Dr Murray found guilty in the death of Michael Jackson and Judge Pastor was quick to revoke bail and remand Dr. Conrad Murray to the Los Angeles Sheriff’s department pending sentencing on Nov. 29, 2011.
The only surprising thing today was the remanding and revoking bail. We all thought Murray would be convicted. John has said on many shows this was like musical chairs and when the music stopped Murray was left standing with the Propoful bottle in his hand.
Murray barely had time to look back at his mother and girlfriend before being taken into custody and whisk out of the court room.
Straight Talk with John J Nazarian guest tonight is Criminal Defense attorney Adam Braun, who has been both a prosecutor and now one of the top criminal attorneys in California. Braun will answer questions of what now? Over crowding in the jails, why the revoking of bail? Can the defense appeal based on Dr. Klein never appeared in trial which was a major set back most say to Murray? Will Murray get house arrest or a retreat like Ryan Bowman did for involuntary manslaughter in the Lauren Freeman case, at camp Seal on the California coast line.
Adam Braun is one of the best criminal defense lawyers in California. Braun is the Principal at Law Offices of Adam H. Braun and was a Federal Prosecutor at the United States Attorney’s Office for over 6 years. The Princeton University graduate represented Dr. Khristine Eroshevich during the lead up to the Anna Nicole Smith trial. Braun was the attorney for one of Anthony Pelicanno’s co-defendants.
In other bizarre interviews we have Dr. Arnold Klein on what looks like his golden throne.
“Dr. Arnold Klein said he personally tried several times to prevent other doctors from administering propofol to Jackson for sleep. “I knew this problem existed,” Klein said in the interview. “I did my best to prevent it. Whenever I could, I prevented it, but I’m only one man and I have to support my own life and take care of myself.”
Klein disputed the argument by Dr. Conrad Murray’s lawyers that he addicted Jackson to Demerol in the months before his death, saying he used only low doses of the painkiller while repairing Jackson’s collapsed nose and jaw line.
Klein described three instances in which he said he was involved in interventions to prevent Jackson from getting propofol, the surgical anesthetic the coroner ruled killed him, although Klein gave no indication of when the incidents occurred.
In the first instance, Klein said he chartered a plane to Las Vegas when he heard Jackson was getting propofol at a hotel where the singer was staying. Klein claimed he threw out the doctor involved to prevent him from giving Jackson the drug. In another encounter in Hawaii, Klein said he and his nurse slept on the floor of Jackson’s room to prevent him from getting propofol from a plastic surgeon.
Klein claimed he once “saved” Jackson in New York when another doctor administered propofol, combined with another drug. It made Jackson go “running down the street,” Klein said. Klein, interviewed in his Beverly Hills home, said that while it was too upsetting to him to watch much of the trial, he watched enough to believe Murray wanted to “make me look like a demon” and “make me as a scapegoat.”
Klein said he began the slow and painful process of rebuilding some of Jackson’s facial skin in early April after his nose collapsed and after he lost his jaw line.
Telephone lines are always open to call in at 818-572-8030 long distance charges do apply, join in the discussion or ask questions of John and his guest, Adam Braun.
We encourage all of you to join other posters to discuss all of the cases we cover. Diamond Girl runs the community part of the site and remember discuss the evidence don’t attack other posters. If you read a post that upsets you just scroll past that comment http://community.rosespeaks.com/ I seldom step on the forums that belongs to the members and is in great hands with Diamond Girl and she will be having a robust discussion there that all of you are invited to join
Follow John J Nazarian On Face Book and on Twitter and see who John J Nazarian is following.
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of our featured author, John Nazarian and/or his agents, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
The world waits for the Jury Verdict to come in next week in the Dr. Conrad Murray Trial in the Involuntary Manslaughter charge in the death of Michael Jackson.
What is Dr. Murray and his lead defense attorney Edward Chernoff thinking and doing today, waiting for the jury to come back perhaps as early as tomorrow with a verdict.
Here is the jury instructions for you to read through and decide how tough is this going to be for this jury.
