Show down at the OK Corral starts tomorrow

[Guest guest]

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=aolaut000300\

00000007 )