Re: Verdict Kelman & VeriTox vs. Kramer

[Guest guest]

Thank you for your kind words. On a little different note, but not really:

Dr. Eckardt Johanning and Ms. Monona Rossol will be guests on the WNYC Leonard Lopate Show on Monday, September 1st. The segment airs from 1:20 to 2:00 PM, EST. They will be discussing the current state of scientific understanding of illnesses caused by mold in the indoor environment along with how public policy and medical protocol has been established over the issue. Mr. Lopate's show streams live on www.wnyc.org.

Host Leonard Lopate lets you in on the best conversations with writers, actors, ex-presidents, dancers, scientists, comedians, historians, grammarians, curators, filmmakers, and do-it-yourself experts. Live interaction is critical to Lopate's conversational and personal style. "I think it's crucial to maintain eye contact when you're discussing complex matters with the likes of Updike, Doris Lessing, Bill Bradley, Mark , and Francis Ford Coppola, all of whom are return guests to Leonard Lopate on WNYC, " says Lopate. The interview with Dr. Johanning should be very informative regarding areas of needed change in policy over the mold issue and public health.Sharon Kramer

It is sad that the system so often doesn't address the truth or the listen to individuals as opposed to corperate interests. Bless you Sharon for the work you have done and for all that you have been through. I hope this at least leads to a new chapter in your life that brings you health, well-being and peace of miind.

From: EnviroBob <BobEnvironmentalAirTechs>Subject: RE: Verdict Kelman & VeriTox vs. KramerTo: iequality Date: Wednesday, August 27, 2008, 11:58 PM

Sharon,

Welcome to the justice system in the USA . What the attorneys say is it¢s no longer about truth!!! Than why go through the system?

From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of snk1955aolSent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 2:54 PMTo: iequality ; sickbuildings Subject: Verdict Kelman & VeriTox vs. Kramer

Dear All,

We got our verdict yesterday. I lost on Kelman, won on VeriTox. I can't believe it. I was not allowed to discuss the science, conflicts of interest of ACOEM, nor was I allowed to describe who the Manhattan Institute is for the jury. So it is $1.

There is much I would like to share with you all, but my attorney does not want me to discuss it in detail today. This whole tale is so bizarre and amazing.

We will be fine. The science and exposure of the deceit of the ACOEM mold statement will continue to march forward.

Sharon

It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here.

[Guest guest]

It is sad that the system so often doesn't address the truth or the listen to individuals as opposed to corperate interests. Bless you Sharon for the work you have done and for all that you have been through. I hope this at least leads to a new chapter in your life that brings you health, well-being and peace of miind.

Subject: RE: Verdict Kelman & VeriTox vs. KramerTo: iequality Date: Wednesday, August 27, 2008, 11:58 PM

Sharon,

Welcome to the justice system in the USA . What the attorneys say is it¢s no longer about truth!!! Than why go through the system?

From: iequality [mailto:iequality ] On Behalf Of snk1955@...Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 2:54 PMTo: iequality ; sickbuildings Subject: Verdict Kelman & VeriTox vs. Kramer

Dear All,

We got our verdict yesterday. I lost on Kelman, won on VeriTox. I can't believe it. I was not allowed to discuss the science, conflicts of interest of ACOEM, nor was I allowed to describe who the Manhattan Institute is for the jury. So it is $1.

There is much I would like to share with you all, but my attorney does not want me to discuss it in detail today. This whole tale is so bizarre and amazing.

We will be fine. The science and exposure of the deceit of the ACOEM mold statement will continue to march forward.

Sharon

It's only a deal if it's where you want to go. Find your travel deal here.

[Guest guest]

Thanks so much Sharon,

Any other info like that would always be most appreciated. My family and I are trying to understand this as much as possible.

Always - best wishes,

Sam

Dr. Eckardt Johanning and Ms. Monona Rossol will be guests on the WNYC Leonard Lopate Show on Monday, September 1st. The segment airs from 1:20 to 2:00 PM, EST. They will be discussing the current state of scientific understanding of illnesses caused by mold in the indoor environment along with how public policy and medical protocol has been established over the issue. Mr. Lopate's show streams live on www.wnyc.org.

[Guest guest]

Sharon:

I finally acquired a copy of the judgment in the case [bruce J Kelman,

GlobalTox, Inc. v. Sharon Kramer, and Does 1 through 20, inclusive].

