Mold Queen Loses in Court: July 24, 2008

[Guest guest]

Mold Queen Loses in Court: July 24, 2008

Published on December 30, 2008 at 8:20pm

By Heimpel

http://www.laweekly.com/2009-01-01/news/mold-queen-loses-in-court-

july-24-2008/

When does a health concern become an obsession? L.A. Weekly's cover

story, " Toxic Mold Rush: California Mom Helps Fuel an Obsession "

delved into raging courtroom wars over whether mold — that black and

blue stuff that can grow in wet places in homes and offices — can

make healthy people sick. The battle lines had been drawn between a

hungry plaintiff's bar representing thousands of allegedly sick

people, and the dubious scientists and critics who have suggested

the claims were driven by good old American hypochondria.

Our story, published in July, focused on a subculture of bloggers,

activists and others who believe toxic mold is extremely dangerous,

even though many top scientists say there is not enough chemical

material in mold to do the damage to health that's cited — or to

create the huge range of alleged serious maladies.

Sharon Kramer, a former real estate agent in Escondido, alleges that

her daughter's chronic lung problems were worsened by household

mold; Kramer was convinced that scientists and business execs were

bent on making mold sound innocuous in order to reduce the growing

litigation and jury awards against insurance giants, construction

companies and public institutions.

The mold warriors went after a paper co-authored by Washington state–

based scientist Bruce Kelman, which spelled out the lack of evidence

or scientific basis for claims that mold causes the severe symptoms

some people report. But Kramer, in her zeal, crossed the line: She

wrote a press release that falsely suggested Kelman had lied under

oath. Kelman sued her for libel.

Kelman won his libel case against Kramer by jury decision on August

28, after which Kramer discontinued the counsel of her attorney,

Lincoln Bandlow, and filed papers to request a new trial, to strike

costs (the $7,250 in nonattorney fees Kelman had paid in his suit)

and to have the jury decision thrown out.

On December 12, San Diego Superior Court Judge Schall struck

down both Kramer's motion for a new trial and her motion to have the

jury judgment dismissed. Schall will review Kramer's request that

fees be waived. Kramer says she will appeal the decision.

Not that this really settles anything between scientists and alleged

sufferers. After the Weekly story ran, an army of self-styled mold

warriors nationwide came to Kramer's defense, posting more remarks

on the Weekly's online comments board than any other story had

garnered in 2008.

" Jersey Girl " warned: " Shame on you [ Heimpel] and may you get

back what you have put out there. Beware, your home could be next,

and then you will know the nightmare others have lived. "

" Dana Toliver " wrote: " Sharon Kramer has a lot of support and you

have messed with the wrong group of people. This only fuels the fire

to keep fighting for all those around the world who are

suffering. ... Someday the world will wake up to the truth that we

[`Mold Warriors'] already know. "

Kramer added a final comment this month, which cites a September 30

General Accounting Office report that calls for more interagency

cooperation on mold, suggesting that in some cases toxic mold might

be dangerous.

From " Toxic Mold Rush: California Mom Helps Fuel an Obsession " by

Heimpel

Like those who would later join the cause, including ny Carson

sidekick Ed McMahon, she saw a conspiracy funded by businesses out

to end mold claims while risking the public's health. She believed

that the well-being of thousands depended on her exposing that

deceit. Like the fight waged by McMahon over the death of his dog

purportedly from mold, Kramer's belief has consumed her. It has

wiped out her comfortable suburban life and financial security and

caused her to lose touch with many friends.

But the great mold scare never rose to the level of accepted

epidemic among serious researchers. Despite public hysteria that

continues even now, science today finds no direct link between mold

and serious illness in people with normal immune systems.

show/hide comments (1) write your comment

Mr. Heimpel,

I am not certain who feeds you information, but it would behoove you

to check your sources before you write and LAWeekly publishes. A

quick trip to the Vista Courthouse and you would have been able to

determine that the first few sentences of the Judge's ruling

read, " The Court, having take the above-entitled matter under

submission on December 12, 2008,

and having fully considered the arguments of all parties, both

written and oral, as well as the evidence

presented, now rules as follows:~~

Defendant Sharon Kramer's Motion to Strike Costs or to Award Costs

to Prevailing Parties is ruled on as

follows: The Record in this case reflects that Plaintiff Bruce J.

Kelman is the prevailing party solely as

against Defendant Sharon Kramer. Defendant Sharon Kramer is the

prevailing party solely as against

Defendant Globaltox, Inc. " ~~

I don't know why you and LAWeekly persist with your false light

writings of me, my family, this lawsuit and the mold issue in

general. They are cruel, untrue and are apparently intended to

inflict harm and distress writings.~~

The reality is and the court records show, I am the ONLY undisputed

prevailing party in the case. No one is challenging that GlobalTox

lost.~~ It is true, I am appealing the Kelman matter. Know why?

Amazingly, seems there have been some " altered under oath

statements " while under penalty of perjury. You might want to ask

your sources about this matter before you write further on the

subject.~~And please, leave my family alone. All I have done is blow

the whistle on a deceit in medical science driving bad public policy

to the detriment of the US public.~~ While Dr. Kelman has professed

that illnesses " could not be " from mycotoxins in an indoor

environement based on his expert opinion; the Federal GAO came out

with a report Sept 30, 2008 saying these illnesses are indeed

plausible to occur. I and many others have worked hard and we have

now knocked a deceit in public policy science right out of the ball

park. If you checked facts before you write, you would see this.

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-980~~

So it is perplexing to me, why would you, who holds yourself out to

be an investiagative journalist, be willing to jepordize your

reputation by doing such shoddy work? Why would you want to cruelly

promote garbage science that the Federal GAO has now deemed is

garbage? Why would you, who professes to work for the betterment of

your fellowman, continue down this horrid and hateful path?~~And why

would LAWeekly want to publish this? They know better as their

parent company ran an article in 2005 about one who was made ill

from the exact situation I and others are helping to correct.

http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/2005-10-13/news/mold-attacks/~~

What is wrong with you people? What motivates you to write such

false light hatred? Whatever it is, I feel sorry for you and those

who surround you.

Comment by Sharon Kramer from Escondido on Dec 31st, 2008, 18:35