Expert:Prosecution of Michael Jackson will be difficult

  • 27 Replies
  • 1363 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Sinderella

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 1334
    • Show only replies by Sinderella
http://http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202477248111
you might not be able to see it without signing up for an account.

Quote
Expert: Prosecution of Michael Jackson's doctor will be difficult

Amanda Bronstad
The National Law Journal
January 05, 2011

 
Prosecutors from the Los Angeles County, Calif., District Attorney's office provided the first glimpse of their criminal case on Tuesday against Dr. Conrad Murray, who faces charges that his actions in June 2009 contributed to the death of pop star Michael Jackson.
 
Unlike most cases against doctors of celebrities, Murray is not accused of crimes relating to the prescriptions he wrote for his patient, according to Ellyn Garofalo, a partner at Los Angeles-based Liner Grode Stein Yankelevitz Sunshine Regenstreif & Taylor.
 
Garofalo represented Dr. Sandeep Kapoor, who was acquitted of illegally providing prescriptions to Anna Nicole Smith before she died of a drug overdose in 2007. Two other defendants in that case, psychiatrist Khristine Eroshevich and Smith's attorney, Howard K. Stern, are scheduled to be sentenced on Thursday on charges of writing prescriptions using false names.
 
Garofalo told The National Law Journal that the Murray case could be much more clear-cut than the Smith matter, but that prosecutors still face a high burden of proof.
 
NLJ: What was your first impression of the government's case that was outlined on Tuesday?
 
E.G.: It's an odd case. It's different from our case because it's not an over-prescribing case. It's a murder case. What really surprised me is that in the opening statement they started to talk about the deviation from the standard of care. Generally, that's a negligence theory. That was a big issue in our case. We were successful in arguing standard of care is inapplicable in a criminal case. Where do you draw the line? That a doctor's medical judgment was so bad that he engaged in criminal conduct? It's really tough. They said my client, in the Anna Nicole Smith case, gave her more medication than other doctors would have, that he deviated from a standard of practice. How much propofol Murray may have given Jackson is a medical judgment. The D.A. might think it's bad medicine, but if he believed in good faith that's how to treat this patient, should that be criminal?
 
NLJ: So what do prosecutors in the Murray case have to prove?
 
E.G.: They have to show that something Murray did caused Jackson's death. It sounds like the autopsy report shows propofol killed him. They have to show Murray administered the propofol that killed him, and that with that act, although it was lawful to administer propofol, Murray should have known it could have resulted in Jackson's death, or that Murray didn't exercise due caution in using the drug.
 
NLJ: What appeared on Tuesday to be the government's strongest arguments?
 
E.G.: The fact that he's using a drug that is not ordinarily administered outside a hospital setting for purposes for which it's rarely used is a bad fact. If — and I don't know the evidence — he did leave the room while Michael Jackson was being given the drug, I think that's a bad fact. And then if the papers are correct and he waited 21 minutes to call 911, that's a bad fact. On the other hand, if Michael Jackson already was dead, waiting 21 minutes didn't kill him. If there's evidence that in that 21 minutes Michael Jackson might have been revived, that's going to be a very bad fact. They're also arguing Murray didn't do proper CPR.
 
NLJ: This is a preliminary hearing, not a trial. What does that mean exactly?
 
E.G.: A preliminary hearing is a probable cause hearing. They have to show a reasonable suspicion that a crime was committed. It's a very, very low standard. Any evidence a crime was committed is enough for the judge to bind the case over for trial. It is very, very rare that a judge finds there's not at least a reasonable suspicion that a crime's been committed.
 
NLJ: What is different between your case and the Murray case?
 
E.G.: Firstly, you had a death involved. In our case, although she died, that was not part of the criminal case because she didn't die here. In the Murray case, you don't have a prescribing issue because he didn't prescribe anything. That drug is not a prescription drug. There are no prescribing charges in this case, and that makes it different from an ordinary celebrity case. It's a much simpler case, in some ways, than ours was because our case involved a whole host of statues that had never been litigated — areas where there is no law. This is really a more typical criminal case, in that everybody knows what the statute is, and this will be based on the evidence and the facts.
 
NLJ: Your case involved two doctors, one of whom you represented. Why was your client acquitted, but the other doctor was found guilty of prescribing drugs using a false name?
 
E.G.: My client was Anna Nicole Smith's doctor for years. He inherited her when he bought the practice. The file he inherited was in the name of Michelle Chase. And my doctor continued to use the name used by the doctor before him. He used only one pharmacy, only one name. The jury found there was no intent to deceive anybody. The other doctor used multiple names and multiple pharmacies. The jury didn't talk to anyone, but that was indicative of some intent to deceive.
 
