As the California Criminal Trial of Howard K. Stern, Dr. Sandeep Kapoor and Khristine Eroshevich looms for August 4, 2010, the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith tightens the noose on four major witnesses.
You have to wonder if this will affect the credibility of Ford Shelley, G. Ben Thompson, Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson as well as attorney Susan Brown. It also appears that Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers III for the South Carolina Federal Court decided to issue this Order without need of a Hearing.
On July 1, 2010 the Court in South Carolina issued an Court Order allowing the addition of Gaither Thompson II, Gina Shelley, Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia. The new defendants have twenty one (21) days to answer the Amended First Complaint so don’t look for this to go to trial before the criminal charges in California is tried to conclusion.
HERE ARE THE HIGH POINTS I FOUND IN THE COURT’S SEVEN (7) PAGE ORDER
“Plaintiff asserts causes of action for conversion, wrongful taking of estate property in violation of California Probate Code § 850, et seq., statutory and common law commercial appropriation of right of publicity in violation of California Civil Code § 3344.1, unjust enrichment/restitution, unfair competition in violation of California Business & Professional Code § 17200, et seq., violation of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1030(a)(5) and civil conspiracy.
That the Estate’s property has been distributed to other entities including Geraldo Rivera with Fox News, the O’Quinn Law Firm, former television journalist Rita Cosby, and the California Department of Justice.
Counsel for Ford has consented to the filing of the proposed Amended Complaint. See Email from MacDonald to Lantta dated October 28, 2009. Thompson has not filed a Response in opposition the motion. The only opposition comes from proposed new Defendants Brown and the Law Firm. 1 Brown argues that allowing the amendments would be prejudicial to her and would be futile as to the claims against her. Brown does not appear to oppose the addition of Gaither, Melanie and Gina as Defendants in this action or to the addition of factual allegations regarding Ford’s distribution of Estate property to other third-parties.
[Brown] argues that she would be prejudiced due to the fact that she has not had the opportunity to participate in discovery as a party. However, in his Response, Plaintiff asserts that he is not opposed to amending the deadlines in this case to allow Brown to conduct discovery.
Brown argues that, as former counsel in this case, she is immune from the claims Plaintiff seeks to allege. Generally, an attorney is immune from liability to third persons arising from the performance of his or her professional activities as an attorney on behalf of and with the knowledge of his or her client. See Hunt v. Mortgage Electronic Registration, 522 F. Supp.2d 749, 758 (D.S.C. 2007). However, both Thompson and Ford testify that they did not authorize her to distribute Estate property to the O’Quinn Law. Firm.
The Clerk of Court is directed to file the Amended Complaint, which is attached as an exhibit to Plaintiff’s Motion. Plaintiff must serve the Amended Complaint within 15 days of the date of this Order. Defendants must respond in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Ok after reading the First Amended Complaint I see this is the same exhibit filed with the Court in September 2009, so nothing new here; just has not read it in almost a year.
FILINGS ON JULY 1, 2010 WITH THE SOUTH CAROLINA COURT.
July 1, 2010 Court Order allowing the First Amended Complaint to include Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1, 2010 First Amended Complaint filed by the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit A filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit B filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit C filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit D filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit E filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit F filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit G filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit H filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
July 1 2010 Exhibit I filed with First Amended Complaint by he Estate of Anna Nicole Smith adding Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson and the attorney Susan Brown and her Law Firm in Atlanta Georgia
Summons to Serve on Gina Thompson Shelley, Gaither Ben Thompson II and Melodie Thompson
Summons to Serve on Susan M. Brown and the Law Offices of Susan M. Brown
LATEST FILING IN THE TEXAS CASE I have not had time to read any of these papers.
For now we are NOT going to buy these papers due to cost, if it gets traction after the beginning of the Criminal trial or the August 6, 2010 hearing on Stern’s Special Appearance, then we will begin to purchase these papers as well.
Be sure to participate in our MEMBERS ONLY FORUMS, get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the forums where you can safely discuss things you do not want to see copied and pasted on another 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.
Who does the brown hair belong too or as one of our moderators said “Someone got some splaining to do”.
What the Orange County crime scene investigators and the FBI needs is to match is Caucasian head hair, dark brown, fine 5″ long.
In a case that the D.A. office has released ten of thousand of pages a month in a public trial of Casey Anthony, why do they fight to release some of the information to Anthony’s defense team?
The FBI released it to the Casey Anthony defense team ONLY upon request and then not until April 5, 2010.
Report requested on March 17, 2009 from Linda Kenney Baden Esq. file material from the Trace Evidence Unit. This material includes bench notes, computer printouts, and other specific information regarding the case.
