| |||||||||
Re: The Coast News: Jury divided in defamation case against
Posted by Sharon on 9/05/08
To set the record straight...my attorney's name is "Lincoln
Bandlow" not "Brandon Landlow". For three years, I
mispronouned Kelman's attorney's name. It is
pronounced "Shoyer the Laywer". Funny, no one could get the
lawyers' name straight throughout this ordeal..of whereby
Kelman sought to silence me for being the first to publicly
out the connection of the defensors of ACOEM with the think
tank of Manhattan Institute/US fnk Chamber of Commerce. The
judge coined that one. "Shoyer the lawyer".
I am going to write a book entitled "So I Had This Leak,
behind in the icemaker line of my frig, and when I looked in
detail, I saw the underbelly of what is wrong with America
today"
Needless to say, I have absolutely no intention of shutting
up about the deceit in science legitmized by ACOEM and
promoted by the US Chamber. I am sorry. But you cannot take
a rat study, add some math and conclude humans are not being
made ill from exposure to sick water damaged indoor
environments. THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT KELMAN DID. Fkn..sue me
again. I am not shutting up. Period. End of story.
On 9/05/08, Myco X wrote:
> http://www.thecoastnews.com/articles/4553/
>
> Jury divided in defamation case against mold activist
> September 05, 2008 By Randy Kalp Reporter The Coast News
>
> VISTA — On Aug. 26, a San Diego Superior Court jury found
> that mold advocate Sharon Kramer defamed VeriTox scientist
> Dr. Bruce Kelman in a 2005 press release, but that VeriTox
> itself wasn’t wronged by her statement.
>
> Kelman and VeriTox, formerly known as a GlobalTox, filed a
> defamation suit against Kramer for comments she made in the
> press release “Jury Finds ‘Toxic Mold’ Harmed Oregon
> Family, Builder’s Arbitration Clause Not Binding.” They
> were seeking a monetary sum of $1 each.
>
> Throughout the trial, attorney Keith Scheuer argued that
> the lawsuit was to “vindicate Kelman’s reputation and to
> get a finding that he didn’t lie under oath.”
>
> At the heart of the weeklong trial was the phrase from
> Kramer’s three-page press release: “ … Dr. Kelman altered
> his under oath statements on the witness stand” while he
> testified as an expert witness in an Oregon mold lawsuit.
>
> Kramer published the press release after speaking to
> several sources, including the victim and his attorney.
>
> “She had four sources, did a considerable amount of
> investigation and believed her story was correct,” Brandon
> Landlow, her attorney, said.
>
> After speaking with jurors following the trial, he said he
> believed the panel had misunderstood the meaning of “actual
> malice” leading them to focus entirely on a belief that
> Kramer supposedly had some sort of animosity for Kelman,
> which was untrue and legally irrelevant.
>
> “It’s not unusual for jurors to have a tough time with the
> concept of actual malice, because they focus on that second
> word malice not realizing that it doesn’t really mean the
> kind of malice people normally think, which is ill will or
> hatred,” Landlow said. “What it means is that you have to
> essentially know what you’re saying is untrue or have
> substantial overwhelming doubts that it’s true.”
>
> Landlow said Kramer would most likely file an appeal.
> Contact Reporter Randy Kalp via e-mail at
> rkalp@coastnewsgroup.com.
| You are on the BLACKMOLD CHATBOARD: LATEST POSTS ALL POSTS SUBMIT POST |
| ||||||||||
|
1996 - 2007. All Rights Reserved. Please review our Terms of Use, Mission Statement, and Privacy Policy.