Full Court Coverage

Features

What happens when defense counsel and ordinary citizens blog about high-profile trials?

January 2008 Issue
By Stephanie Francis Ward

Joseph Lopez.
Photo by Callie Lipkin

Some say Los Angeles prosecutor Alan Jackson has movie-star looks. Others compare him to a game-show host. But the most unusual characterization of the man who prosecuted music producer Phil Spector on murder charges likened him to a bulldog named Chance in the 1993 Disney movie Homeward Bound. “Of course, AJ is much smarter and more cautious than Chance, but overall personalities seem to fit,” wrote Betsy Ross in Trials & Tribulations, her blog that focused on the Spector prosecution.

A semiretired massage therapist who lives in the Los Angeles suburb of Sherman Oaks, Betsy Ross (yes, that’s her real name) regularly attended Spector’s trial in the 2003 killing of B-movie actress Lana Clarkson. She was one of at least three nonjournalists who blogged about the trial regularly, but the only one to merit a mention in Dominick Dunne’s column in Vanity Fair.

“I was trying to bring my readers into the courtroom with me,” says Ross, who blogs under the handle “Sprocket.” Her observations took a decidedly pro-prosecution lean. And Ross’ writing style often includes details and descriptions that would probably not be included in mainstream press coverage.

The case ended in a mistrial on Sept. 26, but Ross continues to write about Spector on her blog, and she plans to cover his retrial.

The Spector trial—which ended in a hung jury—is Ross’ second. Her first was the murder trial of actor Robert Blake, who in 2005 was acquitted of murdering his wife, Bonnie Lee Bakley. Also a fan of true crime message boards, Ross posted her observations about Blake’s trial on the boards. Later, after copying and pasting significant blocks of text, she started Trials & Tribulations; she now posts links to her blog on various message boards.

(Los Angeles district attorney’s office spokeswoman Sandi Gibbons said the office would not comment on Trials & Tribulations because of the pending retrial.)

Before it became apparent that there was a hung jury, Ross believed that Spector would be convicted. She was unimpressed with the defense and thought the jury felt the same.

In a July 22 post, Ross unloaded on Spector defense lawyer Linda Kenney Baden: “She’s screeching again, raising her voice. I agree with my seatmates. She’s very nice in person, but I can’t stand to listen to her either.

“Around 2:40 p.m., I see Spector’s hands shake for a bit, then stop,” she continued. “He’s in his usual position of slumped in his chair.”

‘NOT VERY NICE’

Roger J. Rosen, who led Spector’s trial team, says he never read Trials & Tribulations.

“Philip hired me to represent and defend him, not read blogs,” says the Los Angeles lawyer, who is not representing Spector in the retrial. He did allow that he had heard of the blog and characterized Ross’ writings as “not very nice.”

Many lawyers share that view about true crime blogs written by those trained in neither law nor journalism. Yet they exist, their numbers are growing, and they’re becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.

“People have to adjust to the fact that publicity is changing,” says Joseph B. Cheshire V, a Raleigh, N.C., lawyer. He represented one of the Duke University lacrosse players accused of rape in 2006. They were ultimately acquitted, which many credit to a blog that supported them.

Some attorneys are troubled by the blogs—which feature posts ranging from the objective to the opinionated to the demonstrably inaccurate—because they can’t control the message, even if only a few receive it. While Cheshire believes that blogs should be read with a grain of salt, “the way a lot of people run and hide from [blogs] is stupid, and to not consider using them would probably be naive as well.”

Joseph R. Lopez, a Chicago lawyer, agrees. He represents Frank Calabrese Sr., an accused Mob boss and hit man recently tried and convicted of seven murders, all tied to organized crime. While the trial—referred to as “Family Secrets” because Calabrese’s son, Frank Jr., cooperated with federal agents—was ongoing, Lopez blogged about it on a Mafia-focused webpage until the judge told him to stop.

“I thought the public had a right to know what I was thinking, and I wanted to express my opinions and views,” says Lopez, who posted his thoughts on a blog called the Chicago Syndicate. Lopez says that while he writes for the blog, it is not his personal page. (Indeed the page appears to be sponsored by someone who goes by the pseudonym “Joe Batterz,” an aspiring country music artist who claims to be a South Side Chicago native now living in Nashville, Tenn.; the domain name was registered privately.)

