LOL, 'rumbling' was probably not the best choice of words was it?! 'Crawling' any better?<br /><br />My guess is this appeal is being saved for after the AEG trial ...... to spin things out even longer! Could go on years yet, with the snail pace of the legal system (and the hoax system!).
Latest update:<br /><br />10/03/2013 Letter sent to: Counsel: This court requests the parties to file and serve supplemental letter briefs, not to exceed three single-spaced pages, on or before October 15, 2013, addressing the following: Assuming appellant is released from custody while this appeal is pending, what effect, if any, does his release have upon his challenge to the term of the sentence imposed by the trial court on his conviction.? Counsel is instructed to e-file their supplemental letter briefs at 2d1.clerk7@jud.ca.gov. [letter emailed to counsel]<br /><br />http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/dockets.cfm?dist=2&doc_id=1999218&doc_no=B237677
Latest updates:<br /><br />10/15/13 Letter brief filed. Plaintiff and Respondent: The People<br /> Attorney: Office of the Attorney General<br /><br />10/15/13 Letter brief filed. Defendant and Appellant: Conrad Robert Murray<br /> Attorney: Valerie G. Wass<br /><br />I take it they've answered the question: "Assuming appellant is released from custody while this appeal is pending, what effect, if any, does his release have upon his challenge to the term of the sentence imposed by the trial court on his conviction.?"<br /><br />Anyone else think this sounds like paving the way for a huge claim for compensation for 2 years wrongly imprisoned?<br /><br />
<br />Latest updates:<br /><br />10/15/13 Letter brief filed. Plaintiff and Respondent: The People<br /> Attorney: Office of the Attorney General<br /><br />10/15/13 Letter brief filed. Defendant and Appellant: Conrad Robert Murray<br /> Attorney: Valerie G. Wass<br /><br />I take it they've answered the question: "Assuming appellant is released from custody while this appeal is pending, what effect, if any, does his release have upon his challenge to the term of the sentence imposed by the trial court on his conviction.?"<br /><br />Anyone else think this sounds like paving the way for a huge claim for compensation for 2 years wrongly imprisoned?<br />
<br /><br /> :suspect: :icon_e_surprised: Anything it's possible :icon_e_wink: .
<br />Latest updates:<br /><br />10/15/13 Letter brief filed. Plaintiff and Respondent: The People<br /> Attorney: Office of the Attorney General<br /><br />10/15/13 Letter brief filed. Defendant and Appellant: Conrad Robert Murray<br /> Attorney: Valerie G. Wass<br /><br />I take it they've answered the question: "Assuming appellant is released from custody while this appeal is pending, what effect, if any, does his release have upon his challenge to the term of the sentence imposed by the trial court on his conviction.?"<br /><br />Anyone else think this sounds like paving the way for a huge claim for compensation for 2 years wrongly imprisoned?<br />
<br />Curls, good question! I think that if released the 10-28-13 or after, CM appealed to defend his alleged innocence. Now I wonder. testify this time? I would like to know your version of 06-25-09, maybe the "bomb" that have said, the expose on the appeal ...<br />Lack little to the 10-28-13, we see that CM takes direction after that day.
