I feel very very weird about the way things go. <br /> :? :?<br /><br />Murray crying was weird - TS can you explain this? I think you can, as you suport the murder court now. He killed Michael by accident, he is very sorry and feels burdened with guilt, or he cried because he pittys himself.<br /><br />But prosecution's presentation was somehow unproper, with that blurred pic on the background. Like they wanted to create drama in the courtroom.<br />A real trial should be based ONLY ON REAL EVIDENCE, you know like fingerprints, DNA tests, medical examinations and so on. And real photos.<br /><br />The opening statements were not presenting that sort of evidence. But it's only the beginning.<br /><br />With much pain in my heart, I am waiting to see the exhibits each part has.
Gina he could be crying about anything;<br /><br /><br />1. Acting<br />2. Stressed, maybe the hoax has taken it's toll<br />3. He wanted to sleep and was bored to death
<br />The jury is not allowed to get any information about the trial from the internet, so whatever we discuss here should not have any influence on the verdict. <br />
<br /><br />Reminds me of what Judge Michael Pastor said at the end about not discussing it with anyone and not going on any social media sties or forums.<br /><br />P.S Welcome CaptainEO, enjoying the trial so far?<br />
<br /><br />Hello. Yes, I enjoy reading through these posts very much.
<br />Gina he could be crying about anything;<br /><br /><br />1. Acting<br />2. Stressed, maybe the hoax has taken it's toll<br />3. He wanted to sleep and was bored to death<br />
<br /><br />Maybe I'm crazy, but I'm obsessed about Conrad's prior association with Michael. Seems that he didn't exist before all of this. Are there any photos of the two of them together?
<br />Gina he could be crying about anything;<br /><br /><br />1. Acting<br />2. Stressed, maybe the hoax has taken it's toll<br />3. He wanted to sleep and was bored to death<br />
<br /> <br />He wasn't acting IMO, his emotion was real. The best hoax-explanation I can come up with is that he is a sensitive person and felt sorry for Michael being forced to fake his death... not convincing I know crash/ .<br />He cried because he felt emotional about something. What that "something" is - maybe our pshychologists can tell us more. Gema? Allforlove?
Two biggest things for me are... and I know they're old news.. but:<br />1) Dave Dave, come on; that was Michael. I mean, that was him, right?<br />2) Janet asked why she doesn't cry over loss... she smiles... "It's a survival tactic" or something along those lines...<br /><br />If one of my siblings suddenly passed away, I'd break down in tears every time their name was brought up... and I'm a big macho dude!
<br />Gina he could be crying about anything;<br /><br /><br />1. Acting<br />2. Stressed, maybe the hoax has taken it's toll<br />3. He wanted to sleep and was bored to death<br />
<br /> <br />He wasn't acting IMO, his emotion was real. The best hoax-explanation I can come up with is that he is a sensitive person and felt sorry for Michael being forced to fake his death... not convincing I know crash/ .<br />He cried because he felt emotional about something. What that "something" is - maybe our pshychologists can tell us more. Gema? Allforlove?<br />
<br /><br />I agree it seemed like real emotion about something, don't know what though but he just broke down, even though he is playing a role, the feelings are real, like when people say things about him, to him, the spotlight is on him, if I was him and were playing a role I'd probably break down too...<br /><br />@CaptainEO no pic or video with CM and MJ...you would think there would be at least one, but I think it's because Murray is representing MJ in the trial so MJ doesn't want us to see them as two separate entities or maybe he wants us to think he is really literally Murray, don't know though.
Welcome CaptainEO!<br /><br />Could Murray be an FBI agent, also skilled in acting (emotions and all)?<br /><br />Could the DA talking about the "illusion the next day" have been given the words to say by some "higher" authority, so that he still is unaware? But I'm pretty sure that Murray is in on the hoax from day 1, since he's a major player, KEY man.<br /><br />And that’s why Michael had to build all the believable details around the death story with the family so adamant that MJ was really dead, had enemies and was murdered. EVERYTHING had to be very real and graphic so all the target groups would take the bait and they did hook, line and sinker.<br /><br />
Andrea<br />Larry King was on HLN a few minutes ago and said he'd met Michael a few times but he never appeared on Larry's show. Then he looked into the camera for a few seconds and his eyes screamed "Dave Dave!" to me. LOL.
<br />Oh man! Love it! <br /><br />
Looking4truth<br />In addition, it can point to the common phrase with the big elephant in the room that Michael is really alive but no one is stating that in the courtroom at the moment.
<br />That’s so good! Blindness is like a veil over the eyes. We're amazed the non-believer fans can't see what we are seeing. They have the same access as us! The human brain is funny that way. It's seems people could be manipulated to believe almost anything with the right story-telling and props.<br /><br />
Andrea<br />And how many times have I heard that audio and seen the "death" pic now? It's being pounded into everyone's brains and it seems that's what people will take away from day one of the trial. A "doctored" photo to make it look "scary" (is it scary for you?) along with Michael's "haunting" voice. Thriller II ladies and gentlemen!
<br />In a way it is manipulating minds just like the coverage for 911 pounded the official story into our brains with the graphic images. This time for good and not evil.<br />
<br />Gina he could be crying about anything;<br /><br /><br />1. Acting<br />2. Stressed, maybe the hoax has taken it's toll<br />3. He wanted to sleep and was bored to death<br />
<br /> <br />He wasn't acting IMO, his emotion was real. The best hoax-explanation I can come up with is that he is a sensitive person and felt sorry for Michael being forced to fake his death... not convincing I know crash/ .<br />He cried because he felt emotional about something. What that "something" is - maybe our pshychologists can tell us more. Gema? Allforlove?<br />
<br /><br />I agree it seemed like real emotion about something, don't know what though but he just broke down, even though he is playing a role, the feelings are real, like when people say things about him, to him, the spotlight is on him, if I was him and were playing a role I'd probably break down too...<br /><br />@CaptainEO no pic or video with CM and MJ...you would think there would be at least one, but I think it's because Murray is representing MJ in the trial so MJ doesn't want us to see them as two separate entities or maybe he wants us to think he is really literally Murray, don't know though.<br />
<br /> <br />I agree, I had the feeling like he was feeling sorry for himself. He tried for a while to hold back the tears, but finally he couldn't. Maybe we should review what the lawyer was talking about when Conrad cried, it must have been something about what the lawyer said.
There just aren't enough hours in the day!<br /><br />I'm going to have to make some choices on where to spend my time over the coming days/weeks while the trial is on.<br /><br />I want to watch as much live coverage as I possibly can, that's top priority - to see and hear at first hand what's going on. I need to work and sleep - had only 5 hours last night and that's not going to be sustainable!<br /><br />I honestly don't know how I'm going to manage keeping up with the forum as well, so if I'm quiet it's not because I've left or stopped believing - if anything, yesterday's action in court has strengthened my faith - it had MJ's stamp all over it - scary photo, chilling audio, the big illusion - Thriller II!<br /><br />Keep the faith everyone - and keep watching!
<br />Gina he could be crying about anything;<br /><br /><br />1. Acting<br />2. Stressed, maybe the hoax has taken it's toll<br />3. He wanted to sleep and was bored to death<br />
<br /> <br />He wasn't acting IMO, his emotion was real. The best hoax-explanation I can come up with is that he is a sensitive person and felt sorry for Michael being forced to fake his death... not convincing I know crash/ .<br />He cried because he felt emotional about something. What that "something" is - maybe our pshychologists can tell us more. Gema? Allforlove?<br />
<br /><br />I agree it seemed like real emotion about something, don't know what though but he just broke down, even though he is playing a role, the feelings are real, like when people say things about him, to him, the spotlight is on him, if I was him and were playing a role I'd probably break down too...<br /><br />@CaptainEO no pic or video with CM and MJ...you would think there would be at least one, but I think it's because Murray is representing MJ in the trial so MJ doesn't want us to see them as two separate entities or maybe he wants us to think he is really literally Murray, don't know though.<br />
<br /> <br />I agree, I had the feeling like he was feeling sorry for himself. He tried for a while to hold back the tears, but finally he couldn't. Maybe we should review what the lawyer was talking about when Conrad cried, it must have been something about what the lawyer said.<br />
<br /><br />I think it was around the time the defence attorney was talking about MJ and CM's relationship, how they were friends etc. and about what the jury would hear from the defence in the coming days.
