New book coming out by Paula Woodward

[Anyhoo]

imo, none of the R's will sue 'cause they would then be under the duress of investigations and cross-examinations which would lead to more and more, and more.........

Agreed. JR and BR want this case buried and forgotten. Any lawsuit could dredge up new information which would not point to an intruder but back to a guilty Ramsey. They would be fools to open up that can of worms.

 

[Landonsmom02]

You didn't ask me Landonsmom, but I'll answer anyway: Because JK's book flies in the face of their IDI "theories", as does ST's book! Personally, I'm not a BDI, but never the less, he presents legitimate evidence. PERIOD! Since his evidence can't be refuted, then JK is personally attacked by some who question his motives for writing the book. They have to have some way of ignoring hard, cold evidence of RDI. Also, IMO, finding a reporter to be a "credible" source, and a police chief (in another CO town) as not credible, shows a serious lack of judgment and common sense. :facepalm:

Thanks!! I was asking anyone It just blows my mind when people discredit JK! From the first chapter I couldn't put my kindle down!

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Agreed. JR and BR want this case buried and forgotten. Any lawsuit could dredge up new information which would not point to an intruder but back to a guilty Ramsey. They would be fools to open up that can of worms.

Well, JR wrote a book and made many media appearances to promote it less than 2 years ago, so not sure how true that is for him.

 

[Nom de plume]

Well, JR wrote a book and made many media appearances to promote it less than 2 years ago, so not sure how true that is for him.

That's true, but that was before the GJ indictments became public knowledge. I kind of suspect that might be why he didn't appear on that TV show (forgot which one).

Regarding a lawsuit, mostly I was just asking a rhetorical question. Obviously, if there had been any legal grounds to sue over, namely false information, then he/they would have gone after JK the second the book hit the market. He/they didn't. That speaks volumes.

 

[redheadedgal]

There are preorders.. The number may not be released but it is available and I know at least one person who did preorder it. So that begs to reason there are more.

someone said there were "1000s" of pre-orders... that is what is being questioned... i find it odd that there is no willingness to show proof of the assertion...


fyi, the book, nor the author are listed on the publisher's website as of today... hmmm.

http://www.kensingtonbooks.com/author.aspx/list

 

[Venom]

I find it absolutely hilarious that people will believe info from a book that a reporter wrote, but will not believe info from an actual detective who saw the whole case file.

Since I can't post in the IDI thread, I will ask this question here and maybe(hopefully) get an answer.Another poster wrote in another thread, they couldn't understand why people discount LS, who worked for the DA and "saw it all." Well the same goes for Kolar. He was hired by the DA and "saw it all." Why do people discount his work?? Just asking! TIA

I thought of that too.

 

[bettybaby00]

Well, JR wrote a book and made many media appearances to promote it less than 2 years ago, so not sure how true that is for him.

Yes he wrote a book, but what was it about? It was about "the world according to john Ramsey." He put himself out there via his own narrative. As for the press tour for the book, that was/is another controlled environment. I'm sure--not unlike many others who appear on the talk show circuit--there was a lengthly list of topics which fell under the heading of, "don't even think about going there."

:moo:

 

[bettybaby00]

That's true, but that was before the GJ indictments became public knowledge. I kind of suspect that might be why he didn't appear on that TV show (forgot which one).

Regarding a lawsuit, mostly I was just asking a rhetorical question. Obviously, if there had been any legal grounds to sue over, namely false information, then he/they would have gone after JK the second the book hit the market. He/they didn't. That speaks volumes.

The Rs were more than willing to sue over reports that implied far less than Kolar. Case in point:

In the lawsuit filed Tuesday in Atlanta, John and Patsy Ramsey took issue with a report that aired last year for the six-year anniversary of JonBenet's death. In it, a Denver-based employee stated there has "never been any evidence to link an intruder to her brutal murder."

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2003-12-24-jonbenet-lawsuit_x.htm

The report doesn't even state "the Rs did it," and yet they filed a $12 million lawsuit, which the judge promptly threw out.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

That's true, but that was before the GJ indictments became public knowledge. I kind of suspect that might be why he didn't appear on that TV show (forgot which one).

Regarding a lawsuit, mostly I was just asking a rhetorical question. Obviously, if there had been any legal grounds to sue over, namely false information, then he/they would have gone after JK the second the book hit the market. He/they didn't. That speaks volumes.

