Seldom do I ever get a chance to just unwind and relax and think nothing except just the food I am eating. Well I got together with a ‘re-new’ old friend, does that make any sense? Let me explain, I met Daniel DiCriscio years ago, a very long time ago. He was employed at the Jose Eber Salon and had just launched his music career. Funny as it seems I remember that CD and it was not bad. I was developing my new business and offices and Daniel was busy with his hair and as I said his music. This guy has some real talent other than being ‘Daniel’. Go ahead and Google him, after you Google me.

Recently his mom died and we communicated both by phone and email and I could hear the pain in his voice as well as in his writings. His emotions were ones that had escaped me during similar circumstances that I had and I felt bad that he was at a loss in his mother’s death. We spoke further and again, it was good for me in away that is hard for me to explain.

Well through the last couple of years Daniel has assisted me in a few projects and he, like myself are tough to miss. He has a presence! The great blond hair and of course his style of dress, too bad those in power during the Anna Nicole Show missed him and found that ‘mess’ who played too many episodes. Booby Bobby or Bobby Boob, whatever. The two of us make an interesting ‘set’, black and white, sour and sweet, Beauty and , well enough, you get my point.

I suggested we get together for a bite to eat and the amazing thing here is that we are both very entertaining when it comes to the rich and famous. It was to the point I was wondering how have we missed what could be one of the best duos since Dean and Jerry, Amos and Andy, Jan and Dean, and maybe even Mutt and Jeff. My point here is that we could both have a new career, we had each other laughing and on serious points we were both on target. Especially, our thoughts on Anna Nicole Smith as well as others both in and out of Hollywood. My perspective is sarcastic and stinging; Daniel has what I call a ‘snap’, like get over it. Call me a little odd, but I was very entertained and realized it was just him and me.

I am posting this picture to make my point, when it comes to ‘Hollywood Insiders’ no one can come close to either one of us. And we both understand how far to the line we can come after all of these years bumping around Hollywood. Speaking for myself, there are things that I would never speak of and a book, is never going to happen. For Daniel the stories about Elizabeth Taylor alone could fill two chapters in his book. My time with Miss Taylor could fill maybe ten pages….thanks Adam! I recall my first encounter with Peerez Hilton and thought, “ Beast “, and having to do a short pilot with him, Lisa Stanley of KRTH ( she is the best ) and Ryan Seacrest’s assistant, what’s her name……the painful part was Peerez Hilton…and those feet!

All I am saying is watch, there could very well be some very interesting ‘tea’ coming along and presented in away that only two people in this town could present, John & Daniel or Daniel & John……that will be a hump to stroll over…..in time.

Follow Us On Face Book at http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001254987261 and on Twitter at http://twitter.com/RoseSpeaks and see who Rose Speaks is following.

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.

Visit our Download Section for all documents on the cases we are following:

We will be listening to all of our readers about new cases. Do you have a tip for us on a case to follow? If so Contact Us, a link appears at the top of all pages; ALL TIPS ARE OF COURSE CONFIDENTIAL. If you would like to do some articles for Rose Speaks.com send us that information and we will give you our rules for guest writers.

©John J. Nazarian
March 22, 2011
Used with the permission of John Nazarian P. I. – writer
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

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.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: a ‘snap’, ABC Network, Access Hollywood, Amos and Andy, an interesting ‘set’, Anna Nicole Show, Anna Nicole Smith, Anthony Pellicano, Beauty and, Beauty and Beast, Beverly Hills, black and white, Bobby Boob, Bobby Trendy, Booby Bobby, both have a new career, both in and out of Hollywood, both on target, both very entertaining, bumping around Hollywood, Call me a little odd, Carlos Diaz, CBS-ET, Celebrity Trials, Daniel & John, Daniel DiCriscio, Daniel DiCriscio Exclusive, Daniel DiCriscio Messiah of Makeover, Daniel DiCriscio music career, Daniel DiCriscio's CD, Dean and Jerry, Debra Opri, Desperateexes.com, E Online!, each other laughing, Elizabeth Taylor, Entertainment Tonight, Extra Tv, Google him, Google me, Harvey Levin, He has a presence, High Profile Trials, Hollyweird Criminal Justice, Hollywood, Hollywood Criminal Justice, Hollywood Insiders, Howard and Anna, hump to stroll over, Jan and Dean, John & Daniel, John J. Nazarian, John J. Nazarian P. I., Jose Eber, Jose Eber Salon, just him and me, like get over it, Lisa Stanley, Lisa Stanley of KRTH, Mutt and Jeff, NBC Network, no one can come close to either one of us, no one can come close to us, one of the best duos, Peerez Hilton, Phil Spector, picture to make my point, PrezHitton.com, rich and famous, Rita Cosby, Rose Speaks Exclusive, Ryan Seacrest, Ryan Seacrest’s assistant, sarcastic and stinging, serious points we were both on target, ShowBiz Tonight, sour and sweet, Stanley Mosk Court House, stories about Elizabeth Taylor, style of dress, TMZ.com, very interesting ‘tea’ coming along, we are both very entertaining, years bumping around Hollywood, “ Beast “

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.

©Rose Turner
January 11, 2011
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

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.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Adam Braun Esq., Anna Nicole Show, Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith's Will, Anna Nicole Smith's Will and Estate, AP interview, Bahamas, bestseller., Beverly Hills, Brad Brunon, Brad Brunon Esq., Bradley Brunon, Bradley Brunon Esq., Britney Spears, Bruce Ross Esq., California Medical Board, Cedars Sinai, Celebrity Trials, Dale Tate, Dannielynn, David Barkhurst, Defense attorney Chris Smith, Deputy District Attorney David Barkhurst, Deputy District Attorney David Walgren, Deputy District Attorney Rene Rose, Deputy District Attorney Renee Rose, Desperateexes.com, Dr. Conrad Murray, Dr. Khris, Dr. Khristine Eroshevich, Dr. Sandeep Kapoor, E Online!, Edward M. Chernoff Esq., Ellyn Garofalo Esq., Ellyn Gerafalo Esq., Estate of Anna Nicole smith, flamboyant fruit cake, Harland Braun criminal lawyer, Harland Braun Esq., High Profile Trials, Hollyweird, Hollyweird Criminal Justice, Hollyweird Justice, Hollywood, Hollywood Criminal Justice, Howard K Stern, investigative agencies, J. Chris Smith Esq., J. Christopher Smith Esq., J. Christopher “Chris” Smith Esq., John J. Nazarian, John J. Nazarian P. I., Judge Perry, Judge Perry California Superior Court, Judge Robert L. Perry, Judge Robert Perry, Judge Robert Perry OJ Simpson, Linda Deutsch, Los Angeles District Attorney, Mariah Carey, Michael Jackson, misdemeanor with probation, Neil McCabe, Nicole White, O. J. Simpson, OJ Simpson’s Trial, Prosecutor Rene Rose, pseudonym is a felony, pseudonym names, Radar Online, Rene Rose Esq., Renee Rose, Ron Rale Esq., Sean Carney, State Bar of California, Steve Cooley, Steve Cooley Esq., Steve Sadow Esq., Superior Court Judge Robert J. Perry, Superior Court Judge Robert Perry, the Sadow Factor, the “real” Anna Nicole Smith, UCLA Medical Center, Virgie Arthur