Hey guys! I’m still here and I still believe. I’m not going anywhere. But I don’t really get on here like before because the forum is soooooo damn slow! I mean no insult to Souza or Mo. I just wish that it was as fast as it was when we had the old version. I like the new look and everything else that has been done but it takes forever for pages to load. I would say that it’s my computer but I don’t have this problem anywhere else that I go on the internet. *sigh*<br /><br />Well…Anyway…<br /><br />Sorry if this has been mentioned before somewhere else and I’m also sorry if this is the wrong place. <br /><br />BUT….<br /><br />Did anyone else notice the V for Vendetta presence on Showbiz Tonight in the interview portion that was done on the outside of the courtroom with two individuals from opposing sides? One was a Michael Jackson fan and one was a supporter of Conrad Murray>> (I believe that this was the same man that Pearl Jr. interviewed in one of her videos).<br /><br />There was a BIG poster in the background that was professionally done. This poster featured half of the V mask and half of Michael’s face. They were placed together side by side to reveal a complete face - one side being Michael’s face and the other side being Vs face. The poster was black and the face was in color. The bottom of the poster featured red font that stated ‘This Is It’. There were words at the top but I couldn’t make them out. I DVRed it so I’ll go back and see if I can figure out what the top of the poster says.<br /><br />And then there was a V Mask resting right below this big poster. <br /><br />Before the reporter started talking to them, the camera panned around to give the viewer an idea as to how many people were outside the courtroom. After that, the camera man zoomed in toward where the individuals that were going to be interviewed were. (Yes they were next to each other) And as he did this, it seemed like the camera man made sure that we would see the poster and the mask as the reporter began to interview them. She spoke with the Michael Jackson fan first.<br /><br />All through the interview with the MJ fan, the mask was in view at the bottom corner of the screen.<br /><br />This just had to be deliberate in my opinion. There were plenty of fans and even places that could have been chosen. Why film in an area where such things that relate to the hoax happen to be in the background? <br /><br />I’ll try to find video and/or photos of this if I can. If I find anything, I’ll be sure to add it to this post.<br /><br />As for the topic of this redirect…I personally believe that this is both a hoax and sting court. Most of what I have observed in the coverage of the trial has already been addressed so I don’t want to be repetitive. XD <br /><br />I just thought the ‘V’ clue-drop was too ironic and amusing to ignore. LOL <br />
<br />4 pages and Souza is not here yet? <br />Where are you hiding Sou geek/ ?<br />Come on, it's not the same without you :?.<br />
<br /><br />LOL, here I am. I am sorry, but I have to split myself in 3 parts lately. The trial, the forum and something else I am trying to read up on. Besides that, I have to sleep, eat and work as well. So that's why I am a little late.<br /><br />@TS: You are going to defend the murder theory again? lolol/ You brave man! Or do you like it being kicked in the ass? Because I will be standing right behind you with my boots! Nice hint on the 777 bottles of propofol by the way, since that was a huge part of the prosecution's opening statements. I was singing to myself "777 bottles of propofol on the ground, 777 bottles of prop'... etc. Didn't make it to the end though, which was Ed's fault. Man, how boring is he? Poor Murray, I would have fired him and hired Mesereau.<br /><br />But anyways. Since you yourself kinda said already that this is a kangaroo court (which means nothing more than HOAX court), you will be having a hard time with me while defending your murder theory. So now is the time to back down, otherwise: let the battle begin! lolol/<br /><br />I agree for the most part with bec and partially with Imconvinced, I think this is a hoax court "with STINGS attached". I think the prosecution knows, I think the judge knows, the defence knows and I think the jury knows. I also think that is why we had the delay between May and now. They questioned the potentials jurors back than and I think they needed the time to screen them, let them sign some papers and make sure they were up to date about this hoax court. The sting part is probably against the media and some of the witnesses, but that we will learn as the trial progresses.<br /><br />The reason I don't believe the sting is against the DA/prosecution team, is because for a personal vendetta, Mike (as far as I am aware) did not have any problems/issues with this team. Besides that, if this sting would be against the prosecution and they would be called out as a team wanting to hang an innocent man by all means, you can prosecute them and that's it. It will not change the system in my opinion, because the media will be all over it and make sure you will think this is a one time event. So I don't see the point in that.