Jackson Trial Fiasco Fear-Echoes of ANS case 23.1.11
Sinderella
Posts: 1,334
I read this last weekend,and ripped it out the paper to remind me to write about it on here but then I was M.I.A for a week.
I don't read newspapers,especially this kind of trash but I found this on a train and stole the page in question in the name of research <!-- s --><!-- s -->
The article is about how the Murray case echoes the Anna Nicole Smith case.
No one was held accountable for her death in the end.
I actually hadn't thought to look into the similarities between the two cases since there are a billion other things going on, but since I am off this weekend,i'll just add it to the to do list with the other 29573million things.
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/173209
I don't read newspapers,especially this kind of trash but I found this on a train and stole the page in question in the name of research <!-- s --><!-- s -->
The article is about how the Murray case echoes the Anna Nicole Smith case.
No one was held accountable for her death in the end.
I actually hadn't thought to look into the similarities between the two cases since there are a billion other things going on, but since I am off this weekend,i'll just add it to the to do list with the other 29573million things.
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/posts/view/173209
MICHAEL JACKSON TRIAL FIASCO FEAR
DAILY STAR SUNDAY
Michael Jackson’s family fears legal wrangling will mean no one will be held responsible for his death
23rd January 2011
By Dominik Lemanski
MICHAEL Jackson’s family fears legal wrangling will mean no one will be held responsible for his death.
It would be a chilling echo of the Anna Nicole Smith case.
The former model and TV star, right, died in 2007 aged 39 after an accidental drug overdose.
Her boyfriend Howard Stern initially faced drugs conspiracy charges.
He used his name to obtain prescriptions for the beauty while keeping her privacy intact.
But the charges have been overturned after a judge declared Stern never intended to “defraud” when obtaining drugs for Smith.
It is a move Jackson lawyer Brian Oxman fears could be repeated in the trial of Conrad Murray, the King of Pop’s doctor.
Speaking exclusively to the Daily Star Sunday Mr Oxman said: “If the Anna Nicole Smith case is any indication, that took three years after her death to get to trial and the result of that trial was absolutely stunning.
“While the evidence here of Dr Murray’s incompetence is just overwhelming there is not one shred of evidence of intent presented by the prosecution. Not one fact of Conrad Murray wanting to injure Michael Jackson.
“Howard Stern put up that defence and Sandeep Kapoor [her doctor] put up that defence.
“These defendants defended on the grounds that ‘We did not want to hurt Anna Nicole, we were trying to help her’ and you are going to hear the same defence from Conrad Murray.”
Dr Kapoor, was acquitted of all charges against him in October.
Earlier this month a judge also dismissed drugs conspiracy charges against the former model’s psychiatrist Dr Khristine Eroshevich.
Meanwhile, Dr Murray has pleaded not guilty to the involuntary manslaughter of Jackson and is due back in court on Tuesday.
He is accused of giving the singer a lethal dose of the anaesthetic propofol and other sedatives.
Comments
Well that's in case we're right about the hoax and the trial and everything. You dont want to imagine they've manipulated the case, including the media and people...feeding them the A.N.Smith story so that everyone says..ah well..another mysterious death of a pop star. Just like Kurt Cobain, Marilyn Monroe, Elvis, Bruce Lee...and....and Michael Jackson. <!-- s:roll: -->:roll:<!-- s:roll: -->
<!-- m -->http://vigilantcitizen.com/?p=3925<!-- m -->
When Insiders Expose the Ugly Side of the Entertainment Industry
Thank You Michael. I appreciate your strength. Thank you for the warnings. <!-- s;) -->;)<!-- s;) -->
<!-- m -->http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/20 ... his-story/<!-- m --> Here is another parallel between Murray and Dr. Nick. Michael and Elvis; can't have one with out the other anymore, lol
Peace
So, the part in red doesn't make sense. You would think that Vernon would be more upset that all of those Rx's were in Elvis' name, rather than in other people's names. And, Vernon wasn't paying for it anyway so what did it matter to him?
Also contradictory was the part where he says Elvis' reliance was evident yet he died a natural death?