New book coming out by Paula Woodward

[Junebug99]

I had no idea people here have been sued, I apologize. I tend to forget that webspeak isn't quite as clear as normal conversation.

 

[otg]

http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682503/Rod%20Westmoreland

The poster mentioned in the above link apparently didn't learn anything from the experience, or he's just a glutton for punishment. Not long ago he reappeared on another forum using a different username, and started spewing the same stuff he was sued for before. He was quickly banned (again) by that forum.

 

[CanManEh]

So who is PW what is she to the crime does she have any special insight to the JBR case or is she just a spectator to the case like most of us..

 

[tezi]

So who is PW what is she to the crime does she have any special insight to the JBR case or is she just a spectator to the case like most of us..

Paula Woodward is an investigative reporter for one of the news stations in Denver, and a "close" Ramsey friend. All that information was available upthread.

 

[BBB167893]

Woodward's book is set to be released August 24th. When is SuperDave's book coming out?

Well, I just got the photos greenlighted, so very soon now!

And for the record, the LAST thing this case and this country need is another screed by another Ramsey stooge.

 

[BBB167893]

Once someone doesn't agree with RDI's, they are crazy, Kool-aide drinkers.

You're more right than you know.

They have seen the evidence came up with a different opinion, that doesn't make them crazy kool-aide drinkers.

No, a lot of the OTHER stuff they did does!

 

[BBB167893]

Exactly, who wouldn't sue if a book full of lies implicating them in murder ( especially of their beloved child) was published?

I wouldn't. I'd KILL 'em, that's what I'd do! Give me the good old days of duels.

Yet the Ramsy's are vilified for it.

As well they SHOULD be. Because it's obvious that their lawsuits are not meant to silence lies, but to obscure TRUTH. I guess you've never heard of SLAPP's, huh? Well, despite their best efforts, we still have free speech in this country.

 

[BBB167893]

It's amazing that the "sue happy" Ramseys haven't sued this board for all of the misinformation.

Leaving aside WHO posts misinformation on this board, Junebug, I'm sure they would if they COULD.

1) The Internet is considered a much grayer area.

2) More than that, Patsy's dead (and you can't sue on behalf of a dead person) and John's made a run for public office, which makes him a political figure, thus almost impossible to bring a successful defamation claim against anyone.

When you sue someone, you open yourself up to more scruntinized. If they were guilty the more they sue the more likely the truth would come out, ask Terry Hobbs.......

Which is why they've never taken suit against anyone like Cyril Wecht or Wendy Murphy. No, they only go after publishers, who settle as a matter of legal course, regardless of grounds.

Well, I'm not afraid! And neither is MY publisher!

 

[redheadedgal]

This book has all ready being pre ordered by 1000's, and the author didn't have to pay to have her worked published, that speaks volumes to me.

where would one find the info about the number of pre-orders?

(‘ Course if one has very deep pockets one could behave like the NY Post - owned by Murdoc who is listed at wealth of 13.4 billion. The Post wrote an article about BR, was sued; the Post attorneys ended up saying “Bring it on” and the R’s backed down from a court fight with the lawsuit. It was settled outside the legal arena, though it’s said the Post was very geared for a good fight.) moo

does anyone know if and where this article can still be read?

It's funny Kolars new book was "going to blow the lid off" the Ramsey case, it didn't happen. Maybe this book will.

doubt it--

But Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner, who declined to be interviewed by Woodward, claims the book might not be factual:

“I know the case pretty intricately, inside and out. And I’m not sure what could appear in a book written by a third party uninvolved in the investigation that I wouldn’t already be aware of. And, if it’s something I’m not aware of, it’s probably not factual.”
​

http://www./1075152/patsy-ramsey-mother-of-jonbenet-ramsey-called-innocent-in-paula-woodwards-book/

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Leaving aside WHO posts misinformation on this board, Junebug, I'm sure they would if they COULD.



1) The Internet is considered a much grayer area.



