What is the lawsuit really about?

From the Liarsuit:

Compare and Contrast:

 

Indeed. It's puzzling. Can anyone remember the significance of the "special damages" claim? Isn't it crucial to the lawsuit? I vaguely remember "special damages" being mentioned in the Ramsey v Fox lawsuit.

ETA - I found it. There is Libel per se and libel per quod.

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/libel+per+se

http://www.legalmatch.com/law-library/article/libel-versus-slander.html

 

undrtheradar Biosketch

http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/undertheradar biosketch

 

Lin Wood is going to eat that poor, demented man alive. :yes:

 

Oh my goodness JC what is going to happen now? Thank you for posting this link.

 

I wouldn't know, Elle. But I was thinking the lawsuit was filed on Tricia and topix to find out who he is. And since he posted his identity online, I'm wondering what the point of the lawsuit is now. Seems like it would be dropped or dismissed.

 

Only if undertheradar has any money...otherwise I think Woody will take a taste and spit undetheradar's poor butt right out of his mouth.

 

wow

Holy :cow: that is one weird piece of reading. Where is the evidence and what exactly is his theory? He doesn't mention either one except the note and I didn't see any comparisons from that either.

 

JC, Tricia wasn't sued by Westmoreland/Wood, only subpoenaed or something like that for the IP numbers she had of the poster undrtheradar because he'd posted a few times at WS about his Westmoreland theory. But remember that snotty professor who runs the pbwiki on JB's murder? He also got some hot air blown his way by Wood, about removing the stuff copied on the pbwiki website which undrtheradar wrote about Westmoreland at various forums. To his credit, the snotty professor told Wood to stuff it, more or less, and left it up, last I heard.

I was doing a little googling on this radar guy today, Texan, and found this interesting thread at topix, "Here's my proof of his guilt!" Let me set it up: seems radar's posts were removed from this topix thread, which we know Wood demanded; but you can keep up with the topic by inference, as well as occasional quotes of what he wrote in other posts. You will find on page three what radar thinks is proof positive that Westmoreland wrote the ransom note. Actually, I can follow his thought here, and were it not clear that Patsy wrote the note from handwriting and linguistic analyses, I might consider his point. Well, that and the fact that Westmoreland probably has a solid alibi, being half way cross country that night, as well as during the time JonBenet was being molested PRIOR to the murder. Anyway, here's the thread and I'll quote the "quote" that gives his idea of basic "proof" that has radar about to commit civil law suicide:

http://www.topix.net/forum/news/jonbenet-ramsey/TDAEJE5QLF3U156TH

From a topix post, where the poster "atlantagal" quotes the undrtheradar theory post:

 

thanks KK

Well it isn't really evidence - it does make a certain amount of sense if you happen to believe the ransom note. However: whoever wrote the ransom note probably thought adding that phrase would sort of prove that the "bad guys" were keeping an eye on things.

 

Exactly. Puts a big hole in the theory if you don't believe the writer actually MEANT to monitor the money. Ssshhhh. Don't tell radar. He's quite content under his tinfoil hat....

 

THIS MAY END UP BEING WOODS BIGGEST MISTAKE YET.

Wow, from that snippet of radars thoery, I hope this DOES go to court in front of a Judge. It will be ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY to actually put the RANSOM NOTE on trial, and maybe, IF and WHEN this happens, we can make massive email floods to all the media, so more people will wake up and realize who the REAL author of the ransom note is.

I mean, radars defense is going to be, Yeah, Rod? Prove you DID NOT write that note. Which means he will bring in the note, and his own handwriting experts, who will say he is NOT the author. And I dont know how it could be done, but it may lead to more of the public trying to solve the 'mystery' of who the author actually is. I bet there is spiked interest in that zodiac case and its crypic notes.

I hope this post makes some sense!!

Forgot to add: This is not criminal court either, so more relaxed evidenciary(spelling) rules? I am just saying, Wood has such a wood for suing people, that in his zeal, he may just forget to think of future repercussions of his foolishness. The more evidence, whatever it is, that gets into a legal document and court, can be used later, and leads to more clues I believe.

I would love to see a cold case team get this case and legitimately give it a new good hard look.

 

Is the burden of proof different in a civil case? I mean - wouldn't it be up to Radar to prove someone DID write the note, rather than have that person prove he did not?

 

The burden of proof is less in a civil case than a criminal case, and the burden of the proof is on Wood and Westmoreland, since they are the ones who are suing. I think since Westmoreland is the one suing, he would have to prove he did not write the note????

 

I think that Rod would have a harder time explaining his unemployable status!

 

I just snorted PowerAde out of my nose thanks to you RR! I needed a laugh today and you provided it, thank you.

 

OMG - I didn't realize that people still read my BS! Sorry about that nose blast, Tezzie - but whatever makes you feel better....as always - you hang in there.

 

Thanks RR, I'm hanging in there. I always read what you post and it isn't BS! I agree with you Westmoreland is going to have a really hard time proving he is "unemployable" isn't he?

I do hope the ransom note has to be reanalyzed again, it will just show who wrote the note, and gee maybe Hair Curtains may get a clue. Well, she probably won't, but I can hope, right?

 

As mad as his theory sounds it does raise the question of why the 'note writer' didn't specify a particular bank...'she' was very specific about the attache case, exhaustion, and bank notes...why not mention which bank?

Is there more than one bank in Boulder? And if the 'kidnappers' are monitoring JR..why on earth send JF to get the money? This would totally and AGAIN disregard the ' speak to a dog and she dies' warning.

So not only does he AVOID any possible 'early delivery' of his daughter by getting the money himself, he also ENSURES her death by sending someone else inspite of being MONITORED. :bigstick: