09 5/10/2000 familiar with libel/slander issues? While I am a lawyer, I admit that I haven't looked at these sorts of issues since law school (many more years ago than I want to admit). [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 20. "If the Ramseys Were Truly Interested in Burke . . . " Posted by CommonSense on 11:25:06 5/10/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 11:25:06, 5/10/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 11:23:36, 5/10/2000 Timing . . . let's use our brains about the timing here. If the Ramseys were truly interested in Burke they would have filed their libel claim at the time of the very first story which would have been a warning to other media outlets that they should publish no more of this crap. Instead, the Ramseys wait until everyone has defamed Burke and then file their suits only after they are looking bad in the public eye over the polygraph issue. Also, any decent parent and any lawyer thinking about the ramifications of this, would realize that a jury is NEVER going to hand Burke a big pile of money when the Plaintiffs in the case are John and Patsy Ramsey as the next friend of Burke. It is not uncommon to have someone else act as legal guardian in these types of suits because trial attorneys know that many times juries think that the parents are going to get the money not the child. Therefore, attorneys have a neutral third party act as the guardian for purposes of the suit. If there were ever a case where a jury would not want to give any money to the parents - this is it! From a legal standpoint - the Ramseys suit is a mistake. So . . . I stand by my original thoughts. Burke deserves his day in court, but if someone wanted to truly help him they would have either filed the suit when the first story was written or wait for the suit to be filed when Burke is old enough to decide how the case should be prosecuted, if at all. I'm curious, how do our Justice Watch members think that the Ramseys are putting food on the table? Could it be that the Ramseys are also in need of cash? Again, they should get jobs and not use Burke as a cash cow (assuming that any media defendant will be willing to pay them). [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 24. "But CommonSense" Posted by Ryder on 12:02:23 5/10/2000 They successfully sued the Star, didn't they? Wouldn't the same logic have applied there? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 26. "The "Settled" With the Star" Posted by CommonSense on 12:23:41 5/10/2000 I have no idea if the settlement was for zip, $1.00, a promise not to print any additional Burke stories, $1 million . . . As far as I know, no one except the parties knows what type of settlement was reached. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 22. "that's it right there" Posted by Edie Pratt on 11:28:33 5/10/2000 the timeing. They waited thruout these 3 1/2 yrs to stockpile these "Burkedidits", until the day came where he was officially cleared. THAT is why they never insisted on clearing his name! They wanted all the fodder time would allow. The tabs will nolonger write those headlines, thanks to ST and BPD,and whomever cleared him, so they are about to cash in their chips. Ch-ching. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 21. "Damn straight" Posted by Watching you on 11:25:26 5/10/2000 CommonSense - what you said. The Rams' standard of living is much more expensive than most of ours. Slinging hash won't cut it, I'm afraid, and neither will mowing lawns. They have to have big money to continue with their lifestyle of the rich and infamous. How better to get it than to sue everyone in sight because they figure everyone will settle out of court, and they are probably right. Money for Burke? Bullrod. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 23. "Watching You and Common Sense," Posted by gaiabetsy on 11:58:51 5/10/2000 I'm on your bandwagon. This is all about how to maintain "lifestyles of the rich and infamous" by Burke's parents. After all, poor old ex-exec JR can't find a job being an exec anymore. How about working at McDonald's, John. I hear they have an excellent career training program aimed to go all the way to Manager!!! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 25. "gaiabetsy" Posted by Watching you on 12:02:51 5/10/2000 I've been watching you ever since you got on board, and I have decided that I need a new kid. I adopted Lacey some time ago because she says it like it is. I have noticed you do that a lot, too, and when I read on another thread that you don't like phonies, I knew you were mine. So, I will continue to be watching you and, don't worry, if any of the big kids pick on you, they deal with WY. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 42. "Gee thanks, Watching you, " Posted by gaiabetsy on 11:48:25 5/11/2000 I always thought I was stolen from the Gypsies and placed in my family. I now know where I belong! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 29. "The settlement with the Star" Posted by SJ on 12:41:24 5/10/2000 How do we know how this settlement went? How much did the Rams actually get? What was conceded and kept confidential? Settlements occur only for one reason: money. Has nothing to do with guilt or innocense. When the cost of a trial exceeds the cost of a settlement, a settlement occurs. So what really happened with that? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 28. "WY" Posted by Gemini on 12:40:52 5/10/2000 Didn't mean to post and run. Lost my head this a.m. and made a stupid committment to really run with a friend. She showed up, I had to go and lope along for three laps, then walk three more. Now then ... if you're talking about me getting your dander up, I think your dander was already primed and ready to go :-) . Furthermore, you may have misunderstood. I wasn't suggesting "poor Ramseys" ... just pointing out the stories about Burke were very irresponsible and action should be taken, IMO, late or not. It's one thing to do a knee jerk about every single thing concerning the Rams when your convictions are very heart felt (as yours have been for a long time), but quite another to tie the kid to the forum bus and drag him along with the parents for no reason other than helpless association. In other words, even if the parents are bad guys, that does not absolve the press. Their libelous (imo) copy should not be justified by a public, hungry for gossip-fodder in the guise of entertainment. I'd like to see any money realized go into a trust fund for Burke, but I hope the named publications have to pay out the wazoo for their irresponsibility and poor judgement (aka greed). [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 43. "Gem" Posted by gaiabetsy on 11:52:04 5/11/2000 I used to be a distance runner. Now, I could run maybe 100 ft. I sympathize. I wish we could plug into the computer and get the exercise we need. When is somebody gonna come up with that? Don't you just hate making a committment like that, then waking up the next day with all kinds of regrets? Yep! I wanna say, hey, it's my life and who cares if I blow at least 20 years of old age to stay in bed another hour or two? Guess what? That's starting to sound OK to me. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 30. "Wow, Gemini," Posted by gaiabetsy on 13:02:06 5/10/2000 your hearts' in the right place. Of that much, I'm sure. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 27. "Yo, watch''in you, " Posted by gaiabetsy on 12:37:20 5/10/2000 yo the main one! No, really I have to reveal myself. Just this : hdc@ispchannel.com. Come along and realize the difference!!!!! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 32. "Transcript" Posted by Chris on 07:10:55 5/11/2000 TODAY SHOW Wednesday, May 10, 2000 KATIE COURIC, co-host: John and Patsy Ramsey are back in the news this morning for a number of reasons. They filed lawsuits this week against four different publications who reported that their son Burke is the one who killed JonBenet. And the Ramseys have still failed to reach an agreement with the Boulder Police Department to take a lie detector test. Lin Wood represents the Ramseys. Lin, good morning. Welcome back. Mr. LIN WOOD (Attorney for John and Patsy Ramsey): Good morning, Katie. COURIC: Let me start with some portion of the interview the Ramseys did with me back in March when I asked them specifically about a lie detector test. Mr. WOOD: Sure. (Beginning of file footage) COURIC: Did you all take a lie detector test? Mr. JOHN RAMSEY: We were never asked to take a lie detector test. COURIC: Why not volunteer to take one? Mr. RAMSEY: That didn't occur to me, first of all. That wasn't our motive. Ms. PATSY RAMSEY: I understand that lie detector tests are not admissible in court anyway. It's kind of a voodoo science. Mr. RAMSEY: I would. If I was asked. Certainly I would. But the fact is, I was never asked. (End of file footage) COURIC: Lin, of course the Ramseys now have been asked to take a lie detector test. And some of the particulars were being worked out. What happened? Mr. WOOD: Well, John and Patsy have stated very publicly that they would, in fact, take a lie detector test if they were asked to do so by Chief Beckner of the Boulder Police Department, if the test was a fair test, and if the test was conducted by an independent examiner, an examiner independent from the Boulder Police Department and its investigation of this family. Chief Beckner offered a test, but he only offered it if it was conducted by the FBI. The FBI has held the hands of the Boulder Police Department members in this investigation. The FBI is not independent. It was meeting last week with Boulder Police officials on the case. And so until and unless Chief Beckner offers a truly fair, truly independent examination, unfortunately there's not going to be one. COURIC: You obviously do not trust the FBI to administer this lie detector test. But apparently last week the nation's foremost polygraph group, the American Polygraph Association, offered to conduct an independent lie detector test. Would they satisfy your requirements as an independent body to administer this test? Mr. WOOD: I received a letter from the American Polygraph Association Monday. And, in fact, it does appear that that organization is offering someone who I think could be deemed to be fair and independent. But the question is not for John and Patsy Ramsey to answer. The question is for Chief Mark Beckner of the Boulder Police