Straight Talk with John J Nazarian guests tonight are Criminal Defense attorney Adam Braun, who has been both a prosecutor and now one of the top criminal attorneys in California. Adam Braun can tell us what the Deputy D. A. David Walgren and his team or doing and thinking today about the upcoming week. Braun can also tell us what it is like as a defense lawyer waiting for the verdict to come in and Braun can give us a pretty good guess as to what Dr. Conrad Murray is doing this weekend except for just praying.
Adam Braun will be joined by two retired homicide detectives who were also partners for a time with the L. A. P. D, Robert Jakucs and William Cox. They can share what the detectives are doing this weekend now that months and months of work is complete and it is just a waiting game at this point.
The radio broadcast will be embedded here soon after it airs live at 7 PM PST – 10 PM EST
Adam H. Braun, Esq.
One of the best criminal defense lawyers in California. Braun is the Principal at Law Offices of Adam H. Braun and was a Federal Prosecutor at the United States Attorney’s Office for over 6 years. The Princeton University graduate represented Dr. Khristine Eroshevich during the lead up to the Anna Nicole Smith trial. Braun was the attorney for one of Anthony Pelicanno’s co-defendants. Braun comes from one of the highest profile families of brilliant criminal attorneys.
Robert A. Jakucs – Retired Homicide Detective of L.A.P.D
Robert A. Jakucs is a retired Los Angeles Police Department Detective with over 30-years of investigative experience. During his distinguished career with the L.A.P.D he worked such high-profile assignments as Homicide, Hollywood Vice, SWAT, Robberies, Burglaries, Complex Thefts, and gang-related shootings. He was a member of the Night Stalker Task Force that investigated the serial murderer Richard Ramirez. Robert Jakucs is also a consultant for national television specializing in private and police investigation issues and has appeared on the news shows Nightline, 20/20 and Inside Edition.
William Cox was a Los Angeles Police Detective who retired in 2007 after 32 years
William Cox worked in a variety of assignments including uniformed patrol, CRASH (gang detail) in South-Central and West Los Angeles areas. He also worked homicides for over 20 years and finished his career in Robbery-Homicide Division (RHD) which handles major cases including serial killers, multiple murders, media and high-profile cases, officer-involved shootings, and assaults and murders on police officers. He also worked the Rampart Corruption Task Force for two years. William Cox was also involved or handled several high-profile cases over the years including the Kimes (mother-son grifters who were responsible for 3 murders in LA, NY, and the Bahamas); the Goetz of the West case; the murder of the pregnant mother at LAX; plus several others.
William Cox has appeared on Investigative Discovery channel, 48 Hours, and E-entertainment. He is currently employed by the US State Dept. as a background investigator.
William Cox’s last case he worked on at RHD was a Chinese immigrant student attending USC who had gone to a frat party and had attempted to pull a gun and start shooting students. He was wrestled to the ground by other students who then called police. After a search warrant was served on the suspect’s apartment Cox and three other detectives were sent to NY City to investigate and attempt to identify approximately 20 persons he had targeted to possibly kill. (This incident occurred shortly after the mass murders at West Virginia Tech.) Cox was also working on a murder where a husband set his car and wife on fire on the Golden State Frwy. Cox had also been working (for the past four years) on a double homicide that had occurred in 2002 wherein two victims were killed in their car and their car set on fire. That murder was the story that 48 Hours has done and shown on television in February 2011.
With this combined years of experience this is a must tune in a listen and even ask a question of two as to what we should expect this coming week of the verdict watch for Dr. Conrad Murray.
Telephone lines are always open to call in, join in the discussion or ask questions of John and his guests, Adam Braun, Robert “Bob” Jakucs and William “Bill” Cox at 818-572-8030 long distances charges do apply.
Note from Ken and Rose Turner Because so many of you have asked here goes:
John J. Nazarian does not own any part of Rose Speaks.com nor will he ever. Rose Speaks.com is a labor of love that came to be because those here saw a grave terrible miscarriage of justice being done to a man none of us knew. Rose Speaks.com does not own any part of Desperate Exes.com or any other site belonging to John J. Nazarian.