The Sheriff’s department submitted seven crime scene investigators hair samples on three different days, under names on two dates and just by numbers on another dates.
The additional hair and other specimens were received on November 25, 2009, December 8, 2009 and December 9, 2009.
The following specimens were submitted under cover of communication dated November 24, 2009 and examined in the Trace Evidence Unit (Hair and Fiber).
Seven crime scene investigators (extensive hair samples)
A Shop Vac Vacuum (Anthony home)
2 Steam Cleaners (Anthony home)
A vacuum cleaner (Anthony home)
And a plastic bag. (Anthony home)
On November 30, 2009 examined by the Trace Unit (Hair and Fiber) Items resubmitted for testing: TEU secondary evidence.
This report states it supplements FBI laboratory reports dated August 1, 2008, August 6, 2008, August 13, 2008, September 12, 2008, October 6, 2008, October 15, 2008, October 21, 2008, November 6, 2008, December 19, 2008, January 27, 2009 and June 25, 2009.
Human hairs with characteristics of apparent decomposition; however, none were found.
The previously reported Caucasian head hair found on specimen is microscopically dissimilar to the head hairs compromising the seven crime scene investigators and it matched none of them.
Crime scene investigators originally found the 5″ of hair and eliminated the seven crime scene investigators Scene was processed on Dec. 11 through Dec. 20. The hair sample was submitted to the FBI on Dec. 13, 2008.
Then there is the canvas laundry bag similar to the one that Caylee Anthony’s remains were in; well the finger prints on that excluded Casey Anthony, George Anthony, Cynthia M. Anthony and Lee A. Anthony. So the fingerprints do not belong to anyone in the Anthony family.
The hair does not belong to Caylee Anthony, Casey Anthony, George Anthony, Cynthia M. Anthony or Lee Anthony. Now they have eliminated all of the crime scene investigators, so who does the hair belong too?
Remember that very important piece of duct tape? The one that was so important to compare hair samples and fingerprints too? Well somewhere between the Orange County Sheriff’s Office crime scene investigators and by the time the FBI had completed the examination that piece of duct tape had been contaminated and so it shows nothing that can be introduced, how convenient is that?
Then you have the reports of Texas Equu Search, stating that on August 28, 2008 and the first part of September 2008 that because of a tropical storm the water where the remains were found was at least waist high to they did not search that area while in Florida.
However, Roy Kronk saw the bag with something white (like a skull) on two days in the middle of August 2008 and after all of that flooding went back on a “hunch” and found the remains on December 11, 2008, so why had the bag not floated a tad with the current of the water? Has Kronk given a sample of his 5” brown hair to be excluded? I am not saying Roy Kronk killed or put Caylee’s body there, I do feel like something with Kronk smells fishy.
This is the danger when cases are tried in the public media of the infotainment world on Nancy Grace, Geraldo and Greta Van Susteren, Fox and Headline News Infotainment.
Can Casey Anthony get a fair trial anywhere in Florida or for that matter in the United States?
I will be adding links of other papers released today added to this article but the hair analysis jumped out at me and I wanted to get this up first.
Be sure to participate in our MEMBERS ONLY FORUMS, get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the forums where you can safely discuss things you do not want to see copied and pasted on another 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.
I have been looking around the web at blogs this weekend and came up with this question. What Polarizes Bloggers on High Profile Cases from Anna Nicole Smith to Haleigh Cummings and Caylee Anthony?
There seems to be few out there with an open mind to follow the legal paperwork, let Google be your friend and make up your own mind of what is the truth for you; or has that been done already?
Whether it is Anna Nicole Smith with the pro Howard K. Stern bloggers on TMZ.com or the Virgie Arthur bloggers on Topix.net, few seem to be open about either side. It has become a hate festival with each side bashing the other and when Court papers come out reading through them and declaring a victory for “their side”…
I have now went out and done the same with bloggers on Haleigh Cummings and Caylee Anthony and found them just as divided and polarized with few bloggers still open to facts. For instance in the Caylee Anthony investigation we now have the 5 inch piece of brown hair found that DNA cannot match it to Caylee Anthony, her mother Casey Anthony, the Anthony family and even the crime scene investigators. I would think this would cause many to back up and take a second look, who does that hair belong to? Added to that you have the FBI lab contaminating the duct tape so any evidence on that is now useless. However with all those new revelations in the past week has any blogger decided to back up and take a second look? If so I cannot find them. They spin it to their side and bash the other side or even those still open minded for being dumb or having an agenda.