Department. They sent that letter to him. COURIC: Do you think they would be suitable to him? Do you think they would be suitable? Mr. WOOD: He has indicated that the only group that he is willing to allow to have this test--conduct this test is the FBI. I can't speak for Chief Beckner. But I think the question ought to be asked, why is Chief Beckner unwilling to have a truly fair and independent examiner perform the test? COURIC: Let me ask you about what's happening in the Boulder Police Department. Apparently, they've started to retest evidence that they found at the murder scene, such as hair and fiber. Were you surprised or were your clients, the Ramseys, surprised by this? Mr. WOOD: No. I think that during the media campaign of the district attorney out there, Alex Hunter, that he's referenced the fact that there were ongoing laboratory tests. So the information from last week certainly came as no surprise. COURIC: Let me ask you about these four lawsuits that were filed against these four separate publications seeking $ 16 million on behalf of their 12-year-old son Burke. What prompted the Ramseys to file those suits? Mr. WOOD: Well, when I was hired several months ago, I made it very clear that John and Patsy had asked me to initially concentrate my efforts in terms of civil litigation on behalf of their son Burke. The first lawsuit was filed against a tabloid, Star. That lawsuit was settled a couple of months ago. And these lawsuits follow in that same vein. These lawsuits are brought against members of the media that very publicly proclaimed that Burke Ramsey, a nine-year-old child at the time of his sister's death, was a murderer. And John and Patsy have drawn a line and said that they're not going to tolerate this. These are vicious lies, unconscionable conduct. It's almost like staring at a bully and finally saying 'Enough is enough.' The Ramseys have had enough. They've had enough of the lies and accusations against their son. They've had enough of the lies and accusations against themselves. COURIC: Meanwhile, they've... Mr. WOOD: They're going to do something about. COURIC: ...they've been sued by someone they mention in their book. Mr. WOOD: They have been, although that lawsuit was filed in New York and dismissed last week. I understand it's going to be refiled in Atlanta. And look, that's--that's unfortunate. It's part of the tragedy this family has to endure. The individual who is going to file that suit has a lawyer who has himself sued the Ramseys and dismissed his case. That individual's lawyer has himself filed a lawsuit against authorities in Boulder trying to interject himself into this case for publicity purposes. That lawsuit is, indeed, frivolous. It's not like the cases that John and Patsy have brought for Burke and will ultimately bring for themselves. COURIC: All right, Lin Wood. Thanks very much for joining us. Mr. WOOD: Thank you, Katie. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 33. "PEOPLE...Show some compassion!" Posted by Cassandra on 07:24:37 5/11/2000 SOMEONE'S got to pay for their latest redecorating! Those labyrinths can run into money! Cassie [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 34. "Lin Wood's prior experience with FBI polygraphs" Posted by CommonSense on 07:41:22 5/11/2000 Thought you guys would like this one: August 20, 1996 Web posted at: 8:50 a.m. EDT ATLANTA (CNN) -- Olympic bomb suspect Richard Jewell passed a lie detector test in which he denied any involvement in the deadly July 27 attack, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported on Tuesday. A polygraph expert hired by the security guard's lawyers told the newspaper that the test results showed Jewell had nothing to do with the pipe bombing that left two people dead and more than 100 injured at downtown Atlanta's Centennial Olympic Park. "He didn't do it," Dick Rackleff, a former FBI agent now in private practice, said. "There's not any doubt in my mind. He had no knowledge about the bomb. The tests show he absolutely was not involved." Jewell, 33, who was hailed as a hero in the immediate aftermath of the bombing, still remains a suspect in the FBI's investigation. He has steadfastly maintained his innocence. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 35. "More Detail about Jewell Polygraph set up by Lin Wood" Posted by CommonSense on 07:50:01 5/11/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 07:50:01, 5/11/2000 Another article: ATLANTA -- The security guard being investigated in the bombing at Centennial Olympic Park passed a lie detector test during which he denied involvement, a former FBI agent who administered the test said Tuesday. Richard Jewell spent a combined 15 hours Aug. 4 and last Thursday being tested by Dick Rackleff, who is now in private practice. He was hired by Jewell's attorneys in their effort to prove their client's innocence. . . . . There is a Richard D Rackleff living in Norcross, Georgia. Wonder if this is the guy? Wonder if he has given the Ramseys a polygraph? I don't want to call the guy and ask. Any reporters here want to ask him? If I were the defense attorneys for the media defendants - I'd be serving this guy with a discovery deposition notice together with a subpoena deuces tecum. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 36. "How conveeeeeenient!" Posted by Cassandra on 07:48:58 5/11/2000 To have your own pet polygrapher! LOL Cassie [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 37. "So, CS, does this" Posted by Watching you on 07:53:37 5/11/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 07:53:37, 5/11/2000 mean....do you suppose.....could it be.... the Rams will be taking a polygraph at the request of Wood, like Richard Jewell did, to prove their innocence? Well, if not, why not? If so, will the results be released? Post edit... ooooooohhhhh, I get it now. Subpoena polygrapher's records - good thinking, CS. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 38. "Why don't we have these questions from a reporter?" Posted by CommonSense on 07:58:24 5/11/2000 Mr. Wood, you have repeatedly stated that the Ramseys are willing to take lie detector tests once they have reached an agreement with Boulder authorities where the FBI won't be involved, but why is it in the Richard Jewell case that you felt comfortable in hiring a former FBI agent - without any agreement with the authorities? Some people might say Mr. Wood, that in the Richard Jewell case that you were comfortable with your client's innocense so you were not afraid to hire an FBI man and to release the results publicly, how do you answer that? Mr. Wood, why not call up Mr. Dick Rackleff and him administer tests to the Ramseys and then release the tests? Mr. Wood, have the Ramseys ever spoken with or met Dick Rackleff? Mr. Wood, have you spoken to Mr. Dick Rackleff or anyone at his suggestion regarding the polygraphs by the Ramseys? Does Dick Rackleff agree with the Ramsey's position that Mr. Rackleff's former fellow officers at the FBI can't be trusted to conduct polygraph examinations of your clients? When you had Richard Jewell take a polygraph conducted by the former FBI agent - did you ever even suggest to the authorities that Mr. Jewell should automatically be cleared if he passed? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 39. "One more question" Posted by Watching you on 08:13:09 5/11/2000 Mr. Wood, why weren't you afraid that a former FBI polygrapher might be biased against your client, Richard Jewell, since they were the ones who were shoulder-deep in trying to convict him? What changed between the Jewell case and the Ramsey case to make you distrust the integrity of the FBI polygraphers? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 40. "Watching You" Posted by CommonSense on 09:52:16 5/11/2000 Any ideas on how we find a reporter to follow-up with this? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 41. "I don't have a clue" Posted by Watching you on 09:54:33 5/11/2000 unless we e-mail Katie Couric asking her to have him back on the show and ask him these questions. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 44. "Missed the interview," Posted by Ev on 12:39:14 5/11/2000 then couldn't get on here to see what was said! I have read with great interest all the comments made about these lawsuits. Lots of food for thought. I think this came about now because the Rams need the money now. All this fussing around about lie detector tests/no lie detector tests, and now the lawsuits. The Rams think we won't notice that "THERE IS AN ELEPHANT IN THE LIVING ROOM!" JonBenet was murdered by someone, apparently other than Burke, and perhaps if they showed even a scintilla of outrage at that then people would be more sympathetic to them. However, creating all the distractions possible now that they have thrown themselves back in the spotlight is what it's all about. I wonder if they really think people are stupid enough to be distracted by all the sabre rattling. NOTHING changes my mind about a lying face when I see one. The tabs deserve to be socked in the gut once in awhile when they get completely out of hand, but the Rams will not be giving their awards to charity as do some of the high profile people who have won judgments. Burke will be lucky to see a dime. (I hope none of them actually see a dime!) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 45. "Thanks for the transcript, Chris.." Posted by LurkerXIV on 13:04:24 5/11/2000 ..I've been missing all the TV interviews while the TV is dedicated to Scooby-Doo, Telletubbies, and the like. Common Sense: Great comments. starry: I like your solution best. I believe there are legal precedents for kids disowning their parents. My question for Mr.Wood: Is your practice so devoid of normal, deserving clients that you have to take up with those two-faced, lying, baby-raping, murderous extortionists, John and Patsy Scamsey? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 46. "Thanks Chris " Posted by Gemini on 14:34:54 5/11/2000 for the transcript, and Commonsense for the article reprint. I suspect Thomas gave Wood and the Ramseys fodder for the neg. stance toward the FBI. I keep remembering the bit in his book about him calling an "FBI buddy". LOL Gaiabetsy. With the big 47 staring at me on the other side of summer (means no more mid-forties, hello late-forties), I might take the extra 20 years. Going to stick to walking while the temps are high though. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ]