Re: Show down at the OK Corral starts tomorrow

[Guest guest]

piece of cake, you got it in the bag girl. hers a bit of advice to

remember on the stand, I've been there before. stay calm, smile, and

if a nasty old lawyer tries to confuse you with his questions, tell

him you don't understand the question could he please repeat it

again, and again, and again if needed. make sure he asks in a way

that his question is just as clear as your answer will be. lol's,

dont be supprized if his face turns a bit red and he starts foaming

at the mouth. lawyers hate it when they have to repeat their question

over again and have to eventually drop the added bs that is meant to

confuse you and trick you into answering the question wrong. if

they get aggitated, your doing good. I wont say good luck, cause luck

should have nothing to do with it. justice is what it's all about.

right and wrong and you are in the right. my thoughts well be with

you. you will win!

[Guest guest]

Good luck Sharon!

>

> Dear All,

>

> The trial of Kelman vs. Kramer starts tomorrow.

[Guest guest]

Thanks for all the good advice, you guys. I am just going to do what I swear

I will under oath. I am going to tell the truth, the whole truth and

nothing but the truth.

In a message dated 8/17/2008 5:41:04 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,

brianc8452@... writes:

Jeanine gave you some good advice. Here's my 2 cents...this is meant to

give you a good laugh!!

What NOT to do! Don't act like an insurance company employee when you are

on the witness stand. They are trained (like puppies or robots--depending on

your point of view) for several days prior to the trial. They spend the

whole time looking like a bobble-head doll.. Their heads are bouncing back and

forth---look at their lawyer, look at the jury, look at their lawyer, look at

the jury---and they have a fake grin plastered on their face. They are also

told to wear brown clothes because apparently brown makes them seem more

sincere (or maybe it just makes them look less like liars).

Contrary to popular belief---don'Contrary to popular belief---don'<WBR>t

try to imagine the other side in their birthday suits because yo

I have to repeat one of Jeanine's comments. The other attorneys really hate

it when they have to repeat themselves. Be sure to ask for clarification

when you don't understand the question.

Take your time and breathe. It's easy to want to rush with your answers,

but it's much better to take your time. The other attorneys love to hear

themselves talk, so if you give them a couple seconds, they are likely to keep

going and will ramble on and on. It's really funny to watch!!

Most important---Most important---<WBR>you know you're right so that makes

it easier, and you know you have lots of people Go get 'em!!!

**************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?

Read reviews on AOL Autos.

(http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut000300\

00000007 )

[Guest guest]

Sharon, if you need testimony from me and others, I would be happy to

provide it. I wish someone would do an investigation of the United

HealthCare building here in Kingston NY and subpoena all the records

of their past and present employees. That would be proof enough that

mycotoxins do cause illness and death. The American Cancer Society

local chapter refused to give me local reports and stats back then.

The collaboration between them, the state of NY, city of Kingston, and

UHC would probably be ripe for a RICO investigation as would so many

other locales.

I wish I could help financially. Perhaps you could supply an address

for us to donate. If everyone on this list gave even $5, it would

help.

Barth

www.presenting.net/sbs/sbs.html

SUBMIT YOUR DOCTOR: www.presenting.net/sbs/molddoctors.html

---

sac> Dear All,

sac> The trial of Kelman vs. Kramer starts tomorrow. This is the libel action

sac> where Dr. Kelman and VeriTox, Inc. are claiming that five words I authored

in a

sac> press release in March of 2005, " altered his under oath statements " is a

sac> false accusation of perjury. Dr. Kelman is claiming these 5 words have

harmed

sac> his reputation.

sac> There are no damages being claimed. So, hypothetically speaking, what is

on

sac> the table should he win this suit is $1. The statement they wanted me to

sac> sign, that I have refused to sign, that could have ended this suit is " Dr.

sac> Kelman and other personnel from VeriTox provide testimony and scientific

advice

sac> in a variety of contexts. To my knowledge, their testimony and advice are

sac> based on their expertise and objective understanding of the underlying

scientific

sac> data. " If they had left out the " under " part, I might have signed it.

sac> But they didn't leave the " under " part out. So besides the fact that they

sac> have been trying to force me to commit perjury by signing the above false

sac> statement and have caused me extreme financial hardship from the cost of

defending

sac> myself....I would rather chew off my right arm before I would sign an

sac> endorsement of the VeriTox/ACOEM/US Chamber science. I may end up sleeping

on a

sac> curb from the expense of this lawsuit, but at least I will be able to sleep

with

sac> a clear conscience.

sac> So, its going to be Kelman, Robbins and some guy named Korenman as their

sac> expert - who is about 80 years old, charges $1100 per hour, knows nothing

of

sac> mold from what I can tell, but is an ethics expert from UCLA.

sac> On our side, its going to be me, Mulvey son and Dr. Harriet

Ammann

sac> as my expert witness.