NLJ: Thursday is the sentencing hearing for the other doctor and Howard Stern. What's your prediction?
 
E.G.: I anticipate that the sentences will be probation, no jail sentences. The judge may reduce the charges or the crimes from felonies to misdemeanors. The few convictions were false name statutes. There were no convictions on the prescribing side.
 
[Los Angeles prosecutors have recommended supervised probation for both defendants, but has asked that the convictions remain felonies, according to a Jan. 4 sentencing memorandum filed in the case].
 
NLJ: We seem to be seeing a lot of criminal cases against doctors with celebrity clients. Is this a growing trend?
 
E.G.: You'll see less of them. Even though the D.A.'s office says they're happy with the result in our case, they didn't get any convictions on the prescribing charges. Historically, these cases are difficult to prove. Elvis's doctor was acquitted. Doctors have medical reasons for doing what they do. Even where celebrities have overdosed, there have been very few prosecutions and very few convictions. According to news reports, in the Michael Jackson case there were doctors writing unbelievable amounts of prescriptions over the years, and they haven't charged those people.
 
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Online ~Souza~

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Hoaxer
  • *****
  • Mrs. SEHF
  • Posts: 10009
    • Show only replies by ~Souza~
    • Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators
What is most odd about this case, is that there is only 1 charge. No charge for hiding the evidence, no charge for neglectance, no charge for administrating a drug like propofol outside of a hospital etc. If you really want to put someone behind bars, you charge him for everything you possibly think you can.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Online ~Souza~

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Hoaxer
  • *****
  • Mrs. SEHF
  • Posts: 10009
    • Show only replies by ~Souza~
    • Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators
Quote
According to news reports, in the Michael Jackson case there were doctors writing unbelievable amounts of prescriptions over the years, and they haven't charged those people.

If Mike really died of an OD and was begging for propofol, it means he was addicted to it. Those other doctors would be evenly guilty for fueling that addiction and they walk.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline trustno1

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 654
    • Show only replies by trustno1
That was my understanding too, throw as many charges at them as possible and with any luck a few of them will stick.  When I saw the title of this thread I was like: :o then I  realised it was about Murray :lol: Only kidding Sinderella I hadn't got my hopes up!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
In a world filled with despair, we must still dare to dream.  And in a world filled with distrust, we must still dare to believe.

Offline ignisaeternus

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 553
    • Show only replies by ignisaeternus
Quote from: "~Souza~"
What is most odd about this case, is that there is only 1 charge. No charge for hiding the evidence, no charge for neglectance, no charge for administrating a drug like propofol outside of a hospital etc. If you really want to put someone behind bars, you charge him for everything you possibly think you can.
ABSOLUTELY! This has always stuck out like a sore thumb.  I am no legal expert, but it seems it would not have been too difficult to come up with more counts.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »
"Hope is both the earliest and the most indispensable virtue inherent in the state of being alive. If life is to be sustained hope must remain, even where confidence is wounded, trust impaired."
Erik H. Erikson

Online ~Souza~

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Hoaxer
  • *****
  • Mrs. SEHF
  • Posts: 10009
    • Show only replies by ~Souza~
    • Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators
Quote from: "ignisaeternus"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
What is most odd about this case, is that there is only 1 charge. No charge for hiding the evidence, no charge for neglectance, no charge for administrating a drug like propofol outside of a hospital etc. If you really want to put someone behind bars, you charge him for everything you possibly think you can.
ABSOLUTELY! This has always stuck out like a sore thumb.  I am no legal expert, but it seems it would not have been too difficult to come up with more counts.
Of course, Mike never did anything and there was also no proof at all for it, and they charged him on 10 counts.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Sinderella

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 1334
    • Show only replies by Sinderella
Quote from: "~Souza~"
What is most odd about this case, is that there is only 1 charge. No charge for hiding the evidence, no charge for neglectance, no charge for administrating a drug like propofol outside of a hospital etc. If you really want to put someone behind bars, you charge him for everything you possibly think you can.


100% correct.
Even the non believers have got onto that fact and are confused as to why they only gave him one charge with a ton of evidence and they gave Michael 10 without any back in 2005....

I'd ask someone who might know but tbh,there are so many people involved/on the payroll/LYING/acting etc....It would be hard to believe anything anyone said about any of this.EVERYTHING and EVERYONE is questionable in the legit department..
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

RunFaYaLife

  • *
  • Guest
    • Show only replies by RunFaYaLife
Quote
Quote
       ~Souza~ wrote:What is most odd about this case, is that there is only 1 charge. No charge for hiding the evidence, no charge for neglectance, no charge for administrating a drug like propofol outside of a hospital etc. If you really want to put someone behind bars, you charge him for everything you possibly think you can.