Then you have Haleigh Cummings, a case that has been spun out of control by Infotainment “News” as the newest hot story. We see the same players, Greta Van Susteren, Geraldo Rivera and Nancy Grace, each competing for the “bombshell or exclusive only here”, but what they talk about is all over the news by the time they come on at night. So there is neither new evidence, an exclusive and/or a bombshell, only bottom line ratings. We are now seeing lawyers in that case, like the Casey Anthony case; beginning to remove themselves from these cases or have bar complaints and then the defense of the lawyers and not the case becomes the focal point.
In Anthony’s case it is Jose Baez for Casey Anthony being reported by the D. A. with what seems to be ongoing never ending complaints against Jose Baez. In the Cummings case we have a lawyer now saying that because in the beginning things were going so bad that, Kim Picazio the attorney for Haleigh’s mother, Crystal Sheffield, had a media consultant who assisted Crystal Sheffield and the legal team, lending their expertise and advice on the strategic placement and release of information to turn around the negative press Crystal Sheffield was receiving. Crystal Sheffield and Kim Picazio spent a great deal of time with their media consultant. “The release of information, or breaking news, in a high media case, must be preplanned, time-sensitive, and intentional,” said Ms. Picazio. Ms. Kim L. Picazio is out of the Haleigh Cummings case and has been cleared by the Florida State Bar of any wrongdoing.
We have seen a lot of that here at Rose Speaks.com in relations to all cases connected to Anna Nicole Smith and I still find it a phenomenal situation with the new instant news of celebrity or high profile cases on the internet.
In public filings by Ms. Picazio she gives her insight about the lawyer turned media spokesperson for a family member in one of these cases saying; “As the spokesperson for Crystal Sheffield, the release of positive information to the public, whether on the internet, or to other media sources, in furtherance her best interest or desired results. …
…The very nature of the role of a “media spokesperson” is different in kind than most other roles customarily served by an attorney. It requires the disclosure of information customarily thought of as “off limits” to the public and/or your opponents. This job requires more than showing up at media interviews. It requires complex strategy, intelligent calculation, finding and maintaining inside sources for information, and trusted contacts who can be your eyes and ears for the “feel” of the public. Damning information about a client that is swirled around the Internet will surely be aired in national headlines, and can devastate your client’s image, credibility, case or cause. Disclosures of information are aimed at directing, it was imperative that we kept key contacts in law enforcement, the community, the media, as well as on the internet, to properly counter many unflattering stories which could have destroyed Crystal’s credibility and chances of ever having custody of her children. Quite simply, guiding, directing and dodging the release of information from your client’s detractors, is an intensely calculated process in a high media case. The parties were involved in a high media tragedy, and “fault” and “blame” for the disappearance of Haleigh Cummings is still being discussed nationwide. Disclosures of this nature were done in the obvious effort to steer suspicions away from her as a suspect in her daughter’s disappearance, raise her public image, and gain an advantage in the very public custody issues that were being televised each day on the news.”
[These] “cases have created a nationwide obsession, and it continues to be a prime topic in local and national news, and internet crime news sites.”
Ms Picazio goes on to say; “The internet is essentially where a growing number of the general public gets their news every day. I received thousands of emails from the public commenting on the Crystal Sheffield/Haleigh Cummings matter, some of which even told me how to better put on my make-up. The public sent tips, leads, support, well-wishes and sometimes screaming insults, my way.”
Then Ms. Picazio addresses the new phenomena of internet bloggers saying; “… [That both Ms. Picazio and] Crystal Sheffield, have suffered libelous attacks on their reputations by internet bloggers, and avant guard journalists.” [You have to] “always attempt to protect your client from these types of self-serving intruders who would befriend the family, or members of the legal team, only to be secretly feeding a hidden agenda for fame, fortune, or the notoriety. From the inception of the Haleigh Cummings case, scheming bloggers have sought the coveted “inside scoop”, attempting to befriend family members, journalists, and law enforcement officers.”
[Lawyers now] “have to have sophisticated computer equipment installed, and often staff member will “catch” fishing expeditions from bloggers attempting to get an email back from the legal team/spokesperson. Emails are easily edited, and on many occasions, you will catch these schemes as they were being planned in chat rooms dedicated to the Haleigh case.”
… “Insidious bloggers can be devastating to a client in modern-day high media cases.”