sac> I am hoping we can put it to bed once and for all that:

sac> 1. The garbage ACOEM has legitimized is NOT consistent with the IOM..or

sac> anyone else for that matter.. when it comes to being able to scientifically

sac> determine if inhaled mycotoxins may or may not cause human illness from an

sac> exposure in a WDB, at this point in time.

sac> 2. The ACOEM claim of being able to scientifically establish the

sac> implausibility of illness is not based on a sound scientific premise.

sac> 3. The US Chamber of Commerce marketed a known false scientific concept,

sac> which was first legitimized by ACOEM, and that this entire charade was for

the

sac> purpose of limiting financial liability for stakeholders of moldy

buildings at

sac> the expense of the health and safety of the American public.

sac> (There is a reason Dr. Kelman was " altering " when forced to discuss the

sac> relationship of these papers in front of a jury. Its the same reason I

refused to

sac> sign the above statement.)

sac> We have jury selection in the morning. I have never even sat in a witness

sac> chair in my entire life. All you ole experts, got any advice for me?

sac> Am anticipating that I am going to be portrayed as a kooky housewife who

sac> knows nothing of science but has Svengali capabilities as a cyber pied

piper,

sac> who via the Internet, is able to make small children and infants from

across

sac> the US feign illness so their lying parents can get money from the poor

sac> insurance industry.

sac> If I have time over the next few days, I am intending to let you all know,

sac> blow by blow, as this case progresses.

sac> Sharon K

sac> **************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?

sac> Read reviews on AOL Autos.

sac>

(http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?ncid=aolaut000300\

00000007 )

sac>

[Guest guest]

Jeanine gave you some good advice.  Here's my 2 cents...this is meant to give

you a good laugh!!

What NOT to do!  Don't act like an insurance company employee when you are on

the witness stand.  They are trained (like puppies or robots--depending on your

point of view) for several days prior to the trial.  They spend the whole time

looking like a bobble-head doll..  Their heads are bouncing back and

forth---look at their lawyer, look at the jury, look at their lawyer, look at

the jury---and they have a fake grin plastered on their face.  They are also

told to wear brown clothes because apparently brown makes them seem more sincere

(or maybe it just makes them look less like liars).

Contrary to popular belief---don't try to imagine the other side in their

birthday suits because you don't want to throw up in the courtroom.

I have to repeat one of Jeanine's comments.  The other attorneys really hate it

when they have to repeat themselves.  Be sure to ask for clarification when you

don't understand the question. 

Take your time and breathe.  It's easy to want to rush with your answers, but

it's much better to take your time.  The other attorneys love to hear themselves

talk, so if you give them a couple seconds, they are likely to keep going and

will ramble on and on.  It's really funny to watch!!

Most important---you know you're right so that makes it easier, and you know you

have lots of people rooting for you!!  Go get 'em!!!

[] Show down at the OK Corral starts tomorrow

Dear All,

The trial of Kelman vs. Kramer starts tomorrow. This is the libel action

where Dr. Kelman and VeriTox, Inc. are claiming that five words I authored in a

press release in March of 2005, " altered his under oath statements " is a

false accusation of perjury. Dr. Kelman is claiming these 5 words have harmed

his reputation.

There are no damages being claimed. So, hypothetically speaking, what is on

the table should he win this suit is $1. The statement they wanted me to

sign, that I have refused to sign, that could have ended this suit is " Dr.

Kelman and other personnel from VeriTox provide testimony and scientific advice

in a variety of contexts. To my knowledge, their testimony and advice are

based on their expertise and objective understanding of the underlying

scientific

data. " If they had left out the " under " part, I might have signed it.

But they didn't leave the " under " part out. So besides the fact that they

have been trying to force me to commit perjury by signing the above false

statement and have caused me extreme financial hardship from the cost of

defending

myself....I would rather chew off my right arm before I would sign an

endorsement of the VeriTox/ACOEM/ US Chamber science. I may end up sleeping on a

curb from the expense of this lawsuit, but at least I will be able to sleep with

a clear conscience.

So, its going to be Kelman, Robbins and some guy named Korenman as their

expert - who is about 80 years old, charges $1100 per hour, knows nothing of

mold from what I can tell, but is an ethics expert from UCLA.

On our side, its going to be me, Mulvey son and Dr. Harriet Ammann

as my expert witness.

I am hoping we can put it to bed once and for all that:

1. The garbage ACOEM has legitimized is NOT consistent with the IOM..or

anyone else for that matter.. when it comes to being able to scientifically

determine if inhaled mycotoxins may or may not cause human illness from an

exposure in a WDB, at this point in time.

2. The ACOEM claim of being able to scientifically establish the

implausibility of illness is not based on a sound scientific premise.

3. The US Chamber of Commerce marketed a known false scientific concept,

which was first legitimized by ACOEM, and that this entire charade was for the

purpose of limiting financial liability for stakeholders of moldy buildings at

the expense of the health and safety of the American public.

(There is a reason Dr. Kelman was " altering " when forced to discuss the

relationship of these papers in front of a jury. Its the same reason I refused

to

sign the above statement.)