@marumjj, my understanding of Appeal Courts is that they don't hear witnesses and/or new testimony (so Murray won't get to drop his bombshell) - a panel of judges/lawyers simply deals with points of law and procedure that may have adversely influenced the outcome of the original trial.<br /><br />Here's part of an article from back in July (originally posted by iLoveyoumore on page 1 of this thread) about the areas Wass claims were dodgy:<br /><br />In her latest filing on Wednesday (10Jul13), she claimed jurors should have been allowed to view Jackson's contract with concert promoters AEG Live during the trial in order to understand the pressures the singer faced to perform the 50 shows and consider Murray's argument that the Thriller hitmaker had self-administered the drugs which killed him, even though witnesses had testified during the case that it was the doctor who had administered painkillers and anaesthetics.<br /><br />Wass writes, "Admission of the contract or evidence of its terms was necessary to show what was at stake for Jackson if he could not meet his contractual obligations, which was pertinent to establish his state of mind which may have explained his conduct on the day he died, and supported the defense theory of the case."<br /><br />In the documents, Wass also repeated her previous concerns about Judge Michael Pastor's refusal to sequester the jury and ban TV cameras from the courtroom, suggesting the "unprecedented fame of Jackson" and the heavy media coverage ruined any chances of Murray receiving a fair trial.<br /><br />http://www.starpulse.com/news/Dave_Simpson/2013/07/11/conrad_murrays_lawyer_files_papers_to_?ref_src=topic_news_rss&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter<br /><br />Interestingly, the next stage on from Appeal Court is The Supreme Court, also known as The Court Of Last Resort!! http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0549697/ Episode 7 of course!!<br />
<br /><br />That time expired along time ago lol,even before it started :icon_e_wink: .<br />I found very intresting the comment ,that a woman named Victoria left lol :icon_e_surprised: :icon_geek: :<br /><br />Hello IMDB<br /> by<br />victoria_kouts<br />» Sun Jul 25 2010 14:32:26 Flag ▼ | Reply |<br />IMDb member since September 2006<br />Dear IMDB,<br /><br />I'm sure there has been a mistake regarding the info about the Director being Mr.Michael Jackson.Could you please kindly remove this?<br /><br />with the L.O.V.E<br />.V.<br /><br /><br />Re: Hello IMDB<br />image for user cat_vincent24<br />by<br />cat_vincent24<br />» Mon Jul 26 2010 18:38:36 Flag ▼ | Reply |<br />IMDb member since January 2005<br />Maybe Michael really is directing this? Before he "died" he said he wanted to spend more time with film and directing.<br /><br />Never underestimate the genius of Michael Jackson, my sweet angelic warrior!<br /><br />http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1572197/board/nest/167565815?ref_=tt_bd_1<br /><br /> :WTF: :WTF: :WTF: :LolLolLolLol: !!!!<br /><br /><br />
<br /><br />That time expired along time ago lol,even before it started :icon_e_wink: .<br />I found very intresting the comment ,that a woman named Victoria left lol :icon_e_surprised: :icon_geek: :<br /><br />Hello IMDB<br /> by<br />victoria_kouts<br />» Sun Jul 25 2010 14:32:26 Flag ▼ | Reply |<br />IMDb member since September 2006<br />Dear IMDB,<br /><br />I'm sure there has been a mistake regarding the info about the Director being Mr.Michael Jackson.Could you please kindly remove this?<br /><br />with the L.O.V.E<br />.V.<br /><br /><br />Re: Hello IMDB<br />image for user cat_vincent24<br />by<br />cat_vincent24<br />» Mon Jul 26 2010 18:38:36 Flag ▼ | Reply |<br />IMDb member since January 2005<br />Maybe Michael really is directing this? Before he "died" he said he wanted to spend more time with film and directing.<br /><br />Never underestimate the genius of Michael Jackson, my sweet angelic warrior!<br /><br />http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1572197/board/nest/167565815?ref_=tt_bd_1<br /><br /> :WTF: :WTF: :WTF: :LolLolLolLol: !!!!<br />
<br /><br />The page now makes no mention of a director at all, not even a "former" director. But maybe that's normal when a work is "abandoned" (?). <br /><br />(Off-topic, FYI. Don't know if this has ever been mentioned on the forum. I remember looking at the IMDb page for This is It during the last week of October 2009, when the movie was released. It, too, listed Michael Jackson as director. The page also listed Conrad Murray as an actor and listed the film status as ongoing. And again, this was in October 2009. Unfortunately, I took no screen shot, just remember finding it puzzling :icon_e_confused: ; that, along with what looked to be an elaborate production for a supposedly impromptu documentary.)
Just checked up on Murray's appeal page, http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/case/dockets.cfm?dist=2&doc_id=1999218&doc_no=B237677 as I do every so often, and I noticed near the top after 'The People v Murray' it says 'E-BRIEF PROJECT' I haven't noticed this before. It may of course have been there all along, but I wonder what, if anything, it means.<br /><br />I checked on Wass and other attorney's cases in 2nd Appellate District on this page: http://appellatecases.courtinfo.ca.gov/search/searchResults.cfm?dist=2&search=attorney&start=1&query_attyLastName=wass&query_attyLawFirm= . Of 606 entries, I found 2 (with another attorney) listed as 'E-Brief Case', but no others, apart from Murray, have this 'E-brief project' description.<br /> <br />Looks like Murray's case has been picked to be part of some sort of special 'online project' - not that that comes as any great surprise! Probably means nothing, especially with those other 2 cases, but just thought I'd mention it.