Many of you have noted that Ken has not been on the blog hardly at all for a few months. Ken has opened his own company, studied hard, and then got the chance of a lifetime to represent John J Nazarian on many levels and endeavors. Ken got these chances from hard work nothing less and nothing more. I know that most of you really like Ken and wish him and the others that are part of K N Turner and Associates only the best in their upcoming endeavors.
Dr. Drew will be covering the Dr. Conrad Murray trail in the involuntary manslaughter charges in the case of Michael Jackson from gavel to gavel with a one hour show every night Monday – Friday at 9 PM EST – PST and 8 PM CST – MST. Straight Talk with John Nazarian will be covering the trial gavel to gavel Monday – Friday at 4 PM PST – 7 PM EST on live radio. The call in number is 1-818-572-8030 long distance charges to apply or call in using Skype internationally free.
Both will have excellent guest I feel sure.
Now that a jury is seated in the Michael Jackson death trial, with opening statements planned for Tuesday, Dr. Drew made it clear on his show last night that HLN will be covering the case every step of the way, gavel-to-gavel. The focus of the trial: how did the “King of Pop” really die? It’s a question the world has been asking for over two years. A Los Angeles County jury will decide whether Conrad is guilty of involuntary manslaughter. He’s accused of administering a fatal dose of a surgical anaesthetic to Jackson. A couple of Dr. Drew’s guests weighed in with their thoughts on the trial.
Judge Greg Mathis, host of “Judge Mathis,” explained how it’s possible for jurors to be impartial:
“The question is whether they can have a preconceived notion that is balanced and fair. Some folks might look at it and say ‘well I’m not sure, I just don’t know.’ And from what I’m hearing on both sides, eveyone has a point, and so I’m just going to wait and see. In fact, that’s what judges have to do, and so perhaps we have some of the juror candidates also that may have been able to have such a consideration.”
Brian Oxman, a close family friend of the Jackson family for over 24 years, said that it was fishy for Michael to announce a 50-date concert tour a couple months before he died:
“Everyone in this family knew full well, when 50 concerts were announced that this was a serious problem. I got a call from Latoya, who said, ‘Brian, he can’t do 50 concerts, they’re going to kill him!’”
What do you think? At the start of the trial, do you think that Jackson’s death was a conspiracy, or are you, like most jurors, going to wait and see what evidence is shown before making a decision?
Straight Talk with John J. Nazarian will kick off his coverage tonight with an in-depth look at the jury and what they might bring into this case or are any of them coming in their mind made up?
Nazarian’s show for September, 26, 2011, with John J. Nazarian co-host Vee Foster, guests Ken and Rose Turner:
Last night show with Nazarian had an error in it and for some reason you can not hear it her or on Straight Talk. I have downloaded the show because the guests were awesome and took like questions like the experts they are and answered them and with great insight. If we can retrieve the show from yesterday we will add an MP3 plugin to our site and load it for your listening pleasure.
We encourage all of you to join other posters to discuss all of the cases we cover. Diamond Girl runs the community part of the site and remember discuss the evidence don’t attack other posters. If you read a post that upsets you just scroll past that comment http://community.rosespeaks.com/ I seldom step on the forums that belongs to the members and is in great hands with Diamond Girl and she will be having a robust discussion there that all of you are invited to join
Visit our Download Section and look through and read all of the documents on the cases we cover.
Follow Us On Face Book and on Twitter and see who Rose Speaks is following.
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners. If comments to this or any other articles are not related to the article or does not meet the terms of use for Rose Speaks, they will be removed by the moderators.
Straight Talk with John J. Nazarian on Blog Talk Radio tonight’s guests are Criminal Hollywood defense attorney Adam Braun and retired L. A. P. D. homicide detective Robert Jakucs.
Tonight Mr. Adam Braun will be telling us what to expect in opening statements and what points to look for that both sides have to make during each of their opening statements. Mr. Bruan can give us that rare view of both sides; Adam Braun was a Federal Prosecutor at the United States Attorney’s Office for over 6 years, and since 2007 has been one of the brightest, brilliant, upcoming and truly one of the Super Lawyers in Los Angeles. He will also be able to tell us what the jury profiles tell about what kind of jury each side tried to have seated last Friday, September 24, 2011.
