CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 03-CV-3976

Ramsey, et al v. Fox News Network

Filed: 12/23/03
Assigned to: Judge Thomas W. Thrash
Jury demand: Plaintiff
Demand: $2,000,000
Nature of Suit: 320
Lead Docket: None
Jurisdiction: Diversity
Dkt# in other court: None
Cause: 28:1332 Diversity-Libel, Assault, Slander

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JOHN RAMSEY L. Lin Wood, Jr.
plaintiff
Katherine M. Ventulett

Office of L. Lin Wood
100 Peachtree Street
2140 The Equitable Building
Atlanta, GA 30303
404-522-1713

PATSY RAMSEY L. Lin Wood, Jr.
plaintiff (See above)

Katherine M. Ventulett
(See above)

BURKE RAMSEY, a minor, by his L. Lin Wood, Jr.
next friends and natural (See above)
parents, JOHN RAMSEY and PATSY
RAMSEY Katherine M. Ventulett
plaintiff (See above)

v.

FOX NEWS NETWORK, LLC
dba
Fox News Channel
defendant

DATE # IMG DOCKET ENTRY

12/23/03 1 COMPLAINT filed. Consent form to proceed before U.S.
magistrate and pretrial instructions given to attorney;
jury demand FILING FEE $150.00 #515617 (er)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is good news. Judge Thrash has already dealt with the Ramsey case, knows quite a bit about what has happened there. (He dismissed the case LHP brought against the Ramseys.)

He knows a bit about what was public in this case - and when. That can only help here - get this dealt with properly and quickly.

Their names are Jason Conti, Dori Ann Hainswirth and Trina Hunn.

~~~~~~~~~~~

I think Lin's suit was pretty cut and dry - I don't see how they can defend Carol's statements when we have all seen the TV programs outlining Lou Smit's Powerpoint demonstration.

I think we will see a settlement initiated by FOX.

THE FALSE AND DEFAMATORY FOX NEWS BROADCAST
27.
On December 27, 2002, in connection with the sixth (6th)
anniversary of the murder of JonBenét Ramsey, Fox News televised
a news segment about the JonBenét Ramsey murder investigation on
the Fox News Channel ("the Ramsey segment").

28.
In the Ramsey segment, Ms. McKinley uttered the following
false and defamatory statements of and concerning John, Patsy
and Burke Ramsey:

"Detectives say they had good reason to suspect
the Ramseys. The couple and JonBenét's nine-year-old
brother, Burke, were the only known people in
the house the night she was killed. JonBenét had
been strangled, bludgeoned and sexually
assaulted, most likely from one of her mother's
paintbrushes. The longest ransom note most
experts have ever seen - three pages - was left
behind. Whomever killed her spent a long time in
the family home. Yet, there has never been any
evidence to link an intruder to her brutal
murder."
29.
The gist of the statements uttered by Ms. McKinley in the
Ramsey segment is that in all probability, one or more of the
Ramseys murdered JonBenét.
30.
The gist of the statements uttered by Ms. McKinley in the
Ramsey segment is false and defamatory.

"Yet, there has never been any evidence to link an intruder to her brutal murder."

She starts out saying "detectives" as a vague general term, when she should have said Steve Thomas, because based on his book, that's what he thinks. Lou Smit is a retired detective, hired by the DA's office under contract---who said there is intruder evidence. That makes the statement libeous, IMO.

Carol is not some newscaster that has never been to Boulder...or someone that never talked to everyone she could about the crime (on both sides). She was even allowed to sit and interview the Ramseys. She had knowledge that there was intruder evidence---she should have said some on the BPD couldn't or wouldn't link it to an intruder....maybe then she would have gotten away with it. If it does go to trial, Fox News will probably hide behind the statements of the BPD--more specifically Steve Thomas, as a defense. We know the damage was done when the purposely placed leaks were put out there that weren't bothered to be corrected---it wouldn't surprise me if they (Fox) hauls the BPD in before it's all over.

And the statements following that are continuations of the material from the "detectives".

A more precisely worded equivalent would be: 'detectives' are of the opinion that there is no evidence of an intruder'.

Rose asked, "Could it be that Carol's argument will be that there is no "conclusive physical evidence" that does link an intruder?"

Intruder evidence includes:

use of a stun gun when LE can't find any evidence that the family had access to one.

the cord found on the body doesn't match anything in the house and the BPD could never link the parents to such a cord.

ditto on the duct tape

The handwriting on the ransom note doesn't match any of the Ramseys.

The fresh boot print found near the body remains unsourced.

There is DNA under JonBenét's nails and mixed with the blood in her panties that doesn't come from any family member.

It seems to me that all of that is conclusive physical evidence that points to an intruder.

And that is not all of it.

Carol saw Lou Smit's presentation, she can't say she was in the dark about that evidence. She knew about it and chose to mislead the public. To me that is defamatory reporting.

FOX will try to get the case dismissed to start - every time there has been a lawsuit the first thing is the defendants ask for the suit to be dismissed.... but I think the judge will see the merits of the lawsuit and after that I think FOX will ask for a chance to settle and save the cost of lawyers and more court costs.

JMO

But that isn't what she did - she said, as a fact, that "... there has never been any evidence to link an intruder to her brutal murder."

"Detectives say they had good reason to suspect
the Ramseys. The couple and JonBenét's nine-year-old
brother, Burke, were the only known people in
the house the night she was killed. JonBenét had
been strangled, bludgeoned and sexually
assaulted, most likely from one of her mother's
paintbrushes. The longest ransom note most
experts have ever seen - three pages - was left
behind. Whomever killed her spent a long time in
the family home. Yet, there has never been any
evidence to link an intruder to her brutal
murder."

I think the Ramseys' successful suits against news agencies has motivated people like Carol to continue to stand at the pulpit and say "no way". I suspect her reasons for excluding that part of her "news" story was to continue to inflame the public with defamatory lop-sided "reporting" in order to support her disagreement with the Ramseys' success in the courts.

Her media peers hated it.

She returned to the BORG fold and mended her ways.

She may have tried to walk the fence from time to time, (to put on a show, I think) but in the end, Carol was BORG to the bone in all her projects.

That's how I see it.

Look at what posters she chose as friends.... her bias certainly did show there.