Yuk Yuk, Court TV's settlement agreement?

<b>On the heels of the announcement that Court TV and the Ramseys reached a settlement on the Ramseys' lawsuit, this appears mighty suspicious to me. Was the airing of the second crockumentary part and parcel of the settlement agreement? And, (GAG) "one of the world's great homicide investigators, Lou Smit" (?) Give me a freaking break - ole Lou is a Ramsey groupie. Yep - I'd say Court TV got bamboozled into this, all right. </b>


COURT TV'S THE ELITE EXAMINES STUNNING CONCLUSIONS OF AN
INDEPENDENT INVESTIGATION INTO THE JON BENET RAMSEY CASE
Riveting One-Hour Documentary, Jon Benet: A Second Look Premieres on Friday, November 8th at 8 PM ET/PT

New York, NY - October 28, 2002 - Court TV's dynamic series The Elite looks at the intriguing case of Jon Benet Ramsey through the eyes of one of the world's great homicide investigators, Lou Smit, revealing his surprising conclusions about the case. The one-hour documentary, The Elite -- Jon Benet - A Second Look, premieres on November 8th at 8 PM ET/PT and features newly released footage of the interrogation of Jon Benet's parents, John and Patsy Ramsey. When the lead investigators are unable to make headway on the Jon Benet case, the District Attorney calls in the investigator many think is second-to-none: the legendary Lou Smit.

In Jon Benet: A Second Look, Court TV profiles Smit and his independent investigation to determine John and Patsy Ramsey's involvement in Jon Benet's death. The compelling one-hour documentary reveals troubling new evidence collected by Smit that strongly suggests the Ramsey's were not involved and
that an intruder was in the house the night of the murder. Using forensic vidence, Smit paints a vivid and compelling picture of how he believes events unfolded the night of Jon Benet's death, which is quite different from the theories developed by police and the media.

Court TV follows Smit as he returns to the Ramsey house day after day, and reveals his tireless efforts to find clues a killer may have left behind. By the time Lou Smit arrived in Boulder, Colorado at the district attorney's request, the Ramsey's were being hounded everywhere they went. Despite the Ramseys' continued denials, many still suspect that they were involved, but
Detective Smit, who interrogated John Ramsey for hours, believes the parents are not involved.

The Elite is a continuing weekly series on Court TV that explores the stories and methods behind the world's foremost experts in criminal investigations, including detectives, profilers, negotiators and forensic scientists.

Jon Benet: A Second Look was produced by David Mills and Michael Tracey of Mills Productions Ltd. for Court TV. The Executive Producer for Court TV is Anthony Horn. Ed Hersh is Senior Vice President, Documentaries and Specials, for Court TV.

http://www.courttv.com/press/elite_benet.html

 

Anyone with half a brain can wade through these crocks and see that it's 98% spin. For the few who can't, if their IQ was any higher they would need watering.

 

Reasoning, not, from the bog

The program that Court TV is going to air first aired in the UK 15 months ago. The additional footage being added for the US audience was released to Mills and Tracey at the same time it was released to CBS. Ergo, the program was NOT produced as part of the settlement....

Yep. That splains everything.

Yeepers.

 

So, you see

said the blind man, John and Pasty said to their front man, Woody, they said, Woody, you tell Court TV we will settle with them if they agree to air the crockumentary that was done over a year and a half ago and that no one in the U.S. will touch with a 20-foot pole. And, Woody said, that'll teach them to mess with me.

Duh.

 

Here you go WY

Pretend it's Spring.

 

Aw Christ. That's all I have to say.

 

I wonder if they will continue to spin so feverishly after Patsy dies.

 

Just a guess, of course...

But see it from this perspective...

Tracey and Mills must be embarassed to no end that they couldn't procure a U.S. sale for their footage. No matter what, it's Ramsey content, and that brings public interest. So it says a great deal that they have not been able to place it anywhere until now.

I think they should tell us what their licensing fee was, haha! Court TV is not in a position to pay very much. It's possible Tracey and Mills simply gave it to Court TV for the purpose of reclaiming their reputations as producers. Their peers certainly know the travails of how long it took to get a U.S. deal. That could very easily affect their ability to get future jobs.

And remember, these two aren't JOURNALISTS, no matter what they say. They are in the advertising business. Any discerning critic knows that. We've discussed it plenty here.

 

Court TV

should've aired "The Return of Crock" tonight, on Halloween, when all the other silly, hokey, ridiculous horror tales are featured.

It would be even more appropriate to air it on April Fool's Day.

 

"The one-hour documentary, The Elite -- Jon Benet - A Second Look, premieres on November 8th at 8 PM ET/PT and features newly released footage of the interrogation of Jon Benet's parents, John and Patsy Ramsey. When the lead investigators are unable to make headway on the Jon Benet case, the District Attorney calls in the investigator many think is second-to-none: the legendary Lou Smit."

This is April Fool stuff, right? When did Lou Smit become a "legend?" I guess the media is going to make it happen right before our eyes!