Much of the content on the site consists of reposts of newspaper and television coverage of the trial, but there are some original entries by both Batterz and Lopez, who used the nickname “The Shark.” (He sometimes wears a necklace with a shark pendant.)

In one of Lopez’s original trial posts, he comments about a government witness who owned a pornography shop, describing the man as a “chuch,” which is Italian slang for ass.

“He forgot to tell the jury how the outfit bankrolled his porno store and put in the video machines in the beat-off booths,” Lopez wrote. “This guy is something.”

In the same post, he spoke of federal prosecutor Mitchell A. Mars and the porn shop owner: “It was killing me. I was narcoleptic,” Lopez wrote. “I do not know who is more monotone and dry with no emotion.”

Yet the prosecution was apparently able to muster one reaction: According to Lopez, they complained about his writing to the court.

“They were hawking to see if I would post,” he claims. “They cared because I was making fun of them.”

‘SQUALID, UNCIVILIZED SAVAGES’

In another post, Batterz criticizes Lopez’s clients, comparing them to the fictional gangsters in The Funeral, a 1996 film starring Christopher Walken and Christopher Penn. The movie and the Family Secrets trial are similar, he writes, because “both portray gangsters as they should be seen—as squalid, uncivilized savages; not as handsome, slick-suited outlaws.” The post continues: “Such men (whether those in the courtroom or not, the jury have yet to decide) are just sadistic thugs who commit murder not for noble cause but for squalid greed, and that should never be forgotten.”

Once the Family Secrets trial ended and the gag order was lifted, Lopez resumed his posting at the Chicago Syndicate. “It’s a great way to tap public opinion,” he says of blogging. Even having the accused keep a blog could be a good thing, he adds. “They could blast the government if they wanted to.”

Randall Samborn, public information officer with the Northern District of Illinois’ U.S. attorney’s office, says his agency will not comment on Lopez’s writings. Lopez has another high-profile case coming up, in which he represents a Chicago police officer charged with participating in a home invasion ring. Unless a judge directs otherwise, Lopez plans to blog about that case, too.

Howard Varinsky, an Emeryville, Calif., trial consultant who often works with the government, believes more defense lawyers like Lopez will start blogging about their trials. As did Lopez, he also mentions the possibility of defendants sponsoring or supporting their own blogs.

Varinsky points to the 2005 Michael Jackson molestation trial. Varinsky worked with the Santa Barbara County district attorney on the case, and he says he suspects that the “King of Pop” was funding a blog that supported him. The blog directed fans to come out to the courthouse during trial, Varinsky says, and it posted photos and home addresses of the prosecution team.

Mark Simon, a Dana Point, Calif., private investigator who works with criminal defense lawyers, says that no clients have requested that he set up a blog on their behalf—yet.

“But if you have a high-profile case, why not?” Simon adds. “I wouldn’t put anything past anyone working for their client.”

‘NUTCASES WITH NO LIVES’

Varinsky also assisted the government with the Spector trial. He would not say whether Trials & Tribulations would be considered when putting together the retrial, but he acknowledges that most of the blogs are pro-prosecution. Still, he describes true crime bloggers, with no relation to the cases they write about, as “nutcases with no lives.”

Regardless, Varinsky believes that prosecutors generally don’t read blogs about the cases they’re prosecuting and doubts a prosecutor would ever blog about an ongoing case.

But it seems plenty of other people involved in the cases are paying attention—and, in the Spector case at least, using the blogs as a means to get heard despite gag orders.

It was Ross who first noticed—and posted—a message allegedly written by Spector’s wife, Rachelle, on “Team Spector,” a MySpace personal page that supports the “wall of sound” producer. The post appeared after Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Larry Fidler issued a gag order, forbidding Rachelle Spector from giving television interviews.

“I love Phil Spector———!!!” read the Sept. 23 post, which included a picture of Rachelle Spector, a 20-something aspiring singer who married the 69-year-old producer in 2006. “The Evil Judge Should DIE!!!!”

Ross mentioned the post on her blog, and mainstream media groups followed the story. Rachelle Spector denied any involvement, and the post was removed from the Team Spector page.

“I heard about that in the courtroom,” Rosen says when asked if his client’s wife wrote the post. “I don’t know anything about it.”

Someone claiming to be Rachelle Spector’s brother-in-law found Ross’ page through the CourtTV.com message board. The person made a post that agreed with Ross’ assessment that the Spector marriage was one of convenience and her view that Phil Spector was guilty. Later, someone claiming to be Rachelle Spector’s sister and the alleged brother-in-law’s spouse complained, and CourtTV.com took down the posts. Ross, who pasted the posts into her blog, refused.

Anne Reed.
Photo by
Carroll Studios-Milwaukee

‘EXTREMELY HELPFUL’

Recaps of such drama rarely reach mainstream media, and some dismiss Ross’ writing as lowbrow. However, her stock rose when she scored a lengthy interview with one of the jurors after it was announced the jury could not reach a verdict.

Ross originally speculated on her blog, incorrectly it turned out, that a certain juror, “# 9,” voted not guilty. A friend of his was following Trials & Tribulations and sent him the post. The juror then contacted Ross and told her which two jurors actually voted not guilty. He also provided her with details about jury deliberations, which she posted.

Mainstream papers published the man’s recollections too, but with much less detail than Ross’ posts.

“One person’s take on a witness is one thing, but someone’s attempt to describe how a person described jury deliberations is something else,” says Anne Reed, a Milwaukee trial lawyer and jury consultant who practices with Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren. “That’s where [Ross] got extremely helpful.”

Reed also blogs, writing about jury consulting at Deliberations. Blogs about trials, Reed says, influence public opinion. The profession may not want to admit it, she adds, but the influence extends to the court and the prosecutor’s office.

“The media in general can affect the decisions of politicians and public servants more easily than it ought to,” Reed says, “and it can affect what happens inside a trial.”

She mentions the Duke University lacrosse players accused and acquitted of rape. K.C. Johnson, a history professor at Brooklyn College, took an interest when the arrests were made and started a blog, Durham-in-Wonderland. Unlike many blogs that focus on criminal cases, Johnson took a pro-defense position.

An advertisement placed by Duke faculty members, who Johnson says condemned the accused before trial, attracted him to the case.

“It struck me as so inappropriate in so many ways,” he says. He believed that newspapers weren’t doing a good job covering the story, that political correctness was affecting coverage, and that the defendants were not being treated fairly.

The blog also reviewed depositions, which Johnson says demonstrated that Mike Nifong, the former Durham County district attorney, filed the charges without enough evidence.

“The characterization of the lacrosse team was that these guys were all sorts of racist folks who spent all their time partying,” says Johnson, mentioning evidence that the defendants received good grades at Duke.

“You couldn’t be good students and behave the way they were portrayed. It was clear to me that the characterization could not be true,” says Johnson, who in September said that he was winding down the blog and planning a one-year stay at Tel Aviv University, where he was awarded a Fulbright grant.

Much of Johnson’s writing is lengthy and sometimes seems more like a college lecture with attitude than a blog entry. For the past two years, Johnson made detailed posts daily, and he often traveled from New York to North Carolina to cover hearings.

In September the blog had received more than 5 million hits, according to Johnson, who added that his page usually attracts between 200 and 300 readers a day. Some, including Johnson, say that his blog figured significantly in the charges against the players being dismissed. They also credit the blog with prompting the North Carolina State Bar to file an ethics complaint against Nifong, who in August surrendered his law license.

“I can name 100 prominent prosecutors—both federal and state—who read his blog every day,” Cheshire says of Johnson. “He had an opinion, of course, but he was very factual.”

According to Johnson, who co-wrote a book about the case, his writing is not biased. If it was, he says, no one would take him seriously.

“My blog had a point of view that was very critical of Nifong and the activist contingent of the faculty, but I was presenting arguments that were factually sound,” he adds.

David B. Freedman, a Winston-Salem, N.C., lawyer who defended Nifong’s discipline charges, disagrees. He characterizes Johnson’s work as having a biased agenda. He did follow Johnson’s blog, and Johnson was the first to report that Freedman was defending Nifong’s state bar charges.

Freedman, a principal at Crumpler Freedman Parker & Witt, posted a comment on the blog clarifying something Johnson wrote.

“They barely printed my side,” Freedman says. “I didn’t feel my response was properly characterized, but I didn’t hold that against him.”

In theory, Freedman says, blogs such as Johnson’s can’t influence a trial because they shouldn’t sway judges and jurors aren’t supposed to read them. But, he says, the blogs, even those with few readers, deliver a message that defense lawyers have no way of controlling.

“When people write for a newspaper, while they’re not always objective, at least in theory they are trying to be,” Freedman says. “There’s no requirement for these bloggers to try and be objective. And if something goes in print, it sort of becomes gospel to some people.”

