0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
The primary objective of Major Crimes Division is the prevention of significant disruptions of public order in the City of Los Angeles. The Board of Police Commissioners authorizes Major Crimes Division to investigate individuals or groups who plan, threaten, finance, aid, abet, attempt or perform unlawful acts which threaten public safety.
"2. Respondent Amy M. Brunner (Respondent) is represented in this proceeding by attorney J. Michael Flanagan, whose address is FLANAGAN, UNGER & GROVER, Attorneys at Law, 1156 North Brand Boulevard, Glendale, California 91202-2582"You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
3. By Joint Stipulation, executed on behalf of Complainant on December 13, 2005, and by Respondent on December 15, 2005, the parties stipulated to the truth of each and every allegation contained in the Accusation and the First Supplemental Accusation. Further, the parties stipulated that the facts as alleged in the Accusation and the First Supplemental Accusation constitute a basis for discipline of Respondent's licenseYou are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Brunner continues to work as a nurse and does not face having herlicense suspended [...]You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
[...]The lawsuit arose out of a battle between Honorine Flanagan and her stepson over John Flanagan’s multimillion-dollar estate. John Flanagan died in March 1997, leaving everything to his wife. His son contested the will, but lost in Riverside Superior Court and in the Court of Appeal, and his petition for review was denied last year by the high court last year.[...]You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Second chair means a lawyer who helps the lead attorney in court. The services of second chair includes examining some of the witnesses, arguing some of the points of law, handling parts of the voir dire, and presenting the opening statement or closing argument. Hence, second chair offers every level of training, support, and consultation for the trial attorney preparing a case for trial. A second chair can execute any task as long as it is done under the supervision of an attorney on the list. Generally, the courts will not make any payment to the second chair.You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Maybe "J. Michael Flanagan" is one of the targets. Is there a reason Chernoff is sitting down? I really can't stand listening to Flanagan, especially how he misrepresents the facts with his incomplete hypotheticals and vague phraseology. Remember, as previously discussed, Flanagan represented Amy M. Brunner (the nurse charged with involuntary manslaughter after injecting her patient—80 year old Pierre Azar—with propofol which resulted in his death). Perhaps they set up a very similar scenario with Murray in order to entice Flanagan into taking on the case. The Board of Registered Nursing in California has this archived (here: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login), so we can rule out tabloid-hearsay/fabrication; there really was a case entailing involuntary manslaughter and propofol, and J. Michael Flanagan did act as the defendant's lawyer in that case: Quote from: Board of Registered Nusing"2. Respondent Amy M. Brunner (Respondent) is represented in this proceeding by attorney J. Michael Flanagan, whose address is FLANAGAN, UNGER & GROVER, Attorneys at Law, 1156 North Brand Boulevard, Glendale, California 91202-2582"You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginOn a related note, there are articles online that reported about the case (at the time the case went to trial); however, I could only find three or so articles all coming from a newspaper called The Burbank Leader. You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginYou are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginYou are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginHopefully this—in addition to the documents archived at the Board of Registered Nursing—means that even though the case was not very popular, the case actually happened and wasn't just made up for the sake of this hoax, lol. Though I find it ironic that his name is "J. Michael".Anyway, the point is that J. Michael Flanagan got this nurse acquitted, despite the fact that she withdrew sedative from another patient's IV risking infection of both patients (gross negligence), administered diprivan AKA propofol to a patient who was NOT intubated nor ventilated (gross negligence), failed to institute appropriate reversal drugs (gross negligence), and the .PDF file goes further on. That is not justice. Especially when you take the following into account:Quote from: Board of Registered Nursing3. By Joint Stipulation, executed on behalf of Complainant on December 13, 2005, and by Respondent on December 15, 2005, the parties stipulated to the truth of each and every allegation contained in the Accusation and the First Supplemental Accusation. Further, the parties stipulated that the facts as alleged in the Accusation and the First Supplemental Accusation constitute a basis for discipline of Respondent's licenseYou are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginThey agreed that Brunner had done all of those things, it was a stipulation; the attorneys agreed that all the stipulated facts (in this document: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login) were true which means the jury AS WELL had to agree the allegations were true, yet she did not get reprimanded for it; she was fully acquitted and she's still practicing (according to the article dated November 06, 2004).Quote from: The Burbank LeaderBrunner continues to work as a nurse and does not face having herlicense suspended [...]You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login---Flanagan also represented Britney Spears' in her license case which the judge dropped due to a mistrial (jurors not reaching unanimity on the verdict; it was a 10-2 decision in favor of acquittal). I don't know what Flanagan said to make the jurors want to acquit her, but if she was driving without a license she should have been reprimanded in some way, but instead she walked free. Once again, that is not justice. You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login---Then there's Flanagan v. Flanagan.J. Michael Flanagan sued his stepmother for recording private phone conversations Flanagan had with his father. Though, there was an underlying reason for doing so:Quote from: Metropolitan News Enterprise [...]The lawsuit arose out of a battle between Honorine Flanagan and her stepson over John Flanagan’s multimillion-dollar estate. John Flanagan died in March 1997, leaving everything to his wife. His son contested the will, but lost in Riverside Superior Court and in the Court of Appeal, and his petition for review was denied last year by the high court last year.[...]You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginHe didn't like the fact that he wasn't going to share in the multimillion-dollar estate, so he sues for something he knows he is going to win because of his expertise in law. Isn't that abuse of power? Can't he be the "bigger"man, not sue, and settle his family disputes out of the courts? It's not like he's poor, he'll survive. This guy is so suspect and dishonorable. Justice seems to be the furthest thing from his mind :| With a sting operation against Flanagan in mind, it's conceivable that newbie Chernoff's role is "second chair" in order to showcase Flanagan's corruption. Quote from: Legal DictionarySecond chair means a lawyer who helps the lead attorney in court. The services of second chair includes examining some of the witnesses, arguing some of the points of law, handling parts of the voir dire, and presenting the opening statement or closing argument. Hence, second chair offers every level of training, support, and consultation for the trial attorney preparing a case for trial. A second chair can execute any task as long as it is done under the supervision of an attorney on the list. Generally, the courts will not make any payment to the second chair.You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginBased on that, I'm assuming Chernoff is second chair and Flanagan is first chair (lead attorney). I honestly can't say for sure though.If the sting is on Flanagan, then the prosecution just has to do their job and if, as you say, Walgren does target public corruption, maybe he's going after Flanagan too.