<br /><br />On the other hand, if you have all parties involved, except the media (and of course as bec pointed out some or maybe even most of the people in the courtroom doing their regular jobs) and they will present a case that is full of shit, like we have been seeing for 2+ years now, and the media will not do their homework and trying to convince you of Murray's guilt by siding with the prosecution in spite of evidence that Murray is innocent, you will be able to make a point. It is the media that plants the idea in your head whether or not someone is guilty. I know that they mostly just cover high profile cases, but still they are able through these cases to give the viewers a general idea of how to decide whether or not a person is guilty. Those viewers will eventually turn up as jurors in a case and will have that printed in their minds. It is not about the real evidence, it is about the way they present a case. If you tell a lie big enough, the public will believe it. <br /><br />In my opinion, the only reason Mike won in 2005, was because he had a lawyer that was so damn good, that the jury had no other choice than to find him not guilty. If he had Ed Chernoff as a lawyer, he would have been a dead man. NOT because he was guilty, but because he wouldn't have a lawyer that could make the jury see that the prosecution was lying. <br /><br />There was a huge contrast in those opening statements that I noticed. The prosecution was overall convincing (not to us, but you get me), had a well layed out story and the DA was well spoken and handsome. It has been scientifically proven that you can convince people more easily if you are handsome and well spoken. Then we have short, less handsome and stuttering Ed. Be honest here: did you all follow him as well as the DA? I saw in chat how people clicked away and said it was too boring to look at. I agree, but that doesn't mean that he didn't have a convincing story. I was very tired at the moment, so I will have to listen to his statement again, but as I remember, Ed tried to explain how propofol works and how Murray couldn't have killed Michael the way the prosecution want to believe you. He said the word 'science' more than once, making a point that you should look at the actual scientific evidence, instead of just the emotional 'Murray killed a drug addict who needed help, he was only 50 years old, look at him laying there on that trolley" kind of talk. Next to that, he even gave a hint that MJ isn't dead at all, by saying he first swallowed 8 pills that could take 6 people out, before he injected/swallowed the propofol. If he was out, how could he have taken the fatal dose of propofol? He would have been asleep for hours. But the public will side with the prosecution, because they will play with your emotions, just like the media does. MJ is the poor little victim, Murray is the doctor from hell, like Gavin was the poor little victim in 2005, and MJ the babysitter from hell. But Sneddon was darn ugly and stupid as well, so luckily their plan didn't work back then. But you can see how the media backed Sneddon even more when they realized they had a huge lion to fight (Mesereau).<br /><br />It's people like Diane Demon, Nancy Disgrace and all other filthy reporters, that should be the target of the sting. They will plant the "Murray is guilty" verdict in the heads of the jurors. Those jurors DO watch the coverage of the case at night, there is no escape. The media doesn't search for evidence, they will try to dig up dirt on Murray to show you. Stuff that wouldn't be allowed in court, but what can be shown on TV. I always think of the movie 'A Time To Kill' where Matthew (the lawyer) says things in court he is not allowed to. He gets slapped for it, but he doesn't care, because he SAID it and the jury HEARD it. It is printed in their minds, even though they may not take it into consideration for the verdict, but he knows they will. That is exactly what the media does. Whatever they say about Murray, the jury may not take it into consideration for the verdict, but the will, because they HEARD it. And it takes a damn good lawyer to 'deprogram' the jury. Not everyone is rich enough to pay for their own 'Tom Mesereau' and that is why IMO many innocent people are condemned, in spite of strong evidence that they are innocent.<br /><br />As for the picture that was shown: that's a BS picture. Why is the quality so bad? Looks like it's 50 years old. Where are his legs? We all know Mike has stelts, did they cut them off? He probably posed for it, before they photoshopped it to make it look like this. If you are worried about this picture, I really don't get how you made it this far, because I have seen way worse things. TMZ pointed out how the prosecution is working on the public's emotion:<br /><br />
[size=18pt]MICHAEL JACKSON'S DEATH PHOTO<br />Frightening Intentions? [/size]<br />9/27/2011 1:05 PM PDT BY TMZ STAFF<br /><br /><br /><br />It seems the prosecution wanted to give the Michael Jackson death photo a murky, gritty treatment before it was presented in court this morning -- because it was clearly touched up to look as daunting as possible. <br /><br />It appears the photo is NOT the original pic -- because now it includes a tattered border, a morgue-esque green hue ... and the word "Homicide" printed over MJ's body in a grainy, police-style font. <br /><br />The prosecution used the photo as the background for a slide-show presentation in court. <br /><br />Compare the pic to a cleaned up version of the photo (below) -- is the murky photo more likely to shake the jury? <br /><br /><br /><br />We gotta ask ...<br /><br />Prosecution's image<br />Misleading 63%<br />Fair 37%<br />Total Votes: 55,264
<br /><br />That tape recording is epic. It reminded me of that interview in (I think) '89 where Mike talks about that intro for 'I just can't stop loving you'. Where he said he recorded that when he was in bed. Like Jermaine said in his book, MJ tape recorded almost everything, I bet he recorded this himself too. Is it really him? Yes I think it is and I wonder how many times he had to start again because he couldn't stop laughing. <br /><br />The first smoking gun for me (also indicating that the prosecution is in on it) was at the start of the DA's opening statement. Michael JOSEPH Jackson died. We all know for a very long time (and thank you Jermaine for confirming that in your book!) that his middle name is JOE. You really can't tell me that the prosecution wouldn't know. They read like we do, they must know his middle name is Joe, so if the sting would have been against them, they would have smelled a rat right at the beginning and I don't see them going through with the case against Murray. Also the talk of the '777 bottles of propofol' was interesting, since TS clearly wanted to point that out. (this is by the way not relevant. Even if Murray ordered that much, you still have to prove that he injected it all into MJ, which seems HIGHLY unlikely, since a waaaaaaay smaller dose would be lethal already.<br /><br />
on 1317151606:
<br /> :idea: Murray isn't board certified=? not a doctor? This is new confirmation.
<br /><br />Again the prosecution playing with the jury/public. As Imconvinced figured out, it's not even required to be board certified. So it's merely to put Murray in a bad light. People will think he's not a doctor, but this information doesn't say that. Manipulation.<br /><br />
on 1317151606:
:idea: Voice recording, my what a deep voice you have Michael, lol. I don't understand how it is admissible for the Prosecutor to state that this recording is "proof of intoxication". There is simply no way that this could be considered proof of intoxication in a court of law. No objection from the Defense on it either.
<br /><br />The fact that Chernoff didn't object and let the DA go on with this, tells me that the plan is to sort of 'remake' the 2005 trial with one huge difference: this time the innocent black man has a lousy lawyer that can't defend his client as he should. Which will make me think that Murray will be found guilty even though the evidence, if properly investigated, will prove the opposite.<br /><br />
on 1317151606:
:idea: Prosecution: [the day before his death] 'Michael was excited about the Illusion that was to begin the next day'. Great, just great, that the Prosecution slipped that in.
<br /><br />Ding dong, everyone paying attention? The DA even asked Kenny what that illusion meant, and Kenny answered that MJ would disappear from a bed. I wonder how many people noticed that huge 'coincidence'. <br /><br />
on 1317151606:
:idea: Murray's email at 11:15am on 6/25/09, 'all press reports regarding Michael Jackson's health are fallacious'. That's an incredible true statement. Blink and you'll miss it type.
<br /><br />Ding dong again!<br /><br />
on 1317151606:
:idea: Close captioning during the Prosecution's opening statement wrote "Conradt Murder", quickly erased "Murder" and replaced it with "Murray". If CC'ing is from court, it's a subliminal clue. If CC'ing is from the network, it exposes the prevalent bias in the case. "Murder" speaks for itself but "Contradt" is interesting in it's similarity to "Contract" and when preceeding "Murder" it reminds me of the early attempts at anagraming Murray's name to "murder by contract".
<br /><br />Interesting, I missed that. Need to rewatch.<br /><br />
on 1317151606:
:idea: Two paramedics pictured, as we discovered already, one white, one black. Neither paramedic in the ambulance pic was black so what's that all about?
