Burke Files 150 Million Dollar Lawsuit Against Werner Sptiz???

[Sparko96]

He told the world that Burke killed his sister when he was 9 years old.

Now that is defamation of a (then) minor that was never indicted nor charged.

So the dr may be somewhat liable in this suit. Idk

No. He is expressing an expert opinion that comports with a GJ indictment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Sparko96]

The Ramseys sponsoring TV shows to exonerate themselves and accepting money for interviews undercuts lawsuits. They are are done.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HarmonyE.]

Lol or MOO or IMHO. Just do not want to see people getting sued left and right. LW is emotionally reactive and aggressive.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Actually, he's been very effective as a pit bull for the Ramseys over the years, scaring off anyone who might dare suggest they played a role in the death.

I'm not sure it's going to work for him this time though.

 

[observation]

Actually, he's been very effective as a pit bull for the Ramseys over the years, scaring off anyone who might dare suggest they played a role in the death.

I'm not sure it's going to work for him this time though.

I believe Stein was the pit bull of the Ramsey family. LW is a horse of a different color.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[just the facts pls]

I don't believe much of anything that the 'doctor' says.

I understand, but remember Dr Phil wouldn't say anything that LW didn't already pre-approve of anyway. I don't think he would want to end up being sued like Dr Spitz.

 

[just the facts pls]

I agree. I would think it would be quite difficult to prove Dr. Spitz had malicious intent against BR. He was stating his professional opinion about what he think happened, using the evidence available to him. In doing a voluntary interview with DP, prior to the CBS documentary, I believe BR made himself a public person before the said "defamation" occurred.

It will be quite interesting to see how this lawsuit plays out.

I think you are right. BR chose to go on Dr Phil to do an interview, and thus made himself a public figure. Ironically, his interview backfired and led many to subscribe to the BDI theory. The fact that BR is suing is probably convincing people even more. I think if we sit back long enough, we'll find BR and LW digging themselves even deeper into self-incrimination.

All Dr Spitz did was provide his professional opinion based on the facts he was presented with. There is no evidence that Dr Spitz hates BR or wants to ruin his life. I don't see how this is a defamation case. If that's true, then we should shut down the entire Internet so nobody can ever opine about anything, lest someone get full of argy bargy and sue.

 

[arm16]

Some interesting details in the Complaint for Defamation against Dr. Spitz that may provide insight into some of facts of the case.

THE PINEAPPLE: The Defamation document claims that “Defendant Spitz recklessly relied on a finding that JonBenet had pineapple in her lower intestine while recklessly ignoring the subsequent testing that established that she had fruit cocktail in her lower intestine—a combination of pineapple, cherries and grapes. “
Significance: In her new book Paula Woodward indicates experts at the University of Colorado reported that “grapes, grape skins, cherries and pineapples” were found in JB’s stomach although no details are provided. Her statement raised the possibility that JB did not eat the pineapple in the kitchen just before her death. The Defamation document provides more detail indicating there was fruit cocktail in her” lower intestine.” While there is no” lower intestine” this may refer to the lower gastro track which is further down the digestion path meaning JB may have eaten other fruit earlier in the day. According to the autopsy the “proximal portion of the small intestine contains fragmented pieces of yellow to light green-tan apparent vegetable or fruit material which may represent fragments of pineapple."” This is the very top part of the small intestine indicating JB ate the pineapple just before death.

THE HEAD BLOW: The Defamation document indicates that “At the time or just after her death from asphyxiation, Jon Benet also suffered a massive blow to her head.”
Significance: Based on brain bleeding and swelling most experts have concluded that the head blow came from 45 minutes to 2 hours before the strangulation. This is in conflict with that conclusion.

BURKE’S SCATILOGICAL ISSUES: The Defamation document indicates that “Dr Spitz made false and defamatory statements that Burke Ramsey “had smeared a family bathroom with faces” and “had smeared Jon Benet’s room with feces.”
Significance: This behavior has been used as support for Burke’s emotional issues. The main source was the housekeeper and its unclear if it was ever substantiated. The suit is raising the possibility that this was inaccurate.

 

[HarmonyE.]

All Dr Spitz did was provide his professional opinion based on the facts he was presented with. There is no evidence that Dr Spitz hates BR or wants to ruin his life. I don't see how this is a defamation case. If that's true, then we should shut down the entire Internet so nobody can ever opine about anything, lest someone get full of argy bargy and sue.