Quote
   ABSOLUTELY! This has always stuck out like a sore thumb. I am no legal expert, but it seems it would not have been too difficult to come up with more counts.


Of course, Mike never did anything and there was also no proof at all for it, and they charged him on 10 counts.

Now those are some BAM comments! SOoooOOoo true. :mrgreen:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline chloead505

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 398
    • Show only replies by chloead505
From a legal point of view, the whole investigation, prosecution,prelim..is an ABSURD PARODY. It's screaming ALL WRONG and yet ppl dont see it! Please!
And this a lawyer speaking, ok?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Sinderella

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 1334
    • Show only replies by Sinderella
Quote from: "chloead505"
From a legal point of view, the whole investigation, prosecution,prelim..is an ABSURD PARODY. It's screaming ALL WRONG and yet ppl dont see it! Please!
And this a lawyer speaking, ok?


You know If you did entertainment law i'd totally hire you as my lawyer doll aha
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline chloead505

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 398
    • Show only replies by chloead505
Quote from: "Sinderella"
Quote from: "chloead505"
From a legal point of view, the whole investigation, prosecution,prelim..is an ABSURD PARODY. It's screaming ALL WRONG and yet ppl dont see it! Please!
And this a lawyer speaking, ok?


You know If you did entertainment law i'd totally hire you as my lawyer doll aha

In fact, Entertainment law does include many issues I deal with so..if you gave me an offer I cant refuse... HAHA!
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Online ~Souza~

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Hoaxer
  • *****
  • Mrs. SEHF
  • Posts: 10009
    • Show only replies by ~Souza~
    • Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators
Quote from: "chloead505"
From a legal point of view, the whole investigation, prosecution,prelim..is an ABSURD PARODY. It's screaming ALL WRONG and yet ppl dont see it! Please!
And this a lawyer speaking, ok?
You're a lawyer? Where do you practice?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Sinderella

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 1334
    • Show only replies by Sinderella
Quote from: "chloead505"
Quote from: "Sinderella"
Quote from: "chloead505"
From a legal point of view, the whole investigation, prosecution,prelim..is an ABSURD PARODY. It's screaming ALL WRONG and yet ppl dont see it! Please!
And this a lawyer speaking, ok?


You know If you did entertainment law i'd totally hire you as my lawyer doll aha

In fact, Entertainment law does include many issues I deal with so..if you gave me an offer I cant refuse... HAHA!


Move to LA,we'll do deals by the pool with cosmos?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline chloead505

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 398
    • Show only replies by chloead505
Quote from: "Sinderella"
Quote from: "chloead505"
Quote from: "Sinderella"
Quote from: "chloead505"
From a legal point of view, the whole investigation, prosecution,prelim..is an ABSURD PARODY. It's screaming ALL WRONG and yet ppl dont see it! Please!
And this a lawyer speaking, ok?


You know If you did entertainment law i'd totally hire you as my lawyer doll aha

In fact, Entertainment law does include many issues I deal with so..if you gave me an offer I cant refuse... HAHA!


Move to LA,we'll do deals by the pool with cosmos?

And in witness thereof the parties hereby seal their deal with a shot of Cosmo... LOL
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline chloead505

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 398
    • Show only replies by chloead505
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "chloead505"
From a legal point of view, the whole investigation, prosecution,prelim..is an ABSURD PARODY. It's screaming ALL WRONG and yet ppl dont see it! Please!
And this a lawyer speaking, ok?
You're a lawyer? Where do you practice?

You mean jurisdiction? I do EU law. Not exactly an expert on US law if thats why you ask...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Online ~Souza~

  • *
  • Administrator
  • Hoaxer
  • *****
  • Mrs. SEHF
  • Posts: 10009
    • Show only replies by ~Souza~
    • Michael Jackson Death Hoax Investigators
Quote from: "chloead505"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "chloead505"
From a legal point of view, the whole investigation, prosecution,prelim..is an ABSURD PARODY. It's screaming ALL WRONG and yet ppl dont see it! Please!
And this a lawyer speaking, ok?
You're a lawyer? Where do you practice?

You mean jurisdiction? I do EU law. Not exactly an expert on US law if thats why you ask...
Yeah that's why... BUMMER! lol
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline chloead505

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 398
    • Show only replies by chloead505
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "chloead505"
Quote from: "~Souza~"
Quote from: "chloead505"
From a legal point of view, the whole investigation, prosecution,prelim..is an ABSURD PARODY. It's screaming ALL WRONG and yet ppl dont see it! Please!
And this a lawyer speaking, ok?
You're a lawyer? Where do you practice?