<br />@marumjj, my understanding of Appeal Courts is that they don't hear witnesses and/or new testimony (so Murray won't get to drop his bombshell) - a panel of judges/lawyers simply deals with points of law and procedure that may have adversely influenced the outcome of the original trial.<br /><br />Here's part of an article from back in July (originally posted by iLoveyoumore on page 1 of this thread) about the areas Wass claims were dodgy:<br /><br />In her latest filing on Wednesday (10Jul13), she claimed jurors should have been allowed to view Jackson's contract with concert promoters AEG Live during the trial in order to understand the pressures the singer faced to perform the 50 shows and consider Murray's argument that the Thriller hitmaker had self-administered the drugs which killed him, even though witnesses had testified during the case that it was the doctor who had administered painkillers and anaesthetics.<br /><br />Wass writes, "Admission of the contract or evidence of its terms was necessary to show what was at stake for Jackson if he could not meet his contractual obligations, which was pertinent to establish his state of mind which may have explained his conduct on the day he died, and supported the defense theory of the case."<br /><br />In the documents, Wass also repeated her previous concerns about Judge Michael Pastor's refusal to sequester the jury and ban TV cameras from the courtroom, suggesting the "unprecedented fame of Jackson" and the heavy media coverage ruined any chances of Murray receiving a fair trial.<br /><br />http://www.starpulse.com/news/Dave_Simpson/2013/07/11/conrad_murrays_lawyer_files_papers_to_?ref_src=topic_news_rss&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter<br /><br />Interestingly, the next stage on from Appeal Court is The Supreme Court, also known as The Court Of Last Resort!! http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0549697/ Episode 7 of course!!<br />
<br /><br />Thanks curls, I'm clear now. In other words fits AEG case, MJ is guilty of his own death.<br />
<br /><br />Thanks for sharing Curls, very interesting.<br />So L.A Courts are gonna be busy this January 2014 with MJ's Hoax issues, Jan 2nd AEG appeal and Jan 9th CM appeal, lol
[size=14pt]Arguments for Conrad Murray to appeal scheduled in court next month[/size]<br />December 12, 2013<br /><br /><br /><br />A California court has scheduled arguments next month for Conrad Murray to appeal his involuntary manslaughter conviction. The 2nd District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles set arguments in the case for January 9, 2014.<br /><br />Former cardiologist Conrad Murray is appealing his 2011 conviction on various grounds. He says a judge excluded jurors from hearing key evidence and should have sequestered jurors on the high-profile case.<br /><br />The attorney general’s office has said the issues cited by Murray’s lawyers were not errors and are not a basis to give him a new trial.<br /><br />Murray was convicted of causing Michael Jackson’s death by giving him an overdose of the anesthetic propofol on June 25, 2009.<br /><br />Murray was released in October after serving nearly two years in jail.<br /><br />http://www.legendarymichaeljackson.nl/news/arguments-for-conrad-murray-to-appeal-scheduled-in-court-next-month/?