2) More than that, Patsy's dead (and you can't sue on behalf of a dead person) and John's made a run for public office, which makes him a political figure, thus almost impossible to bring a successful defamation claim against anyone.







Which is why they've never taken suit against anyone like Cyril Wecht or Wendy Murphy. No, they only go after publishers, who settle as a matter of legal course, regardless of grounds.



Well, I'm not afraid! And neither is MY publisher!

They go after the author and the publisher. Steve Thomas's publisher paid his settlement but Steve Thomas was named in the suit.








Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[otg]

(snipped)

does anyone know if and where this article can still be read?

The article is still online. If you read it, you'll see why the NYPost was ready for a fight and why the lawsuit was dropped. They made no claims about BR. The article is simply reporting that another publication (Star Magazine) was making that claim. The Ramseys had no basis for a lawsuit against the NYP. The lawsuit was probably only initiated with the intent of intimidating them (and others) in hopes that they would settle out-of-court to avoid further legal costs and serve as an example for others.

http://nypost.com/1999/05/13/jealous-brother-9-killed-jonbenet-in-a-rage-claims-tab/

 

[Venom]

Thanks otg. I just read it, it clearly states with all the claims that a tabloid was making them.

 

[otg]

BTW, has anyone else noticed that there is a new ebook by another well-known poster/blogger? I'm not promoting it, because I certainly disagree with him. But just as a FYI:

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/Ruled-IN-Solving-JonBenet-Ramsey-ebook/dp/B00HNWYIEM/ref=sr_1_5?ie=UTF8&qid=1389109659&sr=8-5&keywords=docg"]Amazon.com: Ruled IN: Solving the JonBenet Ramsey Case eBook: DocG: Kindle Store@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51KAkAoBKKL.@@AMEPARAM@@51KAkAoBKKL[/ame]

 

[UKGuy]

BTW, has anyone else noticed that there is a new ebook by another well-known poster/blogger? I'm not promoting it, because I certainly disagree with him. But just as a FYI:

Amazon.com: Ruled IN: Solving the JonBenet Ramsey Case eBook: DocG: Kindle Store

otg,
Thanks. For a moment I thought it was SuperDave. I wonder if DocG has anything to say about BR's presence during the 911 call and JR's remarks?

Since his theory relies on JR being unable to prevent PR from dialling 911 and messing up his master plan.

.

 

[borndem]

At least SG, DA, was Not enthusiastic about another R book.

Of course, anyone can choose any title for a book which he/she believes encapsulates the message. I don’t even have to read the Woodward book to feel a colossal ego behind the book from its title, as though Ms. Woodward has the absolute final word on what is Fiction, Lies and Legend. “’Mr. Ramsey, Listen Carefully!’: Facts, Fictions, Lies and Legends in the Murder of JonBenet Ramsey”. Hubris and truly pathetic for a person trained in investigative reporting. Her little cute statement in the Daily Camera was "I hope someone sues me for not getting permission to publish their ransom note." Right, the Intruder is going to sue Woodward. Gimmee a break. moo

IMO, "the Intruder" is/are the one(s) who Intruded on little JB's life that night. Yes, they were Intruders, all right. And we -- and they -- know (knew) who they were. Grrrrr. And she wasn't theirs to take, but take they did.

I'd buy the book for 50 cents, not :twocents: more.

Thanks for the post, questfortrue -- I agree 100% !

 

[borndem]

More:
http://www.simulstream.com/mp3.html

:floorlaugh: :clap::floorlaugh:

:lol:... Just reading the song titles is a hoot! By Jove, I think they've got it!!


Thanks, otg!!

 

[Anyhoo]

I have no interest at all in a book by a Ramsey supporter. It's a no-brainer that this crime is RDI and anyone who suggests otherwise has no brain or wants to believe in a fantasy. JBR deserves justice, not this.