But what the gospel really says depends on who’s interpreting it. So if a lawyer has his or her trial blogged, Reed says, he or she shouldn’t see the writing as a good prediction of how a jury will vote. She mentions that, initially, none of the true crime blogs predicted that the Spector trial would end with a hung jury.

‘IT SEEPS INTO THE JURY POOL’

Others say that predicting a verdict is not the point.

“It does take time [to read them], but it helps you see the case through others’ eyes,” Cheshire says. “In situations where people talk negatively about your client, you can learn a tremendous amount.”

“Swaying the public opinion is an enormously important part of what we do,” he adds. “It seeps into the jury pool and the prosecutor’s office, and it affects every decision that’s made in a case.”

Varinsky agrees. He advises clients to ask members of the jury pool what Internet sites they visit, including blogs, during voir dire.

And there’s a concern that jurors might read a blog about the case while they’re empaneled.

“All these issues of jurors seeing media materials they’re not supposed to see have been with us for years,” Reed says. “But there’s been a sudden change in the tools we’re using, and that takes us to a new dimension.”

Comments

Report Abuse

Posted by Janet - Jan 23, 2008 07:54 am CDT

Perhaps you would like to rethink your article. You have only 1/2 a story. These facts might be a bit more relative http://bewaresprocketblog.blogspot.com/2008/01/spocket-queen-of-mean.html
Posted by Ollie - Jan 23, 2008 08:00 am CDT

Sorry, but the blogger you speak of is not what you think.Please do check out the above mentioned blog, it could enlighten you.
Posted by Barb - Jan 23, 2008 08:03 am CDT

It appears you do not have all the facts about this blogger, several of her entries were written by another person, I see no credit was given.
You might ask Betsy about this, and do a followup article.
Posted by Janine - Jan 23, 2008 08:36 am CDT

Betsy has perhaps mislead you about a few things.There are many who have seen the light and then the darkside of her.You might want to rethink a few things.
Posted by Ann - Jan 23, 2008 08:58 am CDT

It is my understanding that much of the information Ms. Ross posted on her blog was given to her through other posters from the CourtTV boards.

Also, not only did she use her blog to write about the trial, she also used it to launch a personal attack on someone she felt had wronged her. Did you happen to ask her why the name “Sprocket” was BANNED from the CourtTV message boards? You may find the answer as (or more) interesting than you appeared to have found her blog.

There is MUCH more to the blogger known as “Sprocket” than you have written here. Just a little investigation would have lead you elsewhere.
Posted by Ann Winters - Jan 23, 2008 09:06 am CDT

To know, know, know her- is to hate, hate, hate her.
Posted by alison - Jan 23, 2008 09:14 am CDT

God help our legal system if lawyers on either side of the aisle are relying on information or insight from a blogger like “sprocket.” Check your sources a little better, lawyers - there is a serious lack of accuracy both in content and observation in that blog.
Posted by PhilS - Jan 23, 2008 11:37 am CDT

Whoever did the investigative work on this better get better resources. They haven’t even scracthed the surface of what Ms. Ross is about. She has an agenda (and diet) that just blows the mind of any sane person.
Posted by camille - Jan 23, 2008 11:44 am CDT

It’s unfortunate that the specific focus of this article relating blogging a trial was garnered on Betsy Ross AKA ‘Sprocket’ and not the outstanding true trial blogging done by Kim of the darwin exception. It was Kim who was able to put you right in the courtroom even though she was blogging many miles from the Clara Shortridge Foltz Criminal Justice Center, in downtown Los Angeles. Judge for yourself by clicking on Kim’s blog, specifically the Phil Spector archive section (http://thedarwinexception.wordpress.com/2007/04/25/ca-vs-spector-day-1-opening-statements/). During the live trial, it was Kim’s blog where avid trial watchers went to get the latest when they missed the coverage because they could be assured of fact not fiction, along with a dose of humor. Sprocket’s blog paled in comparison.
Posted by Tommy&Gina - Jan 23, 2008 11:46 am CDT

Sprocket is seriously a Whacked Salad tossed with a vile brand of narcissistic stupidly. This dish is best sent back to Hell’s Kitchen. Her Blog has zero credibility, i.e. lack of credible source material, lack of any writing style or a substance that a 1st year English major could roll right over her in a obsolete Bradley Tank and finally the coup de grace - zip on spell check. Neatness counts, honey.
Posted by Tony Truthful - Jan 23, 2008 12:11 pm CDT

A problem with journalism today is that writers do not check their facts.

Juror #9 contacted Ms. Ross only after his family read a reference to wrong information posted on Trial & Tribulations as to who the “not-guilty” jurors had been He was close to the person Sprocket incorrectly had written was a “not guilty” and wanted it corrected. He was milked by Ms. Ross and soon got the picture and jumped as far away from her as he could get.

Ross did not “discover” Rachelle Spector’s MY SPACE comments but read about them on Court TV boards. As much as she likes to take credit for other’s words and actions it is amazing that she would fill your interview with her usual deceit and misrepresentations.

Guess she just can’t help herself. It seems that if you are publishing these incidents in something as worthy as an ABA publication, perhaps you should look a bit closer.
Posted by Gertude - Jan 23, 2008 01:19 pm CDT

Ms. Ward should have checked the Court TV
Message boards before taking the word of Betsy Ross. Those “Discoveries” of hers came from posters there. Rachelle Spector’s remark about the Judge being key among them.

In fact, the better written sections of the Blog came from there as well. “Sprocket”, before she was banned, regularly took entire posts and added them to her blog. Without asking permission or giving credit.

The original “Sprocket” material in the blog, would be the observations of Rachelle S.’s clothes, and the petty feuding with other people attending the trial.

A better subject for an article about a real trial Blogger, would be Kim of the “Darwin Exception”. A Blog totally focused on the trial, actually written by Kim.
Posted by Paula - Jan 23, 2008 07:41 pm CDT

Its totally disgusting that this “sprocket’ gets any kind of recognition when she is at best a hack and uses others ideas as her own.
Posted by HelloKitty! - Jan 23, 2008 08:35 pm CDT

Where are all of Sprokey’s devoted follower’s AKA as the Stooges?(no offense to Iggy Pop!) Why haven’t they chimed in to defend their timid and fatuous leader? Have they gone to the mattresses, “Godfather” style? What cowards! You know who you are and so do we.
The gig is up.
You have no defensible position and you know it.

Sprocket: The third time is usually the charm, but not in your case. It’s over for you. Do society and yourself a favor and accept it and FGS! stay the hell away from The Spector Trial.

You are NO angel wearing to be wearing those red shoes.
Posted by I'm with the banned. - Jan 24, 2008 09:48 am CDT

Absurd to put any stock in what posters on Court TV’s message boards say about anything. The barely literate moderators BAN any poster who dares to differ with the party line. (The moderators base their decisions about whom to BAN on tattlemail.)

E.g., Court TV’s “Crime Library” moderator decided months in advance of the Mary Winkler trial that the killing of Matthew Winkler was a “NOTORIOUS MURDER”, and an “act of vengeance of biblical proportions”. After the JURY decided the killing was NOT murder, the moderator ignored the verdict, and the case is STILL listed as a “NOTORIOUS MURDER”.

Any lawyer hoping to gauge public sentiment by reading posts on Court TV (now known as “truTV") should be aware of the one-sided nature of the message boards. TruTV should be ashamed of the pathetic message boards, dominated by tattletails, ruled by ignoramuses.
Posted by myopinion - Jan 24, 2008 11:49 am CDT

I take offense at what is spewed by Sprocket in the name of blogging, crime trial watcher or whatever other disguises she comes up with.
I am certainly no author and I don’t blog for public consumption.
I’d rather go to the dentist to have teeth pulled than read that woman’s judgmental and derogatory observations.
Sprocket would be much more enlightened by learning the laws that apply to the trials she covers.

She expects us to believe after the following slay of language, she couldn’t have coffee with the LA Times reporters she hunted down b/c she has to go purchase fabric. LMFAO

Let’s not forget her “Child Bride” “Chicklet teeth” “Black man not big enough to be Phil’s bodyguard” “Juror No. 10 is pass-ass”
“Mrs. C greeted me warmly” “DD is in London or maybe NY by now” blah blah.
It is all utter B.S.
If only she would get proactive and educate herself.

Spiteful Sprocket goes on to discuss some man merely on the scene to do his civic duty:

“when I see his face I think that this could be a long lost Spector son because the guy has virtually no chin. I decide to call him chinman.”

Lets “Chinman” pays her a visit to do some “bodywork” of his own.
Sew sad.

Instead of editing that junior high catty chat, she rather make snides remarks and outlandish inferences such as this literary masterpiece:
“There’s no proof that any of the jurors were tampered with, and anything we think might have happened is just speculation.