In an AP interview lead criminal attorney for Howard K. Stern, Steve Sadow says his client’s law license is in real jeopardy. Sadow said in the interview; “Even if Stern receives misdemeanor probation, his prospects as a lawyer are bleak, because the State Bar of California will likely still treat him as a convicted felon.” Sadow is still hopeful that the verdicts will be overturned, dismissed or reduced to misdemeanors by Superior Court Judge Robert Perry. “The judge has the authority to consider the well-known and commonly accepted practice of doctors and hospitals using aliases and so-called false names.” If he cannot get Judge Perry to dismiss the charges he will urge Judge Perry in the reduction to a misdemeanor with probation. It appears from the interview that even if Sadow can get the charges reduced to misdemeanors that will not help keep Stern’s law license. Sadow did not indicate that he would ask for a new trial as Eroshevich’s attorney is saying he will. We have asked Mr. Sadow if he could clarify for us the future intensions on behalf of Stern but have not received any further comment back from him. My thoughts is that this weekend will be spent on strategy meetings by Stern’s attorneys.

Other attorneys we have talked to and those that understand that strange land of Hollywood justice said that both the medical board and the State Bar would most likely start proceedings for hearings to take away both license this coming week. You know an election and all!!!

Bruce Ross the lead attorney in the appeal of Anna Nicole Smith’s case going back to the Supreme Court in an interview with E Online was more optimistic saying; “it is very premature to speculate about Howard’s executorship in that motions for a new trial will no doubt will be filed, and because the trial judge has the discretion to reduce the two relatively minor felony convictions to misdemeanors.”

I know many of us are not lawyers but have served as Executors of family members will so being disbarred should not affect that unless it is for “appearance sake”, and if that occurs the Estate has a good back up plan that Anna Nicole Smith included in her Will with Ron Rale to step in if needed.

Brad Brunon is a tad more optimistic for his client Dr. Khristine Eroshevich saying he will urge the judge to reduce the charges or order a new trial. He indicates he will cite Eroshevich’s good faith. “No one said she was doing this out of ill will, she certainly didn’t do it for money.” Brunon told the AP in an interview; “That in lieu of suspension, the medical board could allow Eroshevich to practice with a monitor overseeing all of her prescriptions, and she could also be ordered to go through a reeducation program on prescriptions” Brunon stated that in his opinion he did not think most physicians knew that writing a prescription under a pseudonym is a felony, Brunon added in the interview that doctors treating stars have a dual obligation to provide good medical care but also to protect their privacy. .

Attorney Ellyn Garofalo, whose client Dr. Sandeep Kapoor was acquitted of all charges said “these statutes involving use of fake names have never been enforced in this context. It was so unusual that she was unable to find case law on the subject when doing research for the trial. “There are doctors in Beverly Hills today saying, ‘Oh, my God, this is illegal?’… It just goes on all the time, what physician in his right mind wants to take on a celebrity when they will get charged criminally.” .

Another top defense lawyer in Los Angeles, Harland Braun, the father of Adam Braun said of the convictions; “This is a shocker, the convictions of Dr. Khristine Eroshevich and Howard K. Stern for obtaining drug prescriptions for Smith under false names contradicts common practice. It’s absolutely necessary for survival in Hollywood, If it stands that keeping these people anonymous is a criminal act, a lot of doctors will have to refuse to take celebrity patients because they can’t protect them.”

Linda Deutsch of the AP said; “…in the wake of the convictions of her, [Anna Nicole Smith], psychiatrist and lawyer-boyfriend for using false names on her drug prescriptions, the Hollywood medical community awoke to the realization Friday that the practice might be off limits and some doctors could avoid treating celebrity clients rather than risk criminal charges.”

Anna Nicole Smith was known as Jane Brown, Susie Wong and other pseudonyms. Smith is not the exception in Hollywood of being treated under a pseudonym other known celebrities like Michael Jackson had several, performers such as Britney Spears and Mariah Carey to name just two more were known to use aliases when seeking medical care. Jackson’s doctor, Conrad Murray charged with involuntary manslaughter was not charged under this code of prescribing under the fake names he used for Jackson. Which makes me wonder why aren’t all of them being charged, from the doctors, to the hospitals to the pharmacists? Is if fair to send a message that we will not enforce this unless elections are close or we just don’t like you?