Yes. The First Amendment is a pretty big deal. I know it's different in many other countries, but in the US, a public figure has some big hurdles when making a defamation claim. It can be and has been successfully done of course, but it's not simply a matter of "I don't like what you said about me, it caused me harm in my life, and you're going to pay me for it." And Spitz is hardly the first person to publicly speculate that Burke whacked his sister on the head that night.

Dr. Phil was a fiasco for Burke and I don't say that simply as a long time BDI. Dr. Phil actually had to do an unplanned show on the fly to try to make it clear that HE didn't think Burke was guilty, even though much of his audience thought Burke's behavior and answers made him look extremely suspicious. This tells us someone flipped out over the reaction to the interview and insisted that Phil do immediate damage control. John Ramsey? Lin Wood? My guess is both.

 

[rosesfromangels]

Wish I knew more about the legal side of stuff to know if this will actually make it to court!

I speculate it will get settled out of court.

 

[DexterMorgan]

No. He is expressing an expert opinion that comports with a GJ indictment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm sorry. But unless the fbi said Burke did it. Then the doctor shouldn't have said burke did it without a shadow of doubt.

Now of course he may have said it was his opinion 1000 times.

But once you state it as if it is fact; Then you are opening up a defamation lawsuit.

Now a GJ indictment doesn't mean you did it either. Its just a way to move forward which obviously wasn't done.

So imo. Dr Spitz may have to settle out of court for the portion of the interview where he stated the comment as fact.

Jmo.

 

[PositiveLight]

otg,
I'll bet JR and LW thought it would be business as usual, i.e. we'll just sue anyone that gets in our way, that will shut them up for years?

Someone should get Spitz to ask the court to unseal the rest of the True Bills, so he can demonstrate why he thinks BR killed JonBenet?


Is it not bizarre, the case is likely BDI, yet BR can sue to recompense on his reputation as an innocent, and nobody can say boo, because he is protected under federal law?


You have to wonder if CBS dug up some new evidence, else why should BR bother with Dr Phil to tell us more or less what we already knew?

Kolar looked uncomfortable on the CBS show, not sure if this was just him not used to being directed, or he was pissed at being told what not to say with everyone else allowed more sound bites?

.

I think that is what they planned on to shut people up. But maybe this time they chose the wrong people to go after. I don't think so many professionals would risk so much if they didn't have proof. One professional maybe...but so many? I think the Ramsey's goose is finally cooked.

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[PositiveLight]

The amount of effort put in to protecting their reputation vs the amount of effort in finding out who killed JB is disturbing and tells you all you need to know about this case.

Amen!

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk

 

[DexterMorgan]

Yes. The First Amendment is a pretty big deal. I know it's different in many other countries, but in the US, a public figure has some big hurdles when making a defamation claim. It can be and has been successfully done of course, but it's not simply a matter of "I don't like what you said about me, it caused me harm in my life, and you're going to pay me for it." And Spitz is hardly the first person to publicly speculate that Burke whacked his sister on the head that night.

Dr. Phil was a fiasco for Burke and I don't say that simply as a long time BDI. Dr. Phil actually had to do an unplanned show on the fly to try to make it clear that HE didn't think Burke was guilty, even though much of his audience thought Burke's behavior and answers made him look extremely suspicious. This tells us someone flipped out over the reaction to the interview and insisted that Phil do immediate damage control. John Ramsey? Lin Wood? My guess is both.

Burke isn't a public figure because most of his statements were made under the proceedings when he was a minor.

So he is the victims brother that probably would have never did Dr Phil if the press didn't once again want to blame his family on the 20year anniversary. Jmo.

Now there has been statements by the killers that Puff Daddy had something to do with Tupacs murder.

Now even though there are documentaries out there along with other evidence.

I doubt any Dr would get away with saying that Sean Combs (puff daddy) had Tupac killed.

Because they would be sued before lunch time even if they had certain docs that stated he was most likely to have done it. Jmo

 

[HarmonyE.]

I'm sorry. But unless the fbi said Burke did it. Then the doctor shouldn't have said burke did it without a shadow of doubt.

Now of course he may have said it was his opinion 1000 times.

But once you state it as if it is fact; Then you are opening up a defamation lawsuit.

Now a GJ indictment doesn't mean you did it either. Its just a way to move forward which obviously wasn't done.

So imo. Dr Spitz may have to settle out of court for the portion of the interview where he stated the comment as fact.

Jmo.

Spitz may well settle out of court if he (or more likely, his insurance company) thinks it's cheaper than defending the case. This has been Lin Wood's game for a long time now.