<br /><br />There allegedly was a third, because someone had to drive. Do we know who that was? I guess we will find out later, but that might be something to keep an eye on.<br /><br />
on 1317151606:
:idea: Stretcher pic: He's not bald, doesn't look old, or emaciated, and certainly not like a cancer patient. He looks exactly like Michael Jackson. What's he wearing? It appears to have sleeves. It is a hospital snuggy? He appears to be wearing what might be a watch. Where is the endo-tracheal tube? The autopsy states it is still present and in place. It is certainly present in the ambulance pic. Who captioned it "Homicide"? It's a manslaughter trial.
<br /><br />I don't see the tube either, so if this picture was taken in the hospital, I would like to know who got it out and put it back in for the coroner (which is mission impossible with a corpse by the way. Even if you would get it back in, there would be terrible damage to the throat.)<br /><br /><br />
on 1317151606:
:idea: Chernoff: in regards to MJ, "He did an act... he did an act" repetitively stressed.
<br /><br />Probably because he's an ACTor. <br /><br />
on 1317151606:
:idea: Chernoff: in regards to helping the jury understand the evidence, "We will provide you The Sign." Love it. Little TS shout out there.
<br /><br />Damn, I missed that too. Thanks for the shout out TS. <br /><br />Okay, I will be back after reviewing/reading the opening statements again, plus the testimonies. I did love Kenny's though, he's such a sweet guy. And he said so many interesting things about the reasons Michael wanted to do this and how he cancelled everything else to be able to be a part of this. I will get back on that later as well.<br /><br />ps. My guess for level 7: I think the trial will indeed end somewhere around or before 10/28 (which is exactly 2 years after TII) and my guess is that the verdict will be read on 10/31 (Halloween) because that date will be EXACTLY 333 weeks after June 13, 2005, plus the obvious: It's Halloween. Court will not be closed: http://www.courts.ca.gov/holidays.htm I think level 7 will be about guessing/discussing the verdict.<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
<br />Hey guys! I’m still here and I still believe. I’m not going anywhere. But I don’t really get on here like before because the forum is soooooo damn slow! I mean no insult to Souza or Mo. I just wish that it was as fast as it was when we had the old version. I like the new look and everything else that has been done but it takes forever for pages to load. I would say that it’s my computer but I don’t have this problem anywhere else that I go on the internet. *sigh*<br />
<br /><br />FYI: Mo is not a part of this website anymore and the problem with the forum yesterday was due to extreme traffic overload. Too many people accessing it at the same time caused it to crash at times, so we probably need a larger hosting plan. We are looking into that right now. It has nothing to do with the new forum, because I can tell you with absolute certainty that the old one would have crashed even sooner and longer. So you need to give us some time and credit here.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
ps. When I say sting in regards to the media, I mean 'sting'. I think it's more of a wake-up call to the public to make them see how stupid they are and how they will lie to make you believe what they claim, but as for the real sting, I think that is more against individuals behind the curtain. Maybe some of the witnesses, maybe people we hear not much about and had to do with MJ's business. I don't think it is actual possible to prosecute media outlets for 'voicing their opinion', unless they are commiting a crime like we saw with Murdoch et al.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
Just WOW is all I can say (well not really)!!!! <br /> <br />Michael Jackson has the world's media eating out of his beautiful hands and the world is lapping it up!<br /> <br />What has gone down today has strengthened my resolve and understanding even more (if that is possible) that Michael is alive and controlling this whole amazing, wonderful, incredible adventure. I am sad that so many people will have missed out on this incredible journey that we have experienced together all these months.....or those who might possibly only manage to join in it with us at the end...like walking in at the end of an amazing film, watching the incredible end scenes but missing out on all the middle parts that built you up, made you understand and really got you there.<br /> <br />I have only managed to get on the forum tonight ...time zone differences meant the trial started here in Australia in the middle of the night and went through during my work day. I tried to sneak peaks on and off at work of the live stream. The morning "news" programs here were abuzz with the "death" picture and the "drugged recording" and when I first saw the picture on the news this morning my initial reaction was a brief F*cK!!!!! and then it was a gut wrenching burst of laughter.