Nicole White. a spokeswoman for Cedars Sinai, and Dale Tate, a spokeswoman for UCLA Medical Center, said they were seeking comment from officials about the issue and had no immediate response. Both hospitals routinely admit celebrities under alias names and send prescriptions home with them under the same alias. When I talked to one of the hospitals a year ago they told me that if this happened it would cost hospitals in Los Angeles millions of dollars in revenue.

If the jury verdict documents provided by Radar Online are to be believed, the jury said they were deadlock on 3 felony counts for Eroshevich and six for Stern, which makes no sense to me at all.

Judge Perry has scheduled a hearing for Jan. 6 for further action in the case and possible sentencing.

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.

Visit our Download Section for all documents on the cases we are following.

We will be listening to all of our readers about new cases. Do you have a tip for us on a case to follow? If so Contact Us, a link appears at the top of all pages; ALL TIPS ARE OF COURSE CONFIDENTIAL

©Rose Turner
October 30, 2010
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

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.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Adam Braun Esq., Anna Nicole Smith, Anna Nicole Smith's Will, Anna Nicole Smith's Will and Estate, AP interview, Beverly Hills, Brad Brunon Esq., Britney Spears, Bruce Ross Esq., California Medical Board, Cedars Sinai, Celebrity Trials, Dale Tate, Dannielynn, Defense attorney Chris Smith, Dr. Conrad Murray, Dr. Khristine Eroshevich, Dr. Sandeep Kapoor, E Online!, Edward M. Chernoff Esq., Ellyn Garofalo Esq., Ellyn Gerafalo Esq., Estate of Anna Nicole smith, Harland Braun criminal lawyer, Harland Braun Esq., High Profile Trials, Hollywood, Hollywood Criminal Justice, Howard K Stern, J. Chris Smith Esq., Judge Robert Perry, Linda Deutsch, Mariah Carey, Michael Jackson, misdemeanor with probation, Nicole White, pseudonym is a felony, pseudonym names, Radar Online, Ron Rale Esq., State Bar of California, Steve Sadow Esq., Superior Court Judge Robert Perry, UCLA Medical Center, Virgie Arthur

You are probably wondering where I came up with “Three Blind Mice?”…well, that’s what they looked like to me in the arraignment room: Howard K. Stern, Dr. Khristine Eroshevich, and Dr. Sandeep A. Kapoor. OK, all kidding aside – Today was a very serious and intense day for Stern and the Doctors, and for me as well!

Believe it or not, the intensity surrounding my being at this arraignment today was unbelievable and completely ludicrous. As I was told a week before this arraignment that I was dressed “too over the top” at the last arraignment outing and seem to spark a little “Daniel” controversy, etc. But I am a big boy and where there is scandal, there is Daniel! LOL!

Well, I arrived at the courthouse early this morning as was a throng of media awaiting the arrival of “the three blind mice”! First to arrive was Dr. Khristine and her team, Dr. Khris and her lawyer, Adam Braun, both gave me a very friendly “Hello”, which I thought was very sweet considering their circumstances, although I didn’t care much for her “Saint John – like” rose/salmony colored skirt suit, looked old fashioned and her hair was a little too flat.

Next to arrive was “the ring master” himself Howard K. Stern and his legal eagles! Stern seem to have a strange almost goofy walk to me today, not his usual “sternest”. I walked in behind Howard K. Stern and his team, including Chris Smith Esq. of California and Steve Sadow of Georgia. When I was about to go through the security check, I didn’t realize that Dr. Kapoor was in front of me in line and was very solemn! It seemed that Dr. Kapoor didn’t garner that much attention as I thought he would.

Although I do have to state the fashions at this arraignment were not the best. I understand it is a courtroom, but everyone looked a little lackluster for some reason. I did not condone the “hummingbird’s”, from my last writing, fashion choice: pale gray pantsuit, which is fine, but her pants were shoved up her behind, and it looked like her pants were wedged in her. Sorry, a major faux pas!