In two messages by you on this listserve, you stated:

1) Message 17296:

" We got our verdict yesterday. I lost on Kelman, won on VeriTox. "

2) Message 17302:

" They forgot to mention that they lost on VeriTox. "

I reviewed both aspects, Kelman and " VeriTox " , and note that based on the

way I read it:

a) On the case of Kelman it was very decisive in his favor.

In the other, the text reads,

" That Kramer made the statement to persons other than GlobalTox, Inc., and

that the persons to whom the statement was made did not reasonably

understand that the statement was about GlobalTox. "

I read that as the jury didn't associate the claim of " Dr. Kelman altered

his under oath statements on the witness stand, " with GlobalTox (aka

VeriTox) but only associated it with Kelman himself, and furthermore that

the merits of the claim against GlobalTox were not even at issue as a

result. Given the merits decided with regard to Kelman (in his favor), I

suspect that in this case (with the evidence as presented) that if the claim

were to have been found associated with GlobalTox, they too would have been

found without merit (in favor of GlobaTox) based on the finding on behalf of

Kelman.

I do not see that as a " win " by Kramer against GlobalTox or a " loss " by

GlobalTox. I see it as a reprieve from a second loss by Kramer. Granted

you said that evidence was supposedly excluded. But that aside, the

won-lost thing you stated does not seem to be an accurate portrayal of the

judgment as written.

Tony

.......................................................................

" Tony " Havics, CHMM, CIH, PE

pH2, LLC

5250 E US 36, Suite 830

Avon, IN 46123

www.ph2llc.com

off

fax

cell

90% of Risk Management is knowing where to place the decimal point...any

consultant can give you the other 10%(SM)

This message is from pH2. This message and any attachments may contain

legally privileged or confidential information, and are intended only for

the individual or entity identified above as the addressee. If you are not

the addressee, or if this message has been addressed to you in error, you

are not authorized to read, copy, or distribute this message and any

attachments, and we ask that you please delete this message and attachments

(including all copies) and notify the sender by return e-mail or by phone at

. Delivery of this message and any attachments to any person

other than the intended recipient(s) is not intended in any way to waive

confidentiality or a privilege. All personal messages express views only of

the sender, which are not to be attributed to pH2 and may not be copied or

distributed without this statement.

[Guest guest]

Tony,

So glad to hear you have a copy of the judgment. Because I have not received one yet. Can you please share how you happened to acquire this?

And..as far as it being decisive, it was a hung jury until they reviewed erroneous documentation that was false, hearsay information, that they should not have been permitted to see. In other words, besides the science being excluded from the reasoning for Kelman "altering his under oath statements", an exhibit was shown to the jury that should not have been. That is a real no no.

Please share, how did you happen to come upon this judgment documentation? May I have a copy?

Why no words from you regarding the findings of the GAO Report? Don't like what you see?

Sharon

Sharon:I finally acquired a copy of the judgment in the case [bruce J Kelman,GlobalTox, Inc. v. Sharon Kramer, and Does 1 through 20, inclusive].In two messages by you on this listserve, you stated:1) Message 17296:"We got our verdict yesterday. I lost on Kelman, won on VeriTox."2) Message 17302:"They forgot to mention that they lost on VeriTox."I reviewed both aspects, Kelman and "VeriTox", and note that based on theway I read it: a) On the case of Kelman it was very decisive in his favor. In the other, the text reads,"That Kramer made the statement to persons other than GlobalTox, Inc., andthat the persons to whom the statement was made did not reasonablyunderstand that the statement was about GlobalTox."I read that as the jury didn't associate the claim of "Dr. Kelman alteredhis under oath statements on the witness stand," with GlobalTox (akaVeriTox) but only associated it with Kelman himself, and furthermore thatthe merits of the claim against GlobalTox were not even at issue as aresult. Given the merits decided with regard to Kelman (in his favor), Isuspect that in this case (with the evidence as presented) that if the claimwere to have been found associated with GlobalTox, they too would have beenfound without merit (in favor of GlobaTox) based on the finding on behalf ofKelman.I do not see that as a "win" by Kramer against GlobalTox or a "loss" byGlobalTox. I see it as a reprieve from a second loss by Kramer. Grantedyou said that evidence was supposedly excluded. But that aside, thewon-lost thing you stated does not seem to be an accurate portrayal of thejudgment as written.Tony

Sharon Noonan KramerBUY Indiana and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull on DVD today!