You mean jurisdiction? I do EU law. Not exactly an expert on US law if thats why you ask...
Yeah that's why... BUMMER! lol

Dang! Sorry to disappoint you, lol. But you know, most things are similar - e.g. yellow-taping a suspected crime scene and securing evidence, aha.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Sinderella

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 1334
    • Show only replies by Sinderella
Quote from: "chloead505"
Dang! Sorry to disappoint you, lol. But you know, most things are similar - e.g. yellow-taping a suspected crime scene and securing evidence, aha.

LMAO.
Surely EVERY police dept leaves a crime scene open for 4days after the fact...no?
Must just be the LAPD then.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline shelby61

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 305
    • Show only replies by shelby61
Why is the main title say Expert:  Prosecution of Michael Jackson will be difficult and then in smaller print, it reads Expert:  Prosecution of Michael's Jackson's Doctor will be difficult...... again the masses are persecuting Michael..... :evil:
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Sinderella

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 1334
    • Show only replies by Sinderella
Quote from: "shelby61"
Why is the main title say Expert:  Prosecution of Michael Jackson will be difficult and then in smaller print, it reads Expert:  Prosecution of Michael's Jackson's Doctor will be difficult...... again the masses are persecuting Michael..... :evil:

I noticed that too,I was going to change it but I forgot when posting the thing
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline MJonmind

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 7290
    • Show only replies by MJonmind
Quote from: "chloead505"
From a legal point of view, the whole investigation, prosecution,prelim..is an ABSURD PARODY. It's screaming ALL WRONG and yet ppl dont see it! Please!
And this a lawyer speaking, ok?
Totally! Yet for people only casually following the news, it all seems impressively legit. Just wondering then even from your EU law perspective, what are the most glaring things you notice all wrong, besides the not closing off the crime scene immediately! Thanks! Maybe there's things we've missed.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline chloead505

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 398
    • Show only replies by chloead505
Quote from: "MJonmind"
Quote from: "chloead505"
From a legal point of view, the whole investigation, prosecution,prelim..is an ABSURD PARODY. It's screaming ALL WRONG and yet ppl dont see it! Please!
And this a lawyer speaking, ok?
Totally! Yet for people only casually following the news, it all seems impressively legit. Just wondering then even from your EU law perspective, what are the most glaring things you notice all wrong, besides the not closing off the crime scene immediately! Thanks! Maybe there's things we've missed.

It's also the late suspension of CMs licence, the omission to secure ALL potential evidence and immediate conducting of ALL necessary tests. The kind of gross negligence CM showed should have led to massive interrogation, given his alleged proficiency his conduct borders on involuntary manslaughter and 4 years in prison sound ridiculous! Will elaborate more later. xox
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline chloead505

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 398
    • Show only replies by chloead505
Quote from: "chloead505"
Quote from: "MJonmind"
Quote from: "chloead505"
From a legal point of view, the whole investigation, prosecution,prelim..is an ABSURD PARODY. It's screaming ALL WRONG and yet ppl dont see it! Please!
And this a lawyer speaking, ok?
Totally! Yet for people only casually following the news, it all seems impressively legit. Just wondering then even from your EU law perspective, what are the most glaring things you notice all wrong, besides the not closing off the crime scene immediately! Thanks! Maybe there's things we've missed.

It's also the late suspension of CMs licence, the omission to secure ALL potential evidence and immediate conducting of ALL necessary tests. The kind of gross negligence CM showed should have led to massive interrogation, given his alleged proficiency his conduct borders on involuntary manslaughter and 4 years in prison sound ridiculous! Will elaborate more later. xox

Ok, so here we go, hear my rant, LOL:

I'm not going to repeat that the suspected crime scene should have been secured and yellow taped and what not. The absurdity of the whole thing goes much further than that. We know for a fact that Murray disappeared after leaving the hospital - not to be found for another couple days. Now that in itself is highly suspicious. You add the fact that Murray had to collect a mysterious cream nobody knows anything about. If he wanted to hide evidence, why didnt he hide everything? Why were the empty syringes found in MJ's room at all? Didnt he collect all of the incriminating stuff before actually prompting MJ to the hospital? We have the testimony of the bodyguards about that, or? And why didnt they tell the Police?? EVERYBODY behaved suspicious, including the family..the sisters went to collect hardrives and who knows what else..and this ok? All this information is out there to be talked about and the police dont seem to be give a damn about anything. People, this is not an investigation..this is a comedia della arte. LaToya sings death certificate because a cardiologist who doesnt know how to do CPR refused to do it and instead went to call his girlfriend, didnt know the address of the house he goes to almost daily to treat Michael Jackson and eventually cries for food the moment his dead patient is brought to hospital...aha. Right so LaToya and Janet go and collect the rest of the stuff Murray left behind (in the meantime a million people could have entered the house -and btw the CCTV isnt working on that day, what a shame, right? Probably the footage was on the harddrives the sisters took. And police decided to "investigate" this 1,5 years after. This ties in quite nicely with Murray's lawyers wanted to do test on syringes that should have been tested ages ago..not to mention that the syringes could have been planted there by...basically anyone. HOw is this evidence even admissible in court? ANY of the evidence for that matter if the crime scene was never sealed..well after 4 days. And this goes on and on and on...How are people not seeing this!?