Mr. Braun will be a regular guest on Straight Talk throughout the trial and will be a valuable guest in directing and helping us through each part of the prosecution and defense of the case with a score as to who he sees ahead during the next 3-5 weeks. You might remember Adam Braun from both the Anna Nicole Smith trial and the Anthony Pellicano trial.
Robert Jakucs will give us his insight what the prosecution has to prove during their part of the trial and what to look for with the officers who investigated the case will testify as well as what to expect the defense will do in an attempt to nullify their testimony. As a previous homicide detective for the L.A.P.D, he will be able to give us a look inside the preparations the police have done to aid the D. A. to get this case ready.
Mr. Jakucs will be a guest on Straight Talk throughout the trial as his busy schedule allows and will be a most welcome guest to any show throughout this 3-5 week trial.
Join us tonight on Straight Talk with John J. Nazarian for the kick off of the Dr. Conrad Murray trial in the allegations of involuntary manslaughter trail in the death of mega super star Michael Jackson.
The call in number is 1-818-572-8030 long distance charges to apply or call in using Skype internationally free.
NOTE FROM ROSE: All of Straight Talk with John J. Nazarian coverage of the Michael Jackson trial will be embedded into Rose Speaks within 10 of the live broadcasts ends.
Don’t believe that the criminal justice system is broken? Just visit the criminal courts, well at least the one in Beverly Hills. Ryan Bowman, the scumbag from down under was in Judge Fox’s courtroom yesterday were he plead “Not Guilty” to felony hit and run, a charge that had already been reduced from manslaughter after he ran over 21-year-old Lauren Ann Freeman with his Bentley and fled the scene, leaving her to die on Sunset Blvd., back on Nov. 15. ….He was dressed in a dark suit with a white shirt opened at the collar, very slickly casual for a guy who runs a girl down killing her and leaves her in his wake to die.
…Sitting in the front row of the courtroom all alone were Lauren’s mom and dad, the loss and devastation is clearly still on their faces. I could feel the pain and desperation just by being close to them. But the feeling of what a failure this city’s/state’s justice system is was about to kick in even further: it was mentioned that Ryan Bowman, the killer of Lauren Ann Freeman, was going to be given F’n PROBATION! Could that be? And worse, the Los Angeles County Probation Department never spoke to either of her parents for their thoughts of the killing of their only daughter. The Los Angeles County Probation Department stated on the form, they were “unable to contact family!” …I have a client whose son spray painted some graffiti and is in custody with a $30,000 bail…I am beginning to hate this entire system.
Adam Braun, one of California’s most brilliant defense attorneys, was in court this morning and when he saw me he came over and we talked about the travesty of justice that we had just witnessed. Adam was clear that if this District Attorney could not get it,… …that perhaps forcing the case to go to the Grand Jury would add some spark to a system that was failing all of us as we watched….
…..The next hearing for The Scum from down under is February 25, 2011. Let’s hope those morons at The Los Angeles Probation Department can get it right. Well we can hope can’t we?
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of our featured author, John Nazarian, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
As I have read through the 39 page transcript of the criminal hearing from January 6, 2011, I notice several things I will comment on and ask you what are your thoughts to Judge Perry in this hearing? I will then close this chapter of the saga with some personal thoughts.
On the hearing on January 6, 2011 the appearances in front of Judge Robert L. Perry were:
THE STATE OF California. Renee Rose, Sean Carney, & David Barkhurst Deputy District Attorneys for Los Angeles County..
Bradley Brunon attorney at law and his client defendant Dr. Khristine Eroshevich
Steven Sadow & Christopher Smith with their client defendant Howard K. Stern.
Judge Robert Perry first outlined the charges brought by the prosecution, summarized those charges as follows: “The District Attorney brought an extremely complex criminal prosecution in this matter involving three conspiracy counts and eight substantive counts against three Defendants which allege criminal acts over a period of approximately three years. The theory of the case was that the defendants wrongfully obtained excessive quantities of prescription drugs for Anna Nicole Smith, who was alleged to be addicted to said drugs. The charges involved allegations of furnishing statutes and violations of obtaining prescriptions by fraud or in false names. The three defendants collectively faced a potential of 23 guilty verdicts. The jury returned six guilty verdicts, four against Eroshevich, two against Howard stern. Dr. Kapoor, the lead defendant, was acquitted on all counts.