I'm just kidding folks... the rumor floating around is that this "one-hour documentary" is the direct result of that legendary defective, ah, detective, Lou Smit getting pictures of CourtTV executives taking big breasted Tyson chickens into a motel room to do things that normal people can only guess at.

 

LMAO Shadow! Too funny!

Hir is saying part of this new crapola is the crock that Tracey had shown in the UK that was not shown here. You know, the one showing Loose in his Delorean?

 

Settlement Agreement???

Watching You, "Was the airing of the second crockumentary part and parcel of the settlement agreement?"

Hmmm, well if you review Patsy's deposition there is a section whereas Darnay asks Patsy about the interview with the Enquirer. I like this part where Wood says, "I don't think you understand courtesy. Down here in the south, we don't interrupt people. You have interrupted me repeatedly." It only takes 8 pages later for Wood to allow Patsy to answer the question with all his "interruptions!"

Patsy Ramsey Deposition - December 11, 2001
http://www.acandyrose.com/12112001pr-depo.htm

Page 105
24 Q. I am going to ask you if at any time
25 you ever gave an interview with The National
Page 106
1 Enquirer.
2 A. We spoke with a representative from
3 The National Enquirer as part of some litigation
4 we were involved with for Burke.
5 Q. Did you ever agree to be interviewed
6 by The National Enquirer for publication?
7 MR. WOOD: Hold on. Tell me how
8 this is relevant to the libel claims of Chris
9 Wolf, whether John and Patsy Ramsey were
10 interviewed by The National Enquirer.
11 MR. HOFFMAN: Because I am going to
12 ask her about statements that were made in The
13 National Enquirer which relate to the murder and
14 the case. That is why I am asking her.
15 MR. WOOD: Ask her about the
16 statements.
17 MR. HOFFMAN: I am going to first
18 lay the foundation that, in fact, she --
19 MR. WOOD: I let you say she gave
20 the interview. Why she gave the interview is not
21 relevant.
22 MR. HOFFMAN: I want to ask her why.
23 MR. WOOD: I told you that is not
24 relevant to any claim.
25 MR. HOFFMAN: You can't make that

Page 107
1 objection.
2 MR. WOOD: In the stipulation --
3 MR. HOFFMAN: You can direct her not
4 to answer. I want you to direct her not to
5 answer.
6 MR. WOOD: If you let me finish.
7 Why do you want me to do that? You mean you
8 came here with a plan to ask irrelevant
9 questions?
10 MR. HOFFMAN: No, not at all. Quite
11 simply because it is the proper form. I am
12 going to ask the question to Mrs. Ramsey and ask
13 her if she will answer it despite counsel's
14 objection.
15 MR. WOOD: Let's set the ground rules
16 right now. Mrs. Ramsey is going to follow the
17 instructions of her counsel, and you are not
18 going to ask her whether she will or will not.
19 MR. HOFFMAN: Oh, no, I will, and I
20 will tell you why, Mr. Wood.
21 MR. WOOD: You may --
22 MR. HOFFMAN: I will tell you why,
23 Mr. Wood.
24 MR. WOOD: You know, Darnay, you --
25 MR. HOFFMAN: I don't think you

Page 108
1 understand procedure.
2 MR. WOOD: I don't think you
3 understand courtesy. Down here in the south, we
4 don't interrupt people. You have interrupted me
5 repeatedly.
6 MR. HOFFMAN: You are using manners
7 as a ploy to avoid things.
8 MR. WOOD: Interruptions are
9 interruptions.
10 MR. HOFFMAN: You have interrupted me
11 many times.
12 MR. WOOD: Not repeatedly or
13 intentionally.
14 MR. HOFFMAN: If you want to go back
15 and count my interruptions of you, or Mr. Rawls
16 in Mr. Wolf's deposition --
17 MR. WOOD: You weren't even there
18 except by telephone.
19 MR. HOFFMAN: Yes. But the fact is
20 that no counsel interrupted you --
21 MR. WOOD: This man asked proper
22 questions. There was no need to have to go
23 through all this kind of back-and-forth.
24 MR. HOFFMAN: You are wrong. You
25 are out of order here, sir. You are out

Page 109
1 of order.
2 MR. WOOD: Darnay, Darnay, I am being
3 patient with you.
4 MR. HOFFMAN: No, no, no. I am
5 being patient with you.
6 This is my deposition. This is not
7 a forum for you to grandstand to look like a big
8 shot in front of your clients. That is not what
9 this is.
10 MR. WOOD: Darnay, Darnay, Darnay, I
11 am not going to sit here and listen to that.
12 You are not going to characterize what my efforts
13 are for my clients in a deposition as
14 grandstanding or otherwise. That is totally
15 inappropriate.
16 Look, I am trying to make an
17 objection, and, if necessary, an instruction which
18 at the beginning of this deposition we all agreed
19 was appropriate if you went outside of areas
20 relevant to the claims and defenses in the
21 lawsuit.
22 I happen to believe that, if the
23 question you are trying to get to is why did
24 John and Patsy Ramsey agree in the year 2000 or
25 2001 to an interview with The National Enquirer,