On a side note: I cant seem to understand why - if the whole family was saying murder murder, why didnt they for fucks sake (sorry) DO anything about it? It's all gonna come out sounds like a nice "spell-cast", maybe they think it's gonna help..like a woodoo kinda thing. It's all gonna come out and BANG, Murray dies. They havent done anything to actually help put Murray behind the bars. And Joe's failure - or his lawyers' failure - to properly file his civil suit is like a blow between everyone's eyes...and still not enough. I mean what lawyer screws a suit involving claim for damages in a Michael Jackson death case? Haha ha ha! Yeah right. And why is it just Joe suing? Because everyone thinks he's being funny and ridiculous so they wont be surprised if the suit never happens..hm? If you think of the O.J.Simpson case: he was freed of the criminal charges but ended up having to pay BIG money in the civil proceedings. Now we all know that Murray isnt O.J. but come on...if you think your criminal case might fail, wouldnt you sue him for damages just for the pleasure to make him go bankcrupt? Wouldnt you just use ALL like ALL possible means (both legal and illegal perhaps, lol) to destroy the man who you think caused the death of your beloved son...of MICHAEL JACKSON for God's sake!!??

All they're doing is writing books, doing come-back shows and organizing tribute shows that never happen? Oh and mind you...rant on twitter about people trying to profit off of MJ with fake album.

Now to me even the prelim is just ridiculous (Im aware it's the procedure in the US) but things that have been said during the prelim would in my opinion justify a speed-trial as what Murray has allegedly done isnt just about gross negligence of a doctor (improper medical setting and administration of a lethal coctail of meds etc) but the pure fact he probably left MJ alone when dying and went to call his girl-friend is a separate crime in itself!! This has nothing to do with him being a doctor or not anymore...he left him die even though he probably could have saved him?! This had better be a F hoax or else we are looking at the biggest, mindfucking (sorry) conspiracy the history has ever known because in that case the US legal and judicial system is involved in the murder of Michael Jackson.

LOL.

And there's lot more to say..Im not even a criminal law expert. Duh!

P.S. I love the deteriorating evidence in the syringes...I think that was the best joke of 2010.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline shelby61

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 305
    • Show only replies by shelby61
I agree with everything you have said, Chloead -- the tainting of evidence, the media interviewing potential witnesses, etc. before the police... it seems that it is right in your face absurdity that this would have happened.  I have been a paralegal for 30 years and I knew right when Murray wasn't been charged back in the summer that something was up and the fact that the lawyers were allowing the media to interview all these potential witnesses.  In addition, the whole court scene is a circus as I noted in another posting lol.

If in fact it did really happen, everything would have been hush hush.  

It is clearly MJ telling his side of the story and his thoughts on various topics, ie. the environment, the legal system, the corruption and so on.  This is really it.... this is how it is, this is how he led his life, this is how the media treated him, this is how his friends treated him, This is It!  People wanted to know who he was, what he represented and so on and there were so many misconceptions throughout his lifetime, he is here to clear them up... This is It - This is the Final Curtain Call.  A genius at work :)
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »

Offline Sinderella

  • *
  • Hoaxer
  • Posts: 1334
    • Show only replies by Sinderella
Chloe you are one of my fave petals on the flower of life!

Quote
P.S. I love the deteriorating evidence in the syringes...I think that was the best joke of 2010.

I agree.On the entire post but this part,just makes me laugh.
I couldn't even believe when they decided to have a fucking trial in December like-6days before the prelim to decide if they were 'worth' testing.LMAO!!!
Worth testing?They are only the main piece of evidence in this whole thing...but you know..it's fine,let 'em sit around for 18months and turn to nothing more than prop fool vapours,no biggy.
What the fuck ever.It's like....A MOVIE  lol :roll:

If I were to put down all my thoughts on this entire production it would =a book.
I might write one,everyone else is.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 07:00:00 PM by Guest »