 

[borndem]

http://www.webpronews.com/jonbenet-ramsey-dead-17-years-book-nears-completion-2013-12

"Do you think John, Patricia and Burke Ramsey are all innocent of wrongdoing in the death of JonBenet Ramsey 17 years ago? Do you think Paula Woodward’s new book will help point fingers at a suspect in the case?"

yawn.
yep I bet this is what John's cooperation was all about>help point fingers at someone else once again

Agreed, madeleine, and I'll bet he gave her a list of whom to interview -- for a balanced approach, don't ya know?!

 

[ATLTRUTH]

I bought J. Kolar's book, and find it most notable for the evidence it presents that is factual and verifiable from the documentation on the case. I also read the book by FBI profiler John Douglas who was hired by the Ramseys and proclaims their innocence (OK, I've read them all, but am just mentioning these two). Douglas's rose colored glasses regarding the Ramseys' involvement in the case was a real disappointment when I read his book-- Douglas holds as fact some of the most questionable evidence-- believing in the stun gun theory, the basement entry, etc. What really killed Douglas's credibility for me was when he totally bit on John Mark Karr as the killer. I saw an interview with him right after Karr was arrested, and Douglas was warning that Karr " might try to feign mental illness." (don't have the cite, but Google it)

My most obvious issue with the Intruder theory is that it just doesn't explain the ransom note. The 'practice" pad, the handwriting comparison, the length of the note itself, the phrasing of the note, the note being directed to JR, the $118K ransom amount, and the "terms" the "kidnappers" set-- to me, none of this makes sense except under the RDI theory.

Second, regardless of what the hired guns said, my "personal opinion only" is that there was a decided LACK of true cooperation by the Ramseys . I'm an attorney and I know what cooperation with the authorities looks like, and to me, it wasn't there. The Boulder PD, with their lack of experience in homicides and their view of the Ramseys as pillars of the community , were at a disadvantage from the start-- the Ramsey defense team was in place and the walls were up from the minute the police were called. In today's world, I would like to think that the family would have been separated immediately and statements taken. The house would have been treated as a crime scene immediately, with the family removed and a thorough search of the house done.

Also, it seems the proponents of the intruder theory embrace the basement window entry-- despite the spider webs on the window and the suitcase placed so it appeared someone tried to use it to climb out the basement window, and lack of evidence showing that it was even possible for someone to escape the house that way. Although there have indeed been cases where an intruder did enter a house and kidnap a child ( Polly Klaas, Elizabeth Smart) , in those cases no one bothered with a ransom note-- they were there to kidnap, rape and kill, and that's what they did, but NOT ON THE PREMISES-- they grabbed the kid and got the hell out of there.

The Ramseys had good legal counsel in the early stages of the investigation, followed their attorneys' advice, and therefore controlled all their statements and interviews. Once the basic "story" was set by the Ramseys, all they had to do was stick to it, not embellish it, and let their attorneys deflect the rest of the evidence.

And as for Lou Smit-- he was indeed a respected investigator, but if an investigator is out there praying with the suspects, doesn't that affect objectivity on the most basic level? Plus, the stun gun theory, which was advanced by Smit and "hired gun" Douglas, has been conclusively disproved-- the Kolar book has some nice photographs showing the difference in the marks made by the stun guns vs. what was measured on the body at the autopsy-- the prongs of the device are a different distance apart from the marks on the body.

So, I won't be checking out any pro Ramsey book on this case. If you want to see a decent analysis of some of the evidence , check out Kolar's Foreign Faction book. I found out about the book here at WS and am glad I took the time to read it. At this point, I don't see anything changing about the case, as the Boulder PD sure doesn't seem to want anything else to do with it. The case is done, and it's sad-- somebody got away with murder of a little girl. All LE can do is learn from this case and apply it to future cases involving a child's death in the home.

 

[borndem]

Great post, Atltruth! I have read the Kolar book, too, as have many WS'ers here, and all comments were good -- fair, dismayed, angry, factual, and not shouting his opinion as to whom the "bad-guy" was. But it's easy to infer his feeling on it...

:wagon:

to
:websleuther:Websleuths:websleuther:
and

:cheers:


to


:drumroll:Atltruth !!!:drumroll:
:seeya:

:rollercoaster:


We're glad you're with us!!
​