Page 110
1 that that is not relevant to the claims or
2 defenses in this libel lawsuit. That was the
3 question. I am going to instruct them not to
4 answer.
5 So why don't you just ask the
6 question and leave off all this back-and-forth,
7 and what I do think might be better to describe
8 now as somewhat of an ad hominem attack, which is
9 okay if you want to do it, but it is just a
10 waste of all of our time.
11 MR. HOFFMAN: Mr. Wood, just to
12 clarify one thing. I believe that, in the event
13 that the judge were to issue an order for Mrs.
14 Ramsey to compel her to answer certain questions,
15 that the record must reflect the fact that she
16 has refused to answer it, not that her counsel,
17 because the judge will not be ordering you to
18 answer it. They will be ordering Mrs. Ramsey.
19 And unless the court is clear that it is Mrs.
20 Ramsey who is refusing to answer the question and
21 not yourself, I have to make that as a record.
22 And that is the law, sir.
23 MR. WOOD: Darnay, please ask your
24 question, and then I am going to instruct my
25 client appropriately; and, if necessary, Judge

Page 111
1 Carnes will determine the law. Just ask the
2 question, for gosh sakes. Let's get going.
3 Q. (By Mr. Hoffman) Mrs. Ramsey, do you
4 know why you agreed to a National Enquirer
5 interview?
6 MR. WOOD: I instruct you not to
7 answer on the grounds that that issue is not
8 relevant to any claim or defense in this lawsuit.
9 Q. (By Mr. Hoffman) Mrs. Ramsey, will
10 you still answer the question?
11 MR. WOOD: I instruct you not to
12 respond to that question.
13 She will, in fact, follow her lawyer's
14 instructions just as any client should
15 appropriately follow her lawyer's instruction so
16 that she does not waive any right she has to
17 have Judge Carnes review this issue and rule
18 appropriately.
19 MR. HOFFMAN: Can I take that as a
20 no from your witness, that she will not --
21 MR. WOOD: You can take that exactly
22 for what it is, my statement on this record.
23 Next question, please.
24 Q. (By Mr. Hoffman) All right. Mrs.
25 Ramsey, I am looking at this interview; and,

Page 112
1 actually, since we have two interviews, what I
2 would like to do is give you an opportunity to
3 review this interview because I am going to ask
4 you questions about statements that you allegedly
5 made in the interview. And since we have only a
6 minute to go before we change, I think this would
7 be an appropriate time to break and give you an
8 opportunity to read the interview.
9 MR. WOOD: Whatever you would like to
10 do.
11 MR. HOFFMAN: Okay.
12 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are off the
13 video record at 11:35.
14 (A recess was taken.)
15 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are on the
16 video record at 11:43.
17 Q. (By Mr. Hoffman) Mrs. Ramsey, I have
18 shown you what has been marked Plaintiff's
19 Exhibit, I believe, No. 13. Has it been marked?
20 Yes. Plaintiff's Exhibit 13 for identification.
21 Have you had an opportunity to review the
22 document that I have handed you?
23 A. Yes, I have.
24 Q. I am now going to ask you again, do
25 you remember giving an interview for The National

Page 113

1 Enquirer?
2 A. I remember talking with them as part
3 of litigation we had with them concerning Burke.

(snip)

Page 156
24 Q. Would you characterize the statements
25 that you made in this article as being statements
Page 157
1 that were made in the course of an interview,
2 formal interview with The National Enquirer?
3 A. It was an interview in conjunction
4 with some litigation for Burke that we were
5 involved with.
6 Q. If it was --
7 MR. HOFFMAN: See, this is why it is
8 a tricky area because for litigation, I don't
9 want to go into what the litigation was about,
10 and, naturally, if she gave it for the purposes
11 of the litigation, then she is required to by
12 law.
13 MR. WOOD: No, it was not given as a
14 requirement of the litigation as a matter of law.
15 MR. HOFFMAN: Oh, okay.
16 MR. WOOD: But I think what she is
17 saying is that the issue about the interview came
18 up in connection with actually the resolution of
19 some of Burke's claims.

So Wood is saying it wasn't a "requirement" but it was part of the "resolution" on settlement. Either way, the Ramseys gave the interview as part of the settlement. Why would we be surprise if they did the same thing with Court TV?

 

Great catch ACR!

But giving the Rams that one moment in time to speak their piece has not stopped the National Enquirer from running Patsy's name on the front page leading to stories on the inside.

So, here's to the hopes of seeing Patsy back on CourtTV a little farther down the line!!!

 

"one of the World's Great Homicide investigators?" according to whom?

 

World's greatest....

fraud of a detective, if you ask me. He really is a delusional old man, as the BPD cops called him. He thinks he's the James Bond of Colorado Springs. Maybe Patsy is his Pu$$y Galore!