It looks like once again America’s favorite check out line magazine is going back to court for yet another law suit against them. I am sure this is of no surprise to anyone and to be honest I do have mixed feelings about this case.

roy kronkBack in 2008 a man that worked as a meter reader in Orange County, Florida, reported spotting the remains of a little girl that was at the time supposedly missing from Orlando, little Caylee Anthony who became a well known name world wide after her mother was arrested for her murder and later found not guilty which upset most people around the world.

To get back to Roy Kronk, he says that the National Enquirer Magazine misrepresented him as an accomplice to the murder, as a man that inappropriate behavior with young girls and treats women with disrespect. Kronk has filed a defamation suit against the magazine asking the courts to award him $15 million to compensate him for any and all damages. He says that this has marred his reputation by all the lies that were printed about him in the magazine.

Kronk claims he became a victim after he discovered Caylee’s remains when suddenly he got vicious attacks against his character and motives. His attorney, Howard Marks, says that an article printed that Kronk had killed Caylee with a very small subtitle that stated “Casey Anthony says.”

“We believe the article is obviously false and misleading. The article also included claims that Kronk engaged in “inappropriate behavior with young girls” and “holding women against their will,” as well as a statement that “He was probably the one that murdered Caylee or had something to do with it.”

Of course the Enquirer’s general council, Mike Antonello claims that they took a neutral stance on the issue and ensured that they clearly stated that the allegations were not supported by the authorities.

An attempt by the attorney for the magazine, Deanna Shullman, to get the judge to decide on the case without a jury, failed Monday. Judge Margaret Schreiber wants to hear arguments from both sides before deciding. Shullman claims that the headlines that the magazine used were more for getting the readers attention and were not meant to be defamatory.

Kronk’s attorney completely disagrees. He doesn’t think the Enquirer’s article was accurate and as to it being defamatory to Kronk, they certainly believe it is and they it is fair to assume that if the to assume a jury reading it would believe his client was in on or possibly killed Caylee.

I’d like to know what you, the readers think. I covered the murder case of Casey Anthony. I was on it from the beginning to the end and I still keep up with what happens. Personally nothing Roy Kronk ever did had me wondering if he was guilty of being involved but I know some did wonder about it. I still say no one will ever pay for the murder of that precious child because like 90% of the world I believe that the one that did it will never pay for it. With that thought do you think Roy Kronk has a case here? Does he deserve to be compensated? Has he really suffered from the magazine’s article? Or is he thinking this would be his last shot of getting any money out of all this? I guess we will soon find out if the judge thinks so, after all we have to accept what the judge says I guess.

At least I know one thing for sure about all this. Little Caylee Anthony is in a happy place and no one will ever hurt her again! God bless you Caylee. The world will never forget you!

Jan Barrett

Be Sociable, Share!