She also blogged about “obsessed people”.
In that entry she blasts a former poster from CTV.
Pathetic.

Sprocket is the one who’s obsessed herself.
Sew sad indeed.
Posted by Jim R. - Jan 24, 2008 07:02 pm CDT

I have to say that the majority of the comments thus far have likely been left by one person who’s sole mission, it seems, is to discredit Ms. Ross. She has had it in for her from day one...the ol’ green eyed-monster thing. So take the blog with a grain of salt if you’d like, but it’d be wise to take the comments here with a grain (if not a pound) of salt as well. This isn’t the first site where the person has launched a litany of disparaging comments towards Ms. Ross. Rather sad and quite juvenile, really.
Posted by melinda jones - Jan 24, 2008 07:10 pm CDT

To the ‘Journal’: I enjoyed your article. I also enjoyed sprocket’s reporting on the trial at CTV and reading her website. I do fear she has a stalker who has cloned herself multiple times (as is obvious by the link provided to the site on which she posts hate and garbage then comments and congratulates herself) ......... someone banned at CTV unable to contain the jealousy over the positive feedback Miss Ross rightfully received for her diligence in following the trial, her colorful commentary that added much to even the driest trial days and her wit. Hope you’re at the next one sprocket, don’t let psychotic rants such as the above get you down.
Posted by myopinion - Jan 24, 2008 07:51 pm CDT

Jim R, Melinda Jones, is that you sprocket?

It would not be the first time Ms Betsy left comments to applaud herself, or left positive comments for herself at her own blog.

How crazy is that?
Crazy but true.
Posted by Besty-Wetsy - Jan 24, 2008 09:55 pm CDT

Nice to see that two of the three stooges who have drunk from the tainted Kool-aid this lady serves at TCS have shown up to fight for the female equivalent of Jim Jones. It is ludicrous to suggest that these negative responses are as a result of one person. She has deceived innumerable people while trolling to sell her wares. I am just sorry that a photo of her couldn’t have been included with this puff piece - as was the lovely lawyer who was featured.
Posted by auntblabby - Jan 24, 2008 10:10 pm CDT

Wow, do you have a fact checker at this publication? Ms. Ross has plagerized multiple CTV posters over and over again. Please, read the Darwin Exception if you want excellent coverage with a dash of wry and Kim is brilliant. Sprocket is a charlatan who uses other people in order to further her goals. She does not even bother to spellcheck.

Anyone reading these comments who thinks the negative ones are all made by one disgruntled poster must be drinking the Jim Jones KoolAid. Sew what?
Posted by trialfan - Jan 24, 2008 10:12 pm CDT

Jim Jones? Slightly dramatic. A trial enthusiast followed a trial and blogged what she observed, what’s the big deal? Blogging is no more a danger to a jury pool than are crime or trial reports on air or in the newspaper. Loved the blog!
Posted by humbert - Jan 24, 2008 10:19 pm CDT

Anyone with even a small amount of sense would be able to tell, simply from reading them, that these comments were not all written by one person.

Nice try Sprocklones.
Posted by mybuddiesandme - Jan 24, 2008 10:29 pm CDT

Ha! you obviously don’t know this woman. She is epitome of DUMB.Hasn’t had an original thought like EVER! Her blog was only entertaining for the mispellings and inaccuracies.She wouldn’t have known about THOSE if she hadn’t had another to correct them for her.Ye gads! what a total loser!
Posted by BooBooKitty - Jan 24, 2008 10:31 pm CDT

What a load. The Rachelle Spector post was ferreted out by one of the more talented detectives on the CTV boards. Taking credit for that is a big fat lie. Not surprising considering the source. Sure thought a legal journal would fact check before publishing something like that.
Posted by Ann Winters - Jan 24, 2008 10:59 pm CDT

Trialfan - aka Trep - your are so totally out of touch with reality that I feel sorry for you. Perhaps like Rip Van Winkle you will awaken from your lethargic sleep and recognize what a fraud Batsy is. I’d like to buy her for what she’s worth and sell her for what she thinks she’s worth. That she could so represent herself on TCS proves how fraudulent she is. She posted a photo of herselff in which she weighed at least 90 lbs. less than her actual present weight. That is reprehensible. Had she posted her present photo - I would have had no problem. I don’t base my affection on what someone weighs. I do base my affection on their integrity - of which this woman has NONE!!
Posted by Justine - Jan 24, 2008 11:44 pm CDT