We have jury selection in the morning. I have never even sat in a witness

chair in my entire life. All you ole experts, got any advice for me?

Am anticipating that I am going to be portrayed as a kooky housewife who

knows nothing of science but has Svengali capabilities as a cyber pied piper,

who via the Internet, is able to make small children and infants from across

the US feign illness so their lying parents can get money from the poor

insurance industry.

If I have time over the next few days, I am intending to let you all know,

blow by blow, as this case progresses.

Sharon K

************ **Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in your budget?

Read reviews on AOL Autos.

(http://autos. aol.com/cars- Volkswagen- Jetta-2009/ expert-review?

ncid=aolaut00030 000000007 )

[Guest guest]

Yes, don't be afraid to take time to think. There are techniques to

slow down questioning so you have that time. One is to repeat question

back to person who asked you. This also accomplishes another thing, to

make clear what the question is exactly and so everyone clearly hears

the question.

--- In , <brianc8452@...>

wrote:

>

> Jeanine gave you some good advice.  Here's my 2 cents...this is meant

to give you a good laugh!!

>

[Guest guest]

Sharon,

Even without saying you know our thoughts and prayers will be with

you today. Many of us know, and are aware that because of your

determination, many cases have been and are being won becaue you

took the teeth and deceit out of the ACOEM report that no one else

has been able to accomplish. You stood your ground and refused to

back down and because of this, many, many people will never know

that YOU were the one who laid the background work for all cases to

come. Walk proud lady. WE are deeply indebted to you for continuing

this fight, even at a great loss to yourself, to make sure that the

truth prevails. WE are very proud of you.

The proof is within our judicial systems that are now beginning to

understand(to some extent) the true results of mold exposure within

our living environment.

Thank you,

KC & Sharon

>

> Dear All,

>

> The trial of Kelman vs. Kramer starts tomorrow. This is the libel

action

> where Dr. Kelman and VeriTox, Inc. are claiming that five words I

authored in a

> press release in March of 2005, " altered his under oath

statements " is a

> false accusation of perjury. Dr. Kelman is claiming these 5

words have harmed

> his reputation.

>

> There are no damages being claimed. So, hypothetically speaking,

what is on

> the table should he win this suit is $1. The statement they

wanted me to

> sign, that I have refused to sign, that could have ended this suit

is " Dr.

> Kelman and other personnel from VeriTox provide testimony and

scientific advice

> in a variety of contexts. To my knowledge, their testimony and

advice are

> based on their expertise and objective understanding of the

underlying scientific

> data. " If they had left out the " under " part, I might have signed

it.

>

> But they didn't leave the " under " part out. So besides the fact

that they

> have been trying to force me to commit perjury by signing the

above false

> statement and have caused me extreme financial hardship from the

cost of defending

> myself....I would rather chew off my right arm before I would sign

an

> endorsement of the VeriTox/ACOEM/US Chamber science. I may end up

sleeping on a

> curb from the expense of this lawsuit, but at least I will be able

to sleep with

> a clear conscience.

>

> So, its going to be Kelman, Robbins and some guy named Korenman as

their

> expert - who is about 80 years old, charges $1100 per hour, knows

nothing of

> mold from what I can tell, but is an ethics expert from UCLA.

>

> On our side, its going to be me, Mulvey son and Dr.

Harriet Ammann

> as my expert witness.

>

> I am hoping we can put it to bed once and for all that:

>

> 1. The garbage ACOEM has legitimized is NOT consistent with the

IOM..or

> anyone else for that matter.. when it comes to being able to

scientifically

> determine if inhaled mycotoxins may or may not cause human illness

from an

> exposure in a WDB, at this point in time.

>

> 2. The ACOEM claim of being able to scientifically establish the

> implausibility of illness is not based on a sound scientific

premise.

>

> 3. The US Chamber of Commerce marketed a known false scientific

concept,

> which was first legitimized by ACOEM, and that this entire charade

was for the

> purpose of limiting financial liability for stakeholders of moldy

buildings at

> the expense of the health and safety of the American public.

>

> (There is a reason Dr. Kelman was " altering " when forced to

discuss the

> relationship of these papers in front of a jury. Its the same

reason I refused to

> sign the above statement.)

>

> We have jury selection in the morning. I have never even sat in

a witness

> chair in my entire life. All you ole experts, got any advice for

me?

>

> Am anticipating that I am going to be portrayed as a kooky

housewife who

> knows nothing of science but has Svengali capabilities as a cyber

pied piper,

> who via the Internet, is able to make small children and infants

from across

> the US feign illness so their lying parents can get money from

the poor

> insurance industry.

>

> If I have time over the next few days, I am intending to let you

all know,

> blow by blow, as this case progresses.

>

> Sharon K

>

>

>

> **************Looking for a car that's sporty, fun and fits in

your budget?

> Read reviews on AOL Autos.

> (http://autos.aol.com/cars-Volkswagen-Jetta-2009/expert-review?

ncid=aolaut00030000000007 )

>

>

>