10-14-2017, 05:09 PM
CAUSES OF ACTION
COUNT I - DEFAMATION (ALL DEFENDANTS)
619. John reasserts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 618 of this
Complaint as if fully restated herein.
620. Defendants negligently and maliciously published the false and defamatory gist
that John completed the final act ending JonBenét’s life: strangling her to death with a garrote.
621. Defendants negligently and maliciously published the false and defamatory
accusation that John covered-up that Burke killed JonBenét.
Page 107 of 113
622. Defendants negligently and maliciously published the false and defamatory
accusation that John engaged in a criminal cover-up and lied to police.
623. Defendants published and communicated the false and defamatory statements
about John to third-parties and did so without privilege or authorization.
624. Defendants published their false and defamatory accusations against John with
actual malice – e.g., with actual knowledge of falsity and/or with reckless disregard for falsity.
625. Defendants also published their false and defamatory statements against John with
common law malice – e.g., in bad faith and/or with ill-will towards John.
626. Defendants’ false and defamatory accusations against John are defamatory per se,
thereby causing serious and permanent harm to John’s reputation.
627. Defendants’ false and defamatory accusations against John caused him to be
exposed to public hatred, contempt and ridicule and continues to so expose him.
628. Defendants’ false and defamatory accusations against John were repeated and
republished worldwide throughout the media and by countless private individuals. Examples are
attached hereto as Exhibit L.
629. Defendants intended that their false accusations against John be republished.
630. The republications of their false and defamatory accusations against John were
reasonably foreseeable by Defendants at the time they published the statements.
631. The republications of Defendants’ false and defamatory accusations against John
were the natural and probable result of Defendants’ original publication of those false and
defamatory statements.
Page 108 of 113
632. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ false and defamatory accusations
against John, he has suffered and will continue to suffer damage and other harm, including
economic damages, damages to his reputation, mental anguish, and special damages.
633. Defendants’ conduct demonstrates that degree of willful misconduct and an entire
want of care that raises a conscious indifference to the consequences of their actions.
634. Defendants published their accusations against John with constitutional actual
malice, thereby entitling John to an award of punitive damages.
635. John is also entitled to an award of punitive damages to punish Defendants for
their unlawful conduct and to penalize and deter them from repeating similar unlawful and
egregious conduct.
636. John is also entitled to recover exemplary and/or punitive damages because
Defendants are guilty of fraud, oppression, and malice in publishing the false accusation that
John strangled JonBenét to death and engaged in a criminal cover-up.
COUNT II – CONSPIRACY TO DEFAME (ALL DEFENDANTS)
637. John reasserts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 636 of this
Complaint as if fully restated herein.
638. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts agreed to form and engaged in a conspiracy
to create and publish the false and defamatory Documentary.
639. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts preconceived the story line that John
covered-up that Burke killed JonBenét.
640. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts pre-calculated and pre-planned to make
their false accusations against John under the guise of conducting a sham reinvestigation and
claiming that the accusation was based on the evidence discovered in the reinvestigation.
Page 109 of 113
641. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts knowingly agreed to participate in the
Documentary’s fraudulent portrayal of a reinvestigation of the murder of JonBenét.
642. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts knowingly agreed to present the ultimate
conclusion of Kolar’s Foreign Faction, and the supposed reinvestigation was a charade.
643. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts knowingly agreed to an unlawful plan to
make their false accusations against John.
644. Each of the Defendants knowingly and intentionally took a responsible part in the
publication of the Documentary, including Defendants’ false and defamatory accusations against
John.
645. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts knowingly engaged in concerted action and
made overt actions in furtherance of their unlawful plan to publish their false and defamatory
accusations against John.
646. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts knowingly took concerted action and made
overt actions in furtherance of their unlawful plan to mislead the viewers into believing that John
strangled JonBenét to death and engaged in a criminal cover-up.
647. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts, acting jointly and according to their
preconceived and unlawful plan, knowingly and recklessly published false and defamatory
statements with actual malice conveying that John strangled JonBenét to death and engaged in a
criminal cover-up.
648. Through the conspiracy, Defendants proximately caused John to be exposed to
public hatred, contempt and ridicule and continue to so expose him.
649. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ conspiracy and the false and
defamatory gist regarding John, he has suffered and will continue to suffer damage and other
Page 110 of 113
harm, including economic damages, damages to his reputation, mental anguish, and special
damages.
650. John is entitled to an award of punitive damages to punish Defendants for their
unlawful conspiracy and to penalize and deter them from repeating similar unlawful and
egregious conduct.
651. John is also entitled to recover exemplary and/or punitive damages because
Defendants by and through their conspiracy are guilty of fraud, oppression, and malice in
publishing that John strangled JonBenét to death and engaged in a criminal cover-up.
COUNT III – JOINT VENTURE (CBS AND CRITICAL CONTENT)
652. John reasserts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 651 of this
Complaint as if fully restated herein.
653. CBS and Critical Content entered into an agreement indicating an intention to
undertake a joint venture in connection with the Documentary.
654. CBS and Critical Content jointly undertook to produce and publish the
Documentary.
655. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content undertook the
Documentary project for profit.
656. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content shared in the
profits as well as losses in connection with the Documentary.
657. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content contributed
skills and property in connection with the Documentary.
658. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content had a
community interest and control over the Documentary, including a joint right of control.
Page 111 of 113
659. CBS and Critical Content preconceived the story line that John strangled
JonBenét to death and engaged in a criminal cover-up.
660. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content planned to
accuse John of strangling JonBenét to death and engaging in a criminal cover-up under the guise
of a sham reinvestigation and claiming that the accusation was based on the evidence discovered
in the reinvestigation.
661. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content knowingly
agreed to participate in the Documentary’s fraudulent portrayal of a reinvestigation of the murder
of JonBenét.
662. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content knowingly
agreed to present the ultimate conclusion of Kolar’s Foreign Faction, and the supposed
reinvestigation was merely a charade.
663. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content knowingly
agreed to accuse John of strangling JonBenét to death and engaging in a criminal cover-up.
664. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content knowingly
and intentionally took a responsible part in the publication of the Documentary, including the
false and defamatory statements conveying that John strangled JonBenét to death and engaged in
a criminal cover-up.
665. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content knowingly
and recklessly published false and defamatory statements with actual malice conveying that John
strangled JonBenét to death and engaged in a criminal cover-up.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff John Ramsey respectfully requests that this Court enter
judgment, jointly and severally, against Defendants, awarding him compensatory damages in an
Page 112 of 113
amount not less than $100 Million ($100,000,000.00) and punitive damages to punish and deter
Defendants in an amount not less than $250 Million ($250,000,000.00) and granting such other
and further legal or equitable relief deemed appropriate.
Respectfully submitted,
By: /s/ John A. Lesko John A. Lesko (P55397) JL@DetroitCounsel.com 134 N. Main St. Plymouth, MI 48170 (734) 652-1338
L. LIN WOOD, P.C.
L. Lin Wood (pro hac vice pending) lwood@linwoodlaw.com Nicole Jennings Wade (pro hac vice pending) nwade@linwoodlaw.com Jonathan D. Grunberg (pro hac vice pending) jgrunberg@linwoodlaw.com G. Taylor Wilson (pro hac vice pending) twilson@linwoodlaw.com 1180 West Peachtree Street Suite 2400 Atlanta, Georgia 30309 404-891-1402 404-506-9111 (fax)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Dated: September 14, 2017
Page 113 of 113
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all claims in this action triable by jury.
Respectfully submitted,
By: /s/ John A. Lesko John A. Lesko (P55397) JL@DetroitCounsel.com 134 N. Main St. Plymouth, MI 48170 (734) 652-1338
L. LIN WOOD, P.C.
L. Lin Wood (pro hac vice pending) lwood@linwoodlaw.com Nicole Jennings Wade (pro hac vice pending) nwade@linwoodlaw.com Jonathan D. Grunberg (pro hac vice pending) jgrunberg@linwoodlaw.com G. Taylor Wilson (pro hac vice pending) twilson@linwoodlaw.com 1180 West Peachtree Street Suite 2400 Atlanta, Georgia 30309 404-891-1402 404-506-9111 (fax)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Dated: September 14, 2017
COUNT I - DEFAMATION (ALL DEFENDANTS)
619. John reasserts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 618 of this
Complaint as if fully restated herein.