If the Lawyers such as Ed Chernoff and David Walgren are in the hoax, how were they chosen?...were they chosen by the FBI or by MJ?Also why were these particular lawyers chosen?...is it to do with the Sting, if there is a Sting court? I do know that David Walgren is apart of the major crime unit (since 2005) which deals with public corruption.QuoteThe primary objective of Major Crimes Division is the prevention of significant disruptions of public order in the City of Los Angeles. The Board of Police Commissioners authorizes Major Crimes Division to investigate individuals or groups who plan, threaten, finance, aid, abet, attempt or perform unlawful acts which threaten public safety. You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginThis reminds me of what was talked about in the TIAI sting thread about public corruption.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginIf the Lawyers such as Ed Chernoff and David Walgren are in the hoax, how were they chosen?...were they chosen by the FBI or by MJ?Also why were these particular lawyers chosen?...is it to do with the Sting, if there is a Sting court? I do know that David Walgren is apart of the major crime unit (since 2005) which deals with public corruption.QuoteThe primary objective of Major Crimes Division is the prevention of significant disruptions of public order in the City of Los Angeles. The Board of Police Commissioners authorizes Major Crimes Division to investigate individuals or groups who plan, threaten, finance, aid, abet, attempt or perform unlawful acts which threaten public safety. You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginThis reminds me of what was talked about in the TIAI sting thread about public corruption.Glad to see you made this thread, hopefully with a little digging around we can get a better view on things.
Jaime Alvarado was convicted of second degree robbery. The prosecution alleged that Alvarado robbed a 16-year-old victim of his bicycle, CD player and earphones. During closing arguments, the prosecutor stated, "I have a duty and I have taken an oath as a deputy District Attorney not to prosecute a case if I have any doubt that that crime occurred. The defendant charged is the person who did it." The court of appeals found prosecutor's statement constituted misconduct, for the prosecutor impermissibly invited the jury to convict Alvarado based on her opinion that he was guilty and on the prestige of her office. Such misconduct was prejudicial against Alvarado, because the victim was the sole eyewitness to the charged crime, and thus the evidence against Alvarado was not overwhelming. The court of appeals thereby reversed Alvarado's conviction.Note: These cases are those where courts found prosecutorial misconduct occurred and as a result, convictions were reversed, sentences were modified, mistrials were declared or evidence was barred. The court findings cover a broad spectrum of conduct, ranging from egregious misconduct to unintentional misconduct.
"My views as a victim, my feelings as a victim, or my desires as a victim were never considered or even inquired into by the district attorney prior to the filing," Geimer said. "It is clear to me that because the district attorney's office has been accused of wrongdoing, it has recited the lurid details of the case to distract attention from the wrongful conduct of the district attorney's office as well as the judge who was then assigned to the case."
(What I found as a weird coincidence is that David Walgren is related to someone named James CONRAD Walgren and MICHAEL JOSEPH Walgren...what are the chances :lol: )
The process usually begins with the filing of a complaint at the bar disciplinary authority. For private attorneys, the complainant is normally a dissatisfied client. Since prosecutors do not have a "client" in the traditional sense, the complainant may be a defendant, defense lawyer or judge.
Examples of such misconduct include: * discovery violations; * improper contact with witnesses, defendants, judges or jurors; * improper behavior during hearings or trials; * prosecuting cases not supported by probable cause; * harassing or threatening defendants, defendants' lawyers or witnesses; * using improper, false or misleading evidence; * displaying a lack of diligence or thoroughness in prosecution; and * making improper public statements about a pending criminal matter.You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
Prosecutors may not bring criminal actions as a result of personal vendettas.You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login