Next, we were all up in the arraignment room. I was wishing they would have kicked on the AC, because it was a little too stuffy for me. Anyway, Howard and the 2 docs and their legal teams took the first 2 rows, center.

When the “three blind mice” were called to the stand, all I could see was “the hummingbird’s” wedge! Also, it was very hard to hear in the courtroom, I actually had to cup my ear to hear better, considering that the judge is wearing a microphone, go figure.

All three put in “Not Guilty Pleas”. Surprise! “Lin Wood’s” name did come up a lot in the arraignment hearing, more about that in part 2 of this series. The Commissioner granted the prosecutor’s motions: Handwriting exemplars from each defendant, etc, and a protective order against dissemination of discovery to protect privacy.

I felt that Dr. Khris and especially Dr. Kapoor seemed to be the most serious in the hearing today, maybe scared? All “three blind mice” held their hands clasped in front of them as school kids would facing a principal. At one point to add to the “circus” in the courtroom, a woman who “organizes” the people in the courtroom actually walked up to me as I was sitting, watching and listening intently to the hearing, and leaned over and whispered to me “Wow, you have such nice hair and skin!” I was like “huh?”!

After the “Not Guilty” pleas were stated, “the three blind mice” and I went down stairs to the awaiting press conference. Howard and his legal eagles were first. At almost the same time, Dr. Khristine Eroshevich and her team dashed to an awaiting limo and skipped the press conference. What was that about?!

Anyway, Steve Sadow took center stage and proceeded to, as it seemed, to hash over the same things again: Attorney General Jerry Brown, etc. It seemed that the Stern team wanted to “lighten” it up a bit. The press wanted to hear Howard K. Stern say something, but he didn’t.

I stood behind Dr. Kapoor and Howard and his legal team during his press conference. I didn’t feel that the press seemed that interested in Dr. Kapoor, I may be wrong about that, but that is what it felt like. When the press conference was over, the entire media throng encased Howard and his team all the way to their limo. Howard, to me, seems to enjoy the attention. I am not saying that this is a bad trait, but a little odd, maybe? The press left “poor” Dr. Kapoor standing there as they followed Howard.

After Howard’s limo exited, the press started asking me questions. I did a “mini” press conference! I was asked many questions and I did the best I could answering them. I gave some heartfelt “Anna” comments and also gave my own insight into this tragedy. Daniel DiCriscio’s comments were picked up by E Online! Although, I did have one interviewer ask me “off the record”, ” Why did Howard bring out of state attorney’s, isn’t that illegal?” I heard that a lot today from other people in the courtroom, too.

I thought I heard in the courtroom the judge say June 24th or 25th for the preliminary hearing, but I think I heard “the hummingbird” say she is going on vacation the 26th, so they will all have to come back and set a date. The preliminary hearing is to be set for some time in June 2009, and is expected to last 2 weeks…Yikes!

This is Part 1 of 2 articles by Daniel DiCriscio, the Messiah of Make Over, the eyes and ears for Rose Speaks.com in the Howard K. Stern, Dr. Sandeep Kapoor and Dr. Khristine Eroshevich court hearings from beginning to end.

© Daniel DiCriscio
May 13, 2009
Used with the permission of Daniel DiCriscio, the Messiah of Make Over
All Rights Reserved, do not reproduce in whole or in part without the express written consent of the author.

The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of our featured author, Daniel DiCriscio, 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.

Please also read our Terms of Use and our Privacy Policy.

Tags: Adam Braun, AG Jerry Brown, Anna Nicole Smith, Celebrity Trials, Chris Smith Esq., Daniel DiCriscio, Daniel DiCriscio Exclusive, Daniel DiCriscio Messiah of Makeover, Dr. Khristine Eroshevich, Dr. Sandeep Kapoor, E Online!, Exclusive by Daniel DiCriscio, Howard K Stern, John J. Nazarian P. I., L. Lin Wood, Steve Sadow