In the next part Judge Robert Perry gives us a rundown of the charges the Jury either found not guilty or found Howard K. Stern and Dr. Eroshevich on with first a statement that in the Court’s opinion “It is the court’s view that the verdict was a stunning repudiation of the prosecution’s case.”
Mr. Stern was acquitted on all eight substantive counts. Stern and Eroshevich were convicted of two conspiracies, count 1, a conspiracy alleged to have commenced on September 11th of 2006, that continued until Ms. Smith’s death on — in February of 2007. Count 3, which was alleged to have commenced on June 5th of 2004, which continued until September 10th of 2006, the day before the count conspiracy was alleged to have commenced. Regarding the conspiracies, the jury found that Stern and Eroshevich CONSPIRED to commit two target crimes: One, to obtain a controlled substance by fraud in VIOLATION of Health and Safety Code section 11173(a), and a second target crime to unlawfully give a false name in a prescription for a controlled substance in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11174. Eroshevich was also convicted of two substantive Counts, Counts 7 and 9. Count 7 pertained to the charge of obtaining a controlled substance by fraud in violation of 11173(a) of the Health and Safety Code. Count 9 charged a violation of giving a false name in a prescription for a controlled substance in violation of 15 11174. Both counts involved a single prescription for Hydrocodone, otherwise known as vicodin, written on November 24th, 2006, by Eroshevich in the name Charlene Underwood.
Judge Perry then gives us the breakdown on the charges the jury deadlocked on and what the vote was by the jury:
“The jury also hung in a split of 6 to 6 for Eroshevich on counts 5 and involving the same event, the prescription for Charlene Underwood. Count 5 charged a violation of unlawfully prescribing a controlled substance, in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11153(a). Count 11 charged a crime of unlawfully prescribing a controlled substance to an addict in VIOLATION of 11156. In addition, the jury deadlocked on certain target crimes alleged in the conspiracies in Counts 1 and 3. The jury hung 5 to 7, 5 would be in favor of guilt, in favor of acquittal, for the target crime of unlawfully prescribing, administering, or dispensing a controlled substance to an addict. As to Count 1, that would be a violation of Health and Safety Code Section 11156, the jury hung 10 to 2 in favor of conviction for the target crimes on Count 1 of unlawfully prescribing a controlled substance in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11153, and excessively prescribing or administering drugs in violation of business and profession code section 725(a). As to the Count 3 conspiracy, the jury found not true that the Defendants conspired to prescribe drugs to an addict in violation of Health and Safety Code section 11156. They — the jury found, or held rather – rather hung 7 to 5 for the unlawful prescribing of a controlled substance, 11153(a), and unlawfully prescribing a controlled substance to a person not under a physician’s treatment for a pathology other than addiction to a controlled substance, a violation of Health and Safety Code Section 11154(A) and (B). The jury also found — or hung 5 to 7 in favor of acquittal for the target crime on Count 3 of excessively prescribing or administering drugs in violation of business and profession code section 24 725(a).“
“The court must view the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution. I have concerns about the conspiracy counts, in particular as to Mr. Stern and whether there is specific intent in the evidence to show that he had a specific intent to violate the two target crimes of which he stands convicted in both counts.” At this part of the hearing Judge Perry asked Steve Sadow to address those issues and what the evidence presented at trial.
I like the part that Sadow thanked the AP reporter and quoting from an article that appeared on January 6, 2011 saying: “I have to give due credit to the esteemed and honorable reporter Ms. Deutch for her article today. I don’t know if the Court saw it. But she found a quote that your Honor — a statement your Honor had made — and thank you, Linda. And that’s Howard K. Stern. What the evidence in this case showed is that he and Dr. Eroshevich had an agreement that prescriptions for Anna Nicole would be written in Howard’s name, and that’s all the evidence shows. There is no evidence that Howard knew of any other name, not Ben Stern, not Charlene Underwood, not any other name. He didn’t pick them up, he didn’t have anything to do with obtaining them. There was never a witness who connected any of those names to him or brought to South — to the Keys. That’s what we have.”