But you are wrong about what constitutes actual defamation in this situation, so you may want to read up on this as it's been addressed out here repeatedly. Also simply adding "just my opinion" to any statement doesn't make a publicly stated conclusion or opinion by an expert any less defamatory if it is a lie created with malice, people believe it, and it harms the individual's otherwise good reputation within his or her community.

 

[HarmonyE.]

Burke isn't a public figure because most of his statements were made under the proceedings when he was a minor.

Nine year old Burke isn't suing. 29 year old Burke who sat for an interview on a show that was broadcast across the planet is. He's a public figure.

 

[DexterMorgan]

Spitz may well settle out of court if he (or more likely, his insurance company) thinks it's cheaper than defending the case. This has been Lin Wood's game for a long time now.

But you are wrong about what constitutes actual defamation in this situation, so you may want to read up on this as it's been addressed out here repeatedly. Also simply adding "just my opinion" to any statement doesn't make a publicly stated conclusion or opinion by an expert any less defamatory if it is a lie created with malice, people believe it, and it harms the individual's otherwise good reputation within his or her community.

Well if the Dr got paid for his interview and stated these things without a higher approval. Then he is on the hook.

Btw. 1 small soundbite can cost someone millions. Jmo.

So the lawyers are not going to focus on how many times he said just my opinion.

Because they only need to focus on that 1 time during the broadcast where he states it as fact.

Civil Suit Loopholes 101.

Anyways.

Do you think that 7/8 figure lawyers would move forward if it wasn't the slightest possibility to settle a civil case.

This means they have enough to prove where the doc messed up at. Jmo.

 

[Tortoise]

Spitz - acted with Malice; knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth - the depressed portion of skull in the medical photos did not look like the shape he was able to reproduce in tests with the Maglite.

Possibly and IMO.

 

[just the facts pls]

I'm sorry. But unless the fbi said Burke did it. Then the doctor shouldn't have said burke did it without a shadow of doubt.

Now of course he may have said it was his opinion 1000 times.

But once you state it as if it is fact; Then you are opening up a defamation lawsuit.

Now a GJ indictment doesn't mean you did it either. Its just a way to move forward which obviously wasn't done.

So imo. Dr Spitz may have to settle out of court for the portion of the interview where he stated the comment as fact.

Jmo.

BBM. I'm not even sure if Spitz actually said that.

If memory serves correctly, Spitz said that "according to the evidence presented to him" that his conclusion would be that BDI.

That's not the same thing as saying it as fact. It's merely giving an expert opinion.

(On that note, does anyone know if there's a transcript of the show?)

 

[Heymom]

Spitz - acted with Malice; knowledge of falsity or reckless disregard for the truth - the depressed portion of skull in the medical photos did not look like the shape he was able to reproduce in tests with the Maglite.

Possibly and IMO.

I don't see how this could be debated - especially the malice part. Regardless of how paranoid JR and BR are, it doesn't mean that anyone hates them directly or has malice toward them. And opinions are opinions, and people are allowed to express them.

I think the lawsuit is a great idea, though! Go forward and let's see what happens. The time when insurance companies just paid a settlement could be over - it's now cheaper to fight than it is to settle. Too many lawyers, don'tcha know...

 

[Tortoise]

I don't see how this could be debated - especially the malice part. Regardless of how paranoid JR and BR are, it doesn't mean that anyone hates them directly or has malice toward them. And opinions are opinions, and people are allowed to express them.

I think the lawsuit is a great idea, though! Go forward and let's see what happens. The time when insurance companies just paid a settlement could be over - it's now cheaper to fight than it is to settle. Too many lawyers, don'tcha know...

I think malice takes on a different slant when it is the expressed conclusion of a purported expert with thousands(?) of autopsies over many years under his belt, and so his opinions carry a greater weight and he bears a higher degree of responsibility for ensuring his statements are not reckless or false, on TV/radio.

The other part to bear in mind is the very long skull fracture. IMO (not an expert) this wound was inflicted from behind or in front because of the direction of the force to cause that long fracture, not the side, and the maglite could only cause that shaped wound if it hit from the side. So he has been really careless in presenting his experiments as a credible theory. That's my conclusion anyway. I believe Spitz will say anything when he is paid to say it. He's totally dismissed the sexual assault too and that was an element of the crime against JonBenet, inflicted while she was alive. It doesn't stack up with a lashing out over pineapple, digested about an hour earlier.