How interesting to see the responses to comments here. Surely this Ross person must have considered the Court TV message boards a worthwhile place to be, since she chose to post on them.
To speak negatively of the Court TV message board posters, is to speak negatively of the blogger in question, as she was one.
You can’t have it both ways.
Posted by Rayny - Jan 24, 2008 11:47 pm CDT

Well, Sprocket sure got Dominick’s attention, didn’t she? You guys wouldn’t be ummm, jealous, would you? Get over it already, geeez!
Posted by hummingbird - Jan 25, 2008 12:39 am CDT

The comments are from many injured by Sprocket’s self serving deceptions. Jealousy about Dominick’s attention? I don’t think so since she was his unpaid assistant and not quite as connected as you might think. Dunne didn’t get where he is without knowing how to work it to his advantage and a one line throw away mentioning her in VF is hardly anything worth being jealous over.

The article contains some truly inaccurate reporting. One example is the claim about finding the Rachelle Spector threat. Well, you had to be accepted as a member on Team Spector and she wasn’t, so she didn’t discover that tidbit, but another clever CTV poster did.

Once again, Sprocket took credit for some one else’s discovery. That is her MO so all of you others who think this is jealousy are wrong.
Posted by Jim R. - Jan 25, 2008 01:28 am CDT

Notice how many of the above disparaging comments reference Ms. Ross’s spelling and the Rachelle Spector blog. Not a mystery who this comment spammer is. As jealous now as she was on CTV. It just killed her that Dunne took a liking to Betsy. Ate her plum up. Saying that anyone with common sense can see that comments are left by multiple users is ridiculous. Of course someone who uses multiple names wouldn’t type the same thing over and over. Oh, but, oops...she did. Dead giveaway. There are other little boo-boos too that she just isn’t bright enough to catch. And to have the nerve to suggest that anyone who posts in opposition to her opinion is “Sprocket” herself. How stupid can you get. Nevermind, we can see it for ourselves. Grow up. See a psychologist. Get well. Move on.
Posted by Won'tGetFooedAgain/Sugaree - Jan 25, 2008 01:31 am CDT

To:

#17
Put the crack pipe down and face it- You’re a fool if you support Sprocket AKA BESTY ROSS. She is a liar and does not give a rip about Lana Clarkson. Someone precious was senselessly MURDERED BY PHIL SPECTOR. A human being. My friend of 13 years. No, many feel this way. Accept that fact. It still hurts like hell.It is neither SAD nor JUVENILE . It is real as all hell.

#18
I hope she is at the next trial also. You bet I do. I will stare into those dead eyes and that frigid heart with everything I’ve got. Jealous?
Are you joking? Seriously? It is Ms. Ross that is a flat out joke. Her so called writing is CRAP. Her pathological obsession with Rachelle Spector is sick. There is no “stalker”, thats just another paranoid delusion of hers to keep her PIS Blog alive.D. Dunne, M. Brown, The Accredited Press? That’s all she truly cares about , NOT Lana or Donna and Fawn.

#22
You have two good eyes, yet you you still don’t see. Not even worth commenting on. Pathetic now passes for insight.

#27
You’re simplistic argument has no meritAT ALL Try harder dear.

#28
Rayny- WHO CARES! Who is the REAL issue here? Mr. Dunne or Lana ?
Not a tough one. I will NEVER” Get over it” . That is a totally, rude and crude comment. I will remember that, Rayny.

KISS MY ROYAL IRISH ASS!!

Sugaree
Posted by Jim R. - Jan 25, 2008 01:50 am CDT

By the way, Rayny, it’s “you girl,” not “you guys”—just one insanely jealous and totally crazed and obsessed stalker. She tried to stir this up again on the CTV boards recently, as she does every chance she gets, even hijacking the lovely and talented Kim’s (Darwin Exception) comments section in the past to spew her sick jealousy. Just check out that blog site she posted above (the Queen of Mean thing). That is all the proof one needs that she is a pathetically sick soul. Aggravating as she is, I feel sorry for her...must suck to be so unwell. I commend Ms. Ross for taking the high road. Not entering the fray is best. Any interaction would likely only encourage the sickness and possibly cause it to escalate. I hesitated to even comment myself, but others reading need to know how grossly inaccurate this person’s portrayal of Ms. Ross is. I didn’t care for the somewhat catty nature of some of Ms. Ross’s postings, but my wife and I certainly otherwise enjoyed her blog greatly and look forward to her reporting in Spector2.
Posted by Getoverit - Jan 25, 2008 01:54 am CDT