Steve Sadow went on to say; “We all had either the fortune or misfortune to sit through two and a half months of facts. The Court instructed the jury, and did so because all of the parties agreed, that if a defendant had a good faith belief that his or her actions were legal, he or she is not guilty of conspiracy. And I really think that’s the crux of where we are because if you look at the evidence in any light, the evidence does not show that Howard K. Stern specifically intended to break the law insofar as these two target offenses, and that he, in fact, had a good faith belief that his actions were legal.”
One of the strongest arguments I think Sadow brought to the Court’s attention is that Howard K. Stern was honest about using his name to Danny Santiago stating: “And based on the evidence here, there is not a single indication that Mr. Stern believed it was illegal to do so and didn’t have a good faith belief that it was okay. They’ve been doing it for Anna since 2000 in Michelle Chase, in Jane brown. They went on and continued to do it in the Bahamas the same way. Howard knew it was going to Anna. Dr. Eroshevich knew it was going to Anna. There was never any question about that. When agent Santiago goes to see Mr. Stern on October the 12th, in a non-custodial setting, Mr. Stern says, Absolutely, it was in my name. It was written for privacy. There wasn’t any question about it. Now, that’s not evidence of a guilty intent. That’s evidence of someone who believes that what he did was legal.”
Judge Perry brought up the question about that pesky black bag stating; “Well, the argument was made that because Mr. Stern had a bag of prescription medication that ended up in the hotel room, that that was some indication of knowledge.” To which Mr. Sadow countered with; “All his name. All Howard K. Stern’s name. Not one other name was in that bag, and that was the beginning of the trial. So we — you know, we have always acknowledged, always admitted, Howard has always done so, he knew they were being written in his name. The question is, did he specifically intend to break the law? Did he know it was illegal to do so? And I’m suggesting that the evidence is insufficient as a matter of law to have convicted on that.”
Judge Perry then turned to Dr. Eroshevich’s attorney Bradley Brunon and asked: “If the evidence fails to support Stern’s involvement in a conspiracy, is it your view that the conspiracy charge against Dr. Eroshevich would fall?” To which Brunon responded in part that; “Yes, your Honor. There would have to be mutuality of intent in the conspiracy and it takes at least two people. And if one of them isn’t criminally culpable, then the other one, I would say, couldn’t be just as a matter of law.”
At this point Mr. Brunon brought up “the elephant in the room” throughout the trial saying: “There’s the additional problem that the Court very clearly, very forcefully and very early in the trial said, we’re not going to litigate Ms. Smith’s Death. And yet, it became kind of a subtle thing, a light motif. We started off very early on with the toxicologist talking about the drugs found in her body at autopsy, obviously a postmortem event. That was followed by Birkhead and others concerning about the ultimate outcome to her health in taking these medications. So it became kind of the elephant in the room.” He further brought up the millions of dollars at stake stating: “[T]hat Mr. stern was trying to drug her into a tractable state where he could make way with Marshal millions, that turned out not to be the case.”
The fact of being a celebrity was addressed by Brunon in stating; “the Journal carried a rather extensive article about the medical data leaks from institutions and doctors that go beyond celebrities to expose thousands, and I think I can cite this simply for the fact that it’s common knowledge — we talked about it during the course of the trial — that celebrities seem to be fair game to anyone that thinks they can make some money off of exposing some secret in their life.” Following this was this exchange with Judge Perry and Brunon:
“THE COURT: I remember the issue involving Farrah Fawcett and her admission at UCLA. and how people were all over themselves trying to find out what she was there for and getting copies of her records.
Mr. BRUNON: And the woman was in terminal condition, and yet someone profited by it.”