620. Defendants negligently and maliciously published the false and defamatory gist
that John completed the final act ending JonBenét’s life: strangling her to death with a garrote.
621. Defendants negligently and maliciously published the false and defamatory
accusation that John covered-up that Burke killed JonBenét.
Page 107 of 113
622. Defendants negligently and maliciously published the false and defamatory
accusation that John engaged in a criminal cover-up and lied to police.
623. Defendants published and communicated the false and defamatory statements
about John to third-parties and did so without privilege or authorization.
624. Defendants published their false and defamatory accusations against John with
actual malice – e.g., with actual knowledge of falsity and/or with reckless disregard for falsity.
625. Defendants also published their false and defamatory statements against John with
common law malice – e.g., in bad faith and/or with ill-will towards John.
626. Defendants’ false and defamatory accusations against John are defamatory per se,
thereby causing serious and permanent harm to John’s reputation.
627. Defendants’ false and defamatory accusations against John caused him to be
exposed to public hatred, contempt and ridicule and continues to so expose him.
628. Defendants’ false and defamatory accusations against John were repeated and
republished worldwide throughout the media and by countless private individuals. Examples are
attached hereto as Exhibit L.
629. Defendants intended that their false accusations against John be republished.
630. The republications of their false and defamatory accusations against John were
reasonably foreseeable by Defendants at the time they published the statements.
631. The republications of Defendants’ false and defamatory accusations against John
were the natural and probable result of Defendants’ original publication of those false and
defamatory statements.
Page 108 of 113
632. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ false and defamatory accusations
against John, he has suffered and will continue to suffer damage and other harm, including
economic damages, damages to his reputation, mental anguish, and special damages.
633. Defendants’ conduct demonstrates that degree of willful misconduct and an entire
want of care that raises a conscious indifference to the consequences of their actions.
634. Defendants published their accusations against John with constitutional actual
malice, thereby entitling John to an award of punitive damages.
635. John is also entitled to an award of punitive damages to punish Defendants for
their unlawful conduct and to penalize and deter them from repeating similar unlawful and
egregious conduct.
636. John is also entitled to recover exemplary and/or punitive damages because
Defendants are guilty of fraud, oppression, and malice in publishing the false accusation that
John strangled JonBenét to death and engaged in a criminal cover-up.
COUNT II – CONSPIRACY TO DEFAME (ALL DEFENDANTS)
637. John reasserts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 636 of this
Complaint as if fully restated herein.
638. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts agreed to form and engaged in a conspiracy
to create and publish the false and defamatory Documentary.
639. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts preconceived the story line that John
covered-up that Burke killed JonBenét.
640. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts pre-calculated and pre-planned to make
their false accusations against John under the guise of conducting a sham reinvestigation and
claiming that the accusation was based on the evidence discovered in the reinvestigation.
Page 109 of 113
641. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts knowingly agreed to participate in the
Documentary’s fraudulent portrayal of a reinvestigation of the murder of JonBenét.
642. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts knowingly agreed to present the ultimate
conclusion of Kolar’s Foreign Faction, and the supposed reinvestigation was a charade.
643. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts knowingly agreed to an unlawful plan to
make their false accusations against John.
644. Each of the Defendants knowingly and intentionally took a responsible part in the
publication of the Documentary, including Defendants’ false and defamatory accusations against
John.
645. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts knowingly engaged in concerted action and
made overt actions in furtherance of their unlawful plan to publish their false and defamatory
accusations against John.
646. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts knowingly took concerted action and made
overt actions in furtherance of their unlawful plan to mislead the viewers into believing that John
strangled JonBenét to death and engaged in a criminal cover-up.
647. Defendants and their Pseudo-Experts, acting jointly and according to their
preconceived and unlawful plan, knowingly and recklessly published false and defamatory
statements with actual malice conveying that John strangled JonBenét to death and engaged in a
criminal cover-up.
648. Through the conspiracy, Defendants proximately caused John to be exposed to
public hatred, contempt and ridicule and continue to so expose him.
649. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants’ conspiracy and the false and
defamatory gist regarding John, he has suffered and will continue to suffer damage and other
Page 110 of 113
harm, including economic damages, damages to his reputation, mental anguish, and special
damages.
650. John is entitled to an award of punitive damages to punish Defendants for their
unlawful conspiracy and to penalize and deter them from repeating similar unlawful and
egregious conduct.
651. John is also entitled to recover exemplary and/or punitive damages because
Defendants by and through their conspiracy are guilty of fraud, oppression, and malice in
publishing that John strangled JonBenét to death and engaged in a criminal cover-up.
COUNT III – JOINT VENTURE (CBS AND CRITICAL CONTENT)
652. John reasserts and incorporates by reference paragraphs 1 through 651 of this
Complaint as if fully restated herein.
653. CBS and Critical Content entered into an agreement indicating an intention to
undertake a joint venture in connection with the Documentary.
654. CBS and Critical Content jointly undertook to produce and publish the
Documentary.
655. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content undertook the
Documentary project for profit.
656. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content shared in the
profits as well as losses in connection with the Documentary.
657. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content contributed
skills and property in connection with the Documentary.
658. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content had a
community interest and control over the Documentary, including a joint right of control.
Page 111 of 113
659. CBS and Critical Content preconceived the story line that John strangled
JonBenét to death and engaged in a criminal cover-up.
660. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content planned to
accuse John of strangling JonBenét to death and engaging in a criminal cover-up under the guise
of a sham reinvestigation and claiming that the accusation was based on the evidence discovered
in the reinvestigation.
661. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content knowingly
agreed to participate in the Documentary’s fraudulent portrayal of a reinvestigation of the murder
of JonBenét.
662. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content knowingly
agreed to present the ultimate conclusion of Kolar’s Foreign Faction, and the supposed
reinvestigation was merely a charade.
663. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content knowingly
agreed to accuse John of strangling JonBenét to death and engaging in a criminal cover-up.
664. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content knowingly
and intentionally took a responsible part in the publication of the Documentary, including the
false and defamatory statements conveying that John strangled JonBenét to death and engaged in
a criminal cover-up.
665. Pursuant to their joint venture agreement, CBS and Critical Content knowingly
and recklessly published false and defamatory statements with actual malice conveying that John
strangled JonBenét to death and engaged in a criminal cover-up.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff John Ramsey respectfully requests that this Court enter
judgment, jointly and severally, against Defendants, awarding him compensatory damages in an
Page 112 of 113
amount not less than $100 Million ($100,000,000.00) and punitive damages to punish and deter
Defendants in an amount not less than $250 Million ($250,000,000.00) and granting such other
and further legal or equitable relief deemed appropriate.
Respectfully submitted,
By: /s/ John A. Lesko John A. Lesko (P55397) JL@DetroitCounsel.com 134 N. Main St. Plymouth, MI 48170 (734) 652-1338
L. LIN WOOD, P.C.
L. Lin Wood (pro hac vice pending) lwood@linwoodlaw.com Nicole Jennings Wade (pro hac vice pending) nwade@linwoodlaw.com Jonathan D. Grunberg (pro hac vice pending) jgrunberg@linwoodlaw.com G. Taylor Wilson (pro hac vice pending) twilson@linwoodlaw.com 1180 West Peachtree Street Suite 2400 Atlanta, Georgia 30309 404-891-1402 404-506-9111 (fax)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Dated: September 14, 2017
Page 113 of 113
JURY DEMAND
Plaintiff hereby demands a trial by jury on all claims in this action triable by jury.
Respectfully submitted,
By: /s/ John A. Lesko John A. Lesko (P55397) JL@DetroitCounsel.com 134 N. Main St. Plymouth, MI 48170 (734) 652-1338
L. LIN WOOD, P.C.
L. Lin Wood (pro hac vice pending) lwood@linwoodlaw.com Nicole Jennings Wade (pro hac vice pending) nwade@linwoodlaw.com Jonathan D. Grunberg (pro hac vice pending) jgrunberg@linwoodlaw.com G. Taylor Wilson (pro hac vice pending) twilson@linwoodlaw.com 1180 West Peachtree Street Suite 2400 Atlanta, Georgia 30309 404-891-1402 404-506-9111 (fax)
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Dated: September 14, 2017