I found out the show Katie filmed in October, through an article about a guest on the episode. The article says it was published on Saturday, October 5 and the episode was filmed "that Thursday" so 10/3, which is right when the proceedings about whether to release the GJ indictment were going on. Many of us thought there would be a lot more detailed information released. I would love to know what happened after someone (presuming) brought his name up during the "Possible Guests" discussion.



http://www.championnewspapers.com/articles/2013/10/21/news/doc524f2f82d835b621149081.txt

 

[BBB167893]

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

Yes, I'm quite aware of that. Frankly, it would take too long to express my full feelings on the subject.

 

[BBB167893]

otg,
Thanks. For a moment I thought it was SuperDave.

Not hardly! To be perfectly honest, I've visited DocG's blog many times. He makes some good points. But it's still not enough to convince me.

I wonder if DocG has anything to say about BR's presence during the 911 call and JR's remarks?

Maybe we should ask him.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Well, PW's book has gotten an endorsement from The Globe:

http://www.celebdirtylaundry.com/20...rles-fight-divorce-split-separate-photo-0115/

 

[otg]

Jon Benet Ramsey Book Shelved: Publisher Halts Production Of Explosive Exposé
After Police Chief Slams It As ‘Not Factual’


http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2014/01/jon-benet-ramsey-book-postponed/


From the article:

A highly-anticipated exposé on the infamous JonBenet Ramsey case has been indefinitely pulled from production,RadarOnline.com has learned exclusively. Former Denver Post journalist Paula Woodward’s has been doing promotion for Mr. Ramsey, Listen Carefully! Facts, Fictions, Lies & Legends in the Murder of JonBenet Ramsey, with a projected release date of August 2014, but the publisher tells Radar that it won’t be seeing the light of day any time soon.
​

...and:

One thing is for certain, however: JonBenet’s parents have been fully exonerated after maintaining their innocence for years.
​

...and:

But Boulder City Police Chief Mark Beckner slammed the exposé, saying, “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 with 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.”
​

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

"“The book is on hold right now and we don’t have a publication date,” a rep for Kensington Publishing told Radar exclusively. Asked whether the delay has anything to do with legal concerns over the book’s reportedly explosive content, the rep demurred, “It’s timing."
http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2014/01/jon-benet-ramsey-book-postponed/



The publisher says it is a timing issue. What the chief says does not matter. She is welcome to her opinion and unless it is an expose about him, I don't see as his opinion matters at all.

Seems to me radaronline is just making up that is about beckners comments.

 

[otg]

(bbm)

"“The book is on hold right now and we don’t have a publication date,” a rep for Kensington Publishing told Radar exclusively. Asked whether the delay has anything to do with legal concerns over the book’s reportedly explosive content, the rep demurred, “It’s timing."
http://radaronline.com/exclusives/2014/01/jon-benet-ramsey-book-postponed/



The publisher says it is a timing issue. What the chief says does not matter. She is welcome to her opinion and unless it is an expose about him, I don't see as his opinion matters at all.

Seems to me radaronline is just making up that is about beckners comments.

Somehow, I don't think anyone will be surprised to know you feel that way, SS.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

I am going to wait until a more credible source reports on this. I have no idea why the publisher would talk exclusively to a Hollywood gossip website, instead of say, The Daily Camera.

 

[otg]

Beckner's comment about the book is not new news. It's from a quote in December. It's word-for-word the same in this story from The Daily Camera:

http://www.dailycamera.com/boulder/ci_24791726

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

(bbm)
Somehow, I don't think anyone will be surprised to know you feel that way, SS.

I don't feel anything about it. I am looking at the facts of the article. Beckner is not the reason it was put on hold, Timing is. Maybe another book is coming out at the same time, Maybe they want her to tour and she can not yet?

But just because he has doubts to what is in it, Since he has not READ it yet, is no reason for them to shelve it.

Just sounds like the reported took license and assumed. Trying to sell papers and advertising.

 

[otg]

Is it really that hard to figure out what happened, considering the "timing" with what else happened recently?

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=232652"]Boulder police chief exonerates Fleet and Priscilla White in death of JonBenet Ramsey - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]


Why would Beckner "clear" the Whites a third time now? No one could figure out why he did that recently. Now it should be obvious.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Is it really that hard to figure out what happened, considering the "timing" with what else happened recently?

Boulder police chief exonerates Fleet and Priscilla White in death of JonBenet Ramsey - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community


Why would Beckner "clear" the Whites a third time now? No one could figure out why he did that recently. Now it should be obvious.

I don't think it would. JMO. No one knows what is in the book yet. No one has read it.. So the only think out there is the few quotes from her, yes?

Maybe But I doubt it. I don't see how it matters. It is just another book on the case. Nothing more than another opinion.