It appears that Bunon hints that a medical malpractice suit would have been more appropriate then a criminal trial when he said; “I alluded in my pleadings to the issue that kind of malpractice crept into this, Dr. Eroshevich didn’t practice psychiatry correctly; therefore, she’s guilty of writing bad prescriptions. It had some relevance, but not the relevancy that it was given. I mean, Dr. Botello physically shuddered when he had to consider the photo of Dr. Eroshevich and Ms. Smith in the bathtub … It really wasn’t an issue in the case. In the case — the forgery case”
After the Deputy District Attorney Sean Carney responded the Court said in part: “I did a little review of the schedule of prescriptions. And I looked at it with the idea of finding what the evidence was as to prescriptions that Howard Stern had allegedly picked up that were prescribed by Eroshevich. And I found in my review, and I think that’s what the evidence supports, that stern picked up prescriptions that Eroshevich had issued for Vickie Marshal. There were a number, maybe eight or nine. I can give you the dates if it’s necessary. That he picked up one prescription for Ambien for Anna smith, and then he picked up on four occasions prescriptions in the name Howard Stern.” Then Judge Perry went on to comment on what good pleadings Carney had written saying: “I thought you were correct in your pleading — of course, I think you do excellent pleading work — in that you thought it was a slightly higher standard for the court on its own motion to dismiss.”
Of course the retrying of the hung charges and that either side could appeal came up.
Judge Perry issued his verbal ruling in a thoughtful and precise way that I believe will hold up under any appeal with a multi-page decision. At the end to this detail explanation Judge Perry stated; “Let me make clear that I am dismissing on my own motion in furtherance of justice counts 1 and 2 (corrected to 3) in this case as to all target crimes finding the evidence insufficient. I think that that needed to be said. All right.”
The only thing left was if the D. A. was going to retry Khristine Eroshevich on the counts that there was a hung jury with the D. A. is to let Judge Perry know in writing and that they had sixty days to file a notice and appeal on Judge Perry’s decision.
I am sure one of you has the charging document, [juries written decisions on all charges], or if not perhaps we can find one. I remember reading it right after the trial in October 2010.
I have been reading and talking to some of you about feeling sorry for Howard K. Stern losing four years of his life here. True, but that said, Stern made a conscious decision to enter into the chaos that appears Anna Nicole Smith’s life which entangled all who came to care for her.
I could whine about the three plus years of my life gone and the fact that 90% of the internet including members of Rose Speaks.com turned against me for not being willing to go to jail. I chose not to because simply there was nothing to hide, and unlike other co-defendants I did not have a robbery or had my hard drive in a bank box. They did not lie about what happened to them, but I did have my emails and hard drives. I simply knew that the truth would prevail that many had great lawyers in this and that I just had to batten down the hatches for however long this storm lasted. I chose to enter the chaos of having a blog that covered “All Things Anna Nicole Smith” so I did throw myself into the peripheral chaos by not closing this site and/or not stopping coverage of this horrible ongoing saga.
Who does my heart ache for and will for a very long time? First two moderators of Rose Speaks.com who did nothing and yet ended up in jail on ridiculous contempt charges. Recordings came out during the discovery that had one “witness” taped by a lawyer in two phone calls about putting Lyndal Harrington in jail, anything to get to me for this person’s own personal vendetta. She was willing to take down Bonnie Stern, Lyndal Harrington and Teresa Stephens if the lawyers promised that I would be brought down. What kind of sick person does that? As I told the lawyer I could only listen to one of the two tape phone calls but that my phone records as well as the time line would prove I never was the “brains” behind robberies, hiding of hard drives and filing a bankruptcy even suggesting that I had that kind of power over others is ludicrous. My prayer is that Karma is a bitch and you know who you are. Hint, it happened in the spring of 2009. So it was NOT QV or Havana or any of the people you might think it was. The complete ability to hate so much that you are willing to sacrifice three people you knew were innocent, to get to someone you just wanted to destroy is unconscionadle. Someone you never met and did nothing to you but try to be a support system during what you said, and now I believe was no more than a made up crises. I don’t think I even want to get in the head of someone like that to see the darkness there.
Besides those two moderators my heart bleeds for Howard K. Stern’s parents, Leon and Bea Stern. They sent their son, the baby of the family, to obtain a top notch education and secured his earning ability only to have him end up with one client. They had nothing to say about the chaos surrounding Anna Nicole Smith flooding into their lives and upon her death to cause what must have been a living hell for them for the next four years. These were just parents, who loved their son and stood by him. Any of us as parents would do the same thing. They had no control over what their lives became and due to their age, I am sure the price emotionally and physically is one none of us can even begin to imagine.
