Re: Update from the OK Corral

[Guest guest]

BTW, did anyone read the USA Today about the soldiers at Fort Sills being in moldy environments?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2008-08-17-mold_N.htm

Guess who the Department of Justice hired to defeat the claims of illness in children in military housing at Fort Sills. And guess which position paper they relied on to say these children's symptoms "could not be" from their moldy military housing.

See Coreen Robbins and Bruce Kelman in vs. US attached.

Their testimony is essentially based on intellectual bullying and creating the straw man argument that mycotoxins were the cause of illness and then refuting that this is possible based on dose-response toxicology. They never considered that acquired hypersensitivity reactions to bioaerosol components and MVOCs could be a cause of illness. That is where they are being disingenuous or negligent by omission, to be kind.

Coreen Robbins only gets paid $400/per hour to say it couldn't be the mold.

Steve Temes

[Guest guest]

Sharon,

Thanks for the update.

I was hoping that this would be an atypical situation, but it seems like

it's not. In my professional and personal experience with litigation, it

seems that 50% of the process is legal maneuvering, and 50% is,

unfortunately, who is the most convincing liar ( " liar " based upon what is

" allowed " into testimony, and manipulation of partial " truths " ).

Make sure that YOUR attorney knows what and what not to ask you, what to ask

plaintiff witnesses, and to try not to ask any questions of anyone that he

doesn't already know the answers to. YOU are responsible for the process on

your side, and to some extent for things over which you have control, (which

is very little) for the outcome. The attorney is simply your vehicle to

navigate the legal system.

Stay calm (unless you want to cry...sometimes that helps), do NOT show

emotions connected with being pissed off, and be CONFIDENT but not arrogant.

Your answers to questions should be brief and direct, unless your attorney

decides ahead of time that you should expound on some particular answers.

That's my story (and advice at this point) and I'm stickin' to it.

Best of luck...hang in there. You've come this far and it's almost over.

Don't let the bastards wear you down coming down the home stretch.

Regards,

Chuck Reaney

Update from the OK Corral

> Dear All,

>

> Thank all of you who sent words of support yesterday. Greatly

> appreciated.

>

> This trial stuff is pretty weird business if you ask me. We did not even

> get far enough to pick a jury yesterday.

>

> There is a BUNCH of stuff Kelman wants kept out of this libel suit. Like

> the Wall Street Journal article, all of my published writings, my advocacy

> work

> in DC. Senator Kennedy's GAO audit request. And all the groups that are

> supporting the need for a Congressional hearing into the conflicts of

> interest

> of the matter.

>

> The judge does not appear to be getting it as to why I wrote the phrase

> " altered his under oath statements " PLURAL " statements " . She is focusing

> on one

> alliteration, which is exactly what Kelman wants her to do. We got a brand

> new

> judge yesterday. She knew virtually nothing of the case other than what

> she

> has read from prior rulings.

>

> VeriTox does not want to go into the science one iota. If you were a

> scientists who was claiming your reputation had been defamed, wouldn't

> you want to

> go into the science?

>

> I am going to have a hard time explaining to the jury why Kelman was

> waffling when describing the relationship of ACOEM and the US Chamber of

> Commerce

> paper when forced to discuss them together in front of a jury without

> going

> into his little feat of scientific magic.

>

> You can read his testimony in question and my press release here.

> _http://moldwarriors.com/SK/index.htm_

> (http://moldwarriors.com/SK/index.htm)

>

> The judge may not get why he was " altering his under oath statements " , but

> I

> know all of you do. So we are not going to discuss Kelman's " science "

> aka

> " marketing " . So it is going to be very weird when I get on the witness

> stand.

> How do I answer questions for the jury of why Kelman was altering without

> being able to answer questions?

>

> We will see what today brings. ...C'est la vie! Whatever happens in the

> court case, I am not shutting up about Kelman applying mathematical

> extrapolations to a study of rodents and from there, concluding that

> humans claiming of

> illness from " toxic mold " are simply a result of " trial lawyers, media

> hype

> and junk science " .

>

> BTW, did anyone read the USA Today about the soldiers at Fort Sills being

> in

> moldy environments?

> _http://www.usatodayhttp://wwwhttp://wwhttp://www.http://www_

> (http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2008-08-17-mold_N.htm)

>

> Guess who the Department of Justice hired to defeat the claims of illness

> in

> children in military housing at Fort Sills. And guess which position

> paper

> they relied on to say these children's symptoms " could not be " from their

> moldy military housing.

>

> See Coreen Robbins and Bruce Kelman in vs. US attached.

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

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

> travel

> deal here.

> (http://information.travel.aol.com/deals?ncid=aoltrv00050000000047)

>