<br /><br />01/09/2014 Argument waived, cause submitted. <br />01/15/2014 Opinion filed. (Signed Unpublished)<br /> The judgment is affirmed. 68 pages; Woods-Perluss-Zelon.<br />01/29/2014 Filed request to modify opinion. Respondent's request for modification of opinion. (See request.)<br />01/30/2014 Order filed. Respondent's January 29, 2014 request to modify the court's opinion is denied.<br />01/30/2014 Rehearing petition filed. Appellant.<br />01/30/2014 Received: Valerie Wass returned 18 volumes of sealed reporter's transcripts (February 24, 2011; March 3, 2011; March 22, 2011; <br /> March 24, 2011; March 25, 2011; March 28, 2011; April 7, 2011; April 8, 2011; August 8, 2011; August 15, 2011; September 7, 2011; <br /> September 8, 2011; September 9, 2011; September 18, 2011; September 21, 2011; September 22, 2011; September 23, 2011; <br /> and September 30, 2011)<br />01/31/2014 Voice Mail message for: Voice mail message for Victoria Wilson, DAG re court would like respondent to file an answer to appellant's January 30, <br /> 2014 petition for rehearing by February 10, 2014. [See California Rules of Court, rule 8.268(b)(2).]<br />01/31/2014 Note: Notice to all counsel: Respondent is requested to file and serve by not later than February 10, 2014 an answer to appellant's <br /> January 30, 2014 petition for rehearing. (See Cal. Rules of Court, rule 8.268(b)(2).)
"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."
And another:<br /><br />02/03/2014 Errata filed to: Appellant's errata to the January 30, 2014 petition for rehearing. Filed with permission of the court.
<br />http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/conrad-murray-works-hard-criminal-appeal-alive-article-1.1603106<br /><br />Conrad Murray resurfaces in exclusive photo as Michael Jackson’s former doctor works hard to keep his criminal appeal alive <br />The petition was the first step for Murray to show he’s not giving up after an appellate court unanimously rejected his criminal appeal in a 68-page ruling last month.<br /><br /> <br /><br />Michael Jackson’s doctor is taking a hands-on approach to his ongoing criminal appeal and was heartened by a court ruling last Friday, his lawyer told the Daily News.<br /><br />Dr. Conrad Murray spent multiple nights last week working side-by-side with lawyer Valerie Wass on a petition for re-hearing filed Thursday, Wass said.<br /><br />The petition was the first step for Murray to show he’s not giving up after an appellate court unanimously rejected his criminal appeal in a 68-page ruling last month.<br /><br />The court could have summarily denied the rehearing petition outright but instead responded within 24 hours asking the Attorney General’s office to file its response argument by Monday, Wass said.<br /><br />“Dr. Murray is nowhere near done fighting this conviction. He worked closely with me on this, meticulously going through the opinion page by page,” Wass told The News Tuesday. “He’s determined to continue this appeal as long as he needs to.”<br />And if the petition ultimately fails, the cardiologist convicted of involuntary manslaughter in 2011 plans to file a follow-up petition for review in the California Supreme Court later this month, she said.<br /><br />Murray, 60, was the last person to see the King of Pop alive before his overdose death on June 25, 2009.<br /><br />A coroner report found the “Thriller” singer died from an overdose of the surgery-strength anesthetic propofol.<br /><br />Prosecutors claimed Murray gave Jackson the drug in an IV drip without proper monitoring.<br /><br />A jury found him guilty of negligence, and he walked out of jail last October after serving two years of a four-year jail sentence thanks to an early release program for non-violent offenders.<br />“He has never wavered from what happened that night, and the evidence and phone records fit in perfectly with his account,” Wass said Tuesday.<br /><br />Murray has maintained that he gave the singer a 25-milligram injection of propofol in the hours before his death and waited at his bedside until the fast-acting effects wore off.<br /><br />He has claimed Jackson must have woken up while he was out of the room and self-administered the fatal dose with a syringe.<br /><br />“The court's analysis of many of the issues was flawed, and the court had misstated certain critical facts,” Wass said Tuesday. “They really misunderstood the infusion theory.”<br /><br />Murray still hopes to practice medicine again and filed a civil lawsuit to regain his medical license in Texas.<br /><br />He also has a mandatory settlement conference related to his California medical license scheduled for June 9.<br /><br />If no settlement is reached, a hearing on the proposed revocation of his California license is set to begin July 1.
<br />interesting where this moron gets money for attorney fees. Is he a prostitute or something?<br />
<br /><br />From the sponsor of this whole hoax thing, where else?
"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."
Latest:<br /><br />02/13/2014 Mod. of opinion filed (no change in judgment). Appellant's petition for rehearing is denied. The foregoing does not change the judgment.<br /><br />Next stop ... The Supreme Court, aka The Court of Last Resort? :icon_lol: :icon_e_wink:
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."