So my tears will be for the two moderators that went to jail and for Howard’s parents, those four people did not deserve to find themselves in the midst of this as none of us should have been entangled. This should have been a simple three hour hearing and court decision where Anna Nicole Smith wanted and intended to be buried not four years of hell.
I will not be saying anything else about anything connected to Anna Nicole Smith except for the Supreme Court hearing and the South Carolina trial; and of course if California is willing to throw more money with what seems to me to be idiocy any Appeal in criminal court they file. I will be updating the download page with all of the paperwork pending before the Supreme Court in the next few days for reference reading for all of you.
Be sure to participate in our COMMUNITY , get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the community where you can discuss things about the cases in a debate area of the site.
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner or our featured authors, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners. If comments to this or any other articles are not related to the article or does not meet the terms of use for Rose Speaks, they will be removed by the moderators.
Numerous people have asked if I had a comment or thought on “the verdicts.” That afternoon I was on my way to New York for an assignment with one of my sons. I had the driver put the limo’s radio on the local news and heard the verdicts. Funny, the day before Dr. Bubbles was reported to be in a state of tears and Howard was comforting her…I was not sure if that was a “hug” or a “head lock,” either would have been appropriate…one more than the other, LOL
(…I was fired by Dr. Bubbles…NEVER was I fired by anyone involved in this case! Anyone who can show me proof in writing that I was ever “fired,” I will pay them $5,000… …and as I warned, “Let sleeping dogs sleep.” Or I promise, there will be tears enough to fill a very big pool! Also let me just say this to try and understand my position, reality never hit home with some of these people, and when I feel like I am being lied to or bullshitted I am gone. Be right with me and I will stand at the gates of hell with you, do the other, I will be having a cold drink sitting by a nice cool stream.)
Sure, like many I am surprised that Dr. Fabulous aka Kapoor walked away totally free…his “acts” of… …he does come across as likable… …He also had a great lawyer…
…Dr. Bubbles Eroshevich I believe never made any money in this adventure that she pursued with much gusto and energy to be in the “in crowd.” I have been told that she was paid for interviews during the “fun times” right after Anna Nicole Smith’s death. However, I have never heard of her actually making any money. If true she is the only one who did not make hundreds of thousands of dollars, THE only one. My other thought is that she came across as arrogant and not likable during the trial, smiling or those silly gigles at inappropriate times…simple, she does not come across as likable. I told Dr. Eroshevich of my concerns and that I felt that her license was in serious jeopardy. For reasons that will remain quiet, Dr. Eroshevich had choices…
…The evidence was not always 100% but keep in mind, in every lie there is a little truth. And something did happen, got it? good, get it!
For Howard, again, one of the smartest guys I have ever met, he thinks and rethinks and thinks some more. Is he a control freak? As much as he is brilliant and people with that characteristic can create havoc in their lives. Why? …With the money Anna had, a real nurse could have been hired, a real body guard could have been hired, but… …there was a great deal of truth in what was said about those dam spoons…”oh no Mr. Bill, tell me it ain’t so”….remember the “tell all,” I do.
…this jury took a great deal of time to come to the conclusions that they did. The district attorney is very much aware that they won, they got a conviction and to think that a judge is going to make it all go away? Wake up, it was Judge Perry who was told to “believe in the jury,” well he did and… ..The timing is bad, it is an election year and these defendants are in the middle of it. Steve Sadow I thought had the jury and they were getting it, I was wrong again …I still believe that Steve is a great lawyer and as I said before, this is Los Angeles and L.A. juries, well they are L.A. juries!
To read the complete article visit Desperate Exes.com, well worth the read and to give it all some thought.
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of our featured author, John Nazarian, please remember we are not lawyers and those opinions expressed here are each of our individual opinions and should not be taken as legal advice and/or legal opinions. The comments following this blog article are the opinions and sole property of the blog site members and do not necessarily reflect those of the site owners.
Entries (RSS)