All of you need to grow up and stop placing the ABA journal into the middle of a bunch of menopausal squabbling women. You all look like fools.
Posted by JIm R. - Jan 25, 2008 01:56 am CDT

Well, I must retract that it is one lone stalker. It seems there is at least one other who was to her credit willing to sign her name and who also does not care for Ms. Ross either. My comments apply to the person known to most from the CTV boards, the one who has been ripping Ms. Ross since day one. I am sorry to the commenter who was a friend of Lana’s. She was truly a unique beauty so full of life. Don’t worry....Spector will eventually be convicted.
Posted by Jordan P. - Jan 25, 2008 05:19 am CDT

One wonders how embarassed the Ms. Ward must be by these comments on her article. While she is a bit guilty for not checking facts given to her by the blogger, she can’t be blamed too much. She becomes one of many duped by the T&T writer, a true “Nutcases with no lives.”

Problem here is this Nutcase has an alterior motive and uses the blog to duoe real people out of money and gifts.

Kudos to the ABA for allowing these comments to remain. What a shame the legal profession has been brought into all this, however, perhaps it will show, if a trial lawyer or Prosecutor needs inside information on their trial, true crime blogs written by those trained in neither law nor journalism may not be worth the effort.
Posted by Penny - Jan 25, 2008 08:00 am CDT

Looks like its hard for some of these people to understand that not everyone cares for this “sprocket” person. She certainly sounds as though she might not have the following she would profess to have. Some people got it, some don’t, looks like she falls into the latter catagory.
Posted by Ann - Jan 25, 2008 08:51 am CDT

Re: #18

I am most certainly not a “clone” but just one of many it appears who have had their eyes opened to “Sprocket” and her many faces. Sad to admit that I too was taken in but thankfully sanity finally took over. She’s a sham, a charlatan - nothing more.

Why does it have to be “jealousy” that brings out these negative comments? Could it possibly, just possibly be, that this is all well deserved by her? Could it possibly be that Ms. Ross wronged so many for so long that it has now come back to bite her in her butt?

As for her stalker, if you look at the BIG picture you may see that it was the exact opposite. Think about it.
Posted by Gloria - Jan 25, 2008 09:14 am CDT

This ONE stalker that JimR. speaks of is really a myth started by Ms.Ross. In actuality, and I have seen this personally, Ms. Ross is obsessed with HER! Of course she doesn’t “get into the fray”, instead, she gets her Cyber pals to do it for her just as she has here. She is such a cowering wimp she can’t even take up for herself, wise up gals, she is making you look like the fools!
Posted by HotSack - Jan 25, 2008 10:18 am CDT

Jim R. ~ yeah, right. Do you want ot be a man?? How did she manipulate you to this extreme? Are you on the BTD menu which resulted in your losing your commen sense and integrity? The fact that Sprockcrotch read supposedly private PM’s on ‘her’ TCS board is despicable. She should be ashamed of herself, but when you’re that self-absorbed, I guess that’s not posible. She’s a sham.
Posted by nochitsherlockzone - Jan 25, 2008 10:18 am CDT

The Sprockettes are as obvious as the breastuses avatars they use on the tittilating alter ego message board. You know, the one that is all whips and chains and sexual innuendo? Holistic cures and diets by day and “disengage your jaw” at night. Oh, and swallow and the other word are properly spelled here, though totally disgusting when posted on another board. Sleazy Sleaza. Better to be “menopausal” than acting like a Dirty Shame on other boards.
Posted by Melinda Jones - Jan 25, 2008 10:30 am CDT

Well I actually wish she would come to see just how pathalogical the same trolls following her at CTV have become. She never said once SHE discovered the Rachel picture, she never once made a claim without having seen it first hand in court or used someone’s else’s observations and claiming them as the source. If you read her reporting on the trial and her blog, she faithfully credits anyone involved with information she’s used. You also couldn’t have found a more faithful admirer of Lana Clarkson or friend to her family than Sprocket was. What is the only weapon a jealous, beaten person has on a place like this - why lies of course. Nothing changes and you clones would be funny if this weren’t someone else’s site but your own you’re using to spread your vitriol. Does the site mentioned in your first post not get enough traffic Jabet/Anne/Gertrude?