<br /> <br />What the hell happened to Michael's legs between the 24th June and the 25th June?....did someone shrink them...he looks like a body on a couple of halved popsticks...and as for the paramedics not recognising him and that he was bald???????...well it does look like his face and he has hair, so <br /> <br />Even my husband who think's Mj is dead had a look of disbelief on his face....that sort of look like "holy sh*t.....maybe she has been right all along" type of look. He really didn't even try to argue against me when I started saying how staged the pic was and how scripted the recording was.<br /> <br />Now I have caught up on everything that has happened today I am going for a hoax court mostly...but I am also going with some type of sting in there as well. I am still thinking about "the who/what" of the sting and I have some ideas in my head and am feeling it is the crappy,vile, parasitic tabloid media...but also something else......I am hoping that the coming days of the trial may shed more light on that aspect.<br /> <br />Keep the Faith. This is no worse than the Memorial, the Funeral, the ambulance picture or the autopsy report....just a hell of a lot more entertaining!!!! (so far)<br /> <br />I have no doubt Michael is going to serve up ALOT worse things to test us as believers, afterall this isn't only a journey/lesson for those that think Michael has died...it is also to test us...my thinking is we have to steel ourselves for worse to come...remember today was just the 1st day and as any good movie/theatrical performance/thriller...it gets much more scary before it gets better :shock: <br /> <br />The proportions of this are now just blowing my mind in what I think Michael has achieved.<br /> <br />Michael Jackson - I am in AWE (even more than I was before)!!! respect/ <br /> <br />
First of all, I'm so sorry because probably I'm repeating the things you guys already wrote. The trial ended at 3 am in my time and I slept just 3 hours and I'm still tired, so I couldn't read all 4 pages but I will definitely read them as soon as possible.<br /><br />The bumpy ride is on and the first day gave me different emotions. I must say that the trial was boring till Kenny popped up (on stage). geek/ What I realized was, the Head Prosecutor used many "Magic acts, Illusions" words when he was asking his questions to Kenny. And this made me ask myself, does he know? suspicious// And the way Kenny described illusion was interesting because he said the illusion was, Michael was going to DISAPPEAR in the bed and APPEAR again on the RISING cherry picker! And we know that Michael "disappeared" ("died") on his bed and he will be appearing back again and RISE! It was like Kenny was describing how Michael disappeared and will be appearing like a Magic trick in this hoax! <br /><br />Kenny also told about his movie plans which we know we're already in one of them. And Kenny was adorable when he was pissed at Ed. I love him. <br /><br />The picture of Michael they showed is just a GRAPHIC picture. It's not him of course. The voice record, I don't know if it's him or not but he was still talking about saving children. Clearing Michael's name and show the world how much he loves and cares for the children. <br /><br />There was an elephant in the room and I saw no other toys.<br /><br />The outfit of the Jackson family. What stood out to me at first was, Katherine's outfit. She was wearing an outfit with DOTS on. Was she trying to say CONNECT THE DOTS?<br /><br />Also the proforol bottle pictures reminded me of one of the posts TS made just a couple of days ago. The bottles on the wall! They were ON THE WALL really TS. I wanted to break them one by one.
<br />And back to the photo. Shouldn´t exhibits be shown numbered and unaltered?<br />
<br />Normally the evidence or exhibits would be numbered however the pic that the DA used as his background for his presentation does not qualify as evidence per the judges words before the opening statements. <br /><br />From my earlier post.
Judge said opening statements are not arguements or evidence. Opening statements are what the lawyers expect the evidence to prove, the end result.
<br /><br />
on 1317176047:
<br />
on 1317186716:
<br />
on 1317168437:
<br />And back to the photo. Shouldn´t exhibits be shown numbered and unaltered?<br />
<br />Normally the evidence or exhibits would be numbered however the pic that the DA used as his background for his presentation does not qualify as evidence per the judges words before the opening statements. <br /><br />From my earlier post.
Judge said opening statements are not arguements or evidence. Opening statements are what the lawyers expect the evidence to prove, the end result.
<br /><br />
on 1317176047:
<br />
Chernoff will present an addiction specialist, who will testify DR. ARNOLD KLEIN ADDICTED MICHAEL JACKSON TO DEMEROL.
<br />I've always leant towards hoax court, but if it's both, could Arnie be the target of the sting. The finger pointing has already begun in Chernoff's long winded opening statement.<br />
This is so the defense can plant reasonable doubt that it wasn't Murray who caused MJ's death. If another doc was giving him drugs prior to Murray taking care of MJ and Murray wasn't aware of that then he may be found not responsible, NOT GUILTY.<br /><br />
on 1317176974:
<br />And regardless of what happened in that room on June 25th...there is no dispute that the contents of the room include a substance that was obtained illegally. Applied Pharmacy 'supplied' a doctor with 15 litres of a controlled substance
<br />At the time when Murray purchased the Propofol is was not illegal nor was it considered a controlled substance. I found info on this and posted it in one of the other levels. I will look for the info later. What I found said that all it took to get the Propofol was a licensed Dr. or a script. /cook/ <br />
.
<br />I've always leant towards hoax court, but if it's both, could Arnie be the target of the sting. The finger pointing has already begun in Chernoff's long winded opening statement.<br />
This is so the defense can plant reasonable doubt that it wasn't Murray who caused MJ's death. If another doc was giving him drugs prior to Murray taking care of MJ and Murray wasn't aware of that then he may be found not responsible, NOT GUILTY.<br /><br />
on 1317176974:
<br />And regardless of what happened in that room on June 25th...there is no dispute that the contents of the room include a substance that was obtained illegally. Applied Pharmacy 'supplied' a doctor with 15 litres of a controlled substance
<br />At the time when Murray purchased the Propofol is was not illegal nor was it considered a controlled substance. I found info on this and posted it in one of the other levels. I will look for the info later. What I found said that all it took to get the Propofol was a licensed Dr. or a script. /cook/ <br />
<br /><br />What I don't understand about this is Klein isn't going to testify to rebuttal what any of that. Meaning, the defense and prosecution can say what ever they want and there isn't anyone (unless they are called to testify, but they can't do that unless they were already on the witness list) who can do or say otherwise. How is that fair? I don't care if it's Klein or someone else. My thought, even if they have a professional come in and say that it was Klein who made Michael addicted it should be considered speculation. Just my thought though.
There's been some really great points supporting both hoax and sting possibilities...hopefully TS will chirp in at some point and share his 2 cents <br /> <br />As for the DA being part of the hoax or a sting 'target'...I can see both as a possibility....there's been good arguments for both. What's important to remember, IMO, is that a 'sting' doesn't necessarily seek to uncover laws broken...as TS pointed to, the focus of the FBI is 'corruption,' and to a lesser extent, 'manipulation'. The media have broken no laws, per se, over the years when they slandered Mike (i.e. the Demon, Batshit got away with their evilness because there are loopholes in the law). Likewise, a lawyer who presents something as 'evidence' without authenticating it...can easily find protection under the 'law' in saying that they were trusting their source(s) and/or believed the 'evidence' to be legit. In that sense, the 'law' works in their favor...hence, when all is said and done, they have not broken any 'laws' in the eyes of the system. That a lawyer, during opening statements, can present just about anything under the sun and insinuate that it is 'truth' (or why present it?)...without having to prove authenticity...leaves a VAST amount of room for 'corruption' and 'manipulation.' THIS is the judicial system...a system in place to determine the fate of individuals....where those who are called upon to pass judgement (the jurors) are manipulated by lawyers (often on both sides), while ONLY been shown what the court decides is relevant (which is usually about 10% of the actual 'truth'). And we call that 'justice'?<br /> <br />Likewise, Murray may not have broken any 'laws' in obtaining the Propofol...and the pharmacy may not have broken any 'laws' in supplying the drug....but it's a blatant example of corruption and 'manipulation' of power/position.<br /> <br />This particular DA team may be 'in' on it...not sure about that just yet. But IMO when this is all over, a HUGE light will be shed on how corrupt and manipulative the judicial system, the media, doctors, pharmacies, etc. have become....EVEN if they haven't broken any 'laws'.<br /> <br />With L.O.V.E. always.
Comments
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.""For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.""For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."