Ms Picazio finishes her thoughts on bloggers by saying; “Often fanatical about missing children’s cases, bloggers spend countless hours “sleuthing” information about all people connected to the case, call and write to authorities with rumors for false tips, and try to become personally close with insiders or family members involved in the case. The most coveted information source for a blogger is to obtain insider information directly from a family member in a case. Unfortunately, the Crystal Sheffield/Haleigh Cummings matter is a prime example of the intrusion and disruption caused by modern-day, fanatical bloggers, who go to great lengths for an “inside scoop” in high media cases. The internet and manipulative bloggers was, and remains, a hurdle to contend with in the Haleigh Cummings case by all involved. There have been countless news articles on the subject of the internet frenzy that plagues the Haleigh case and investigators. The Haleigh Cummings case is the most active criminal investigation blogged about on the internet to date, other than the Caylee Anthony matter. Although I was surely not obsessed with blogging, the internet frenzy was a very real fact and hazard that existed in the case.”
I found Ms. Picazio thoughts expressed to the Florida State Bar something to ponder. Is this the new typical “blogger”? As you know we have had bloggers cross state lines to take pictures of our home just because. We have read where bloggers where doing screen shots or even sending things from Rose Speaks.com to lawyers in the Anna Nicole Smith cases only to find out later from the lawyers, they would never use something obtained in that way. So are bloggers the next step in reporting news or are bloggers angry people who take out that anger towards the world behind the safety of a computer screen in these high profile cases? Do we all need to “own our words”?
NEWEST PAPERS FILED IN CASES WE ARE FOLLOWING:
April 26, 2010 Notice of Hearing for the Motion for Continuance set in Harris County for May 7, 2010 at 11:30 A. M.
Be sure to participate in our MEMBERS ONLY FORUMS, get the most out of the site by learning your way around in the forums where you can safely discuss things you do not want to see copied and pasted on another 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.
Eleven months ago we put up this video of Joy Wray, Equusearch volunteer, stating she had search the area where Roy Kronk had said the body was in August before the discovery of Caylee Anthony by Kronk in December 2008. Ms Wray, for the past year has been a lone voice that no one wanted to hear in the district attorney’s office because she said that Caylee Anthony remains were not where Roy Kronk said they were.
Now almost a year later the Orange County Sheriff’s office has decided to talk to her. I guess they missed the video with this article made almost a year ago.
Joy Wray has stated she spent hours looking for Caylee Anthony’s body before Kronk found the remains in December and said she had the video that proves Caylee’s body was not in the woods in November 2008 where Kronk had said it was. If you remember, three of Roy Kronk’s fellow workers said they did not remember Kronk even talking about seeing any remains in August. In fact one of Kronk’s fellow employees said he only remembered the rattle snake they found and that he took it home and put it in the freezer. I have always wondered why his fellow workers remember the rattle snake but don’t remember or, for the most part, was hazy at best about Kronk saying he saw a body in the woods on three different days in August. This was before the tropical storm hit in mid August making those woods impossible to get to for a couple of months by volunteer searcher’s like Tim Miller’s Texas Equusearch.
In a rush to prove Casey Anthony was the murderer of her daughter, because after all a young immature woman who lied had to be a murderer, why did the Orange County DA focus only on Casey Anthony from the beginning? So does that mean if you are young, immature and a compulsive liar, then you must be a murderer? I have always had a hard time swallowing that logic.
That was followed by thousands of doucments released by the Orange County district attorney’s office under the Florida sunshine act. All of these papers went to prove how bad Casey Anthony was and to convict her in the public since it was only a circumstantial case. The infotainment business went ballistic on the story almost handing out the white sheets and the rope, sadly something many of us remember happening in the spring of 2007 on another case we have been following.
We have a whole section of those documents release over the last 1+ years to preserve them after they are taken offline by news papers, etc…
Ms. Wray has always said she had a video that backed up Casey Anthony’s defense team, led by Jose Baez and Andrea Lyon, that showed that Caylee’s remains could not be where Kronk said they were in August 2008. Ms. Wray has maintained her video would prove that someone other than Casey Anthony probably put the remains of Caylee Anthony there after Casey Anthony was in jail.
Yesterday the Orange County Sheriff’s department descended on Ms. Wray’s home with a search warrant to pick up her computer for examination because that is where the video is stored. Let’s hope they don’t accidentally erase the video or the hard drive while examining it. Eleven months later with at least one video “overlooked” and now the Orange County Sheriff’s department wants to interview Ms. Wray… YOU THINK????
The Orange County Sheriff’s department questioned Ms. Wray yesterday as they served the search warrant at her home for her computer. I hope that Casey Anthony’s defense team and private investigator, Mort Smith, makes sure they stay on top of this evidence and not let it slip away as the district attorney’s office and sheriff’s department might shop around for a forensic specialist like they did with Casey’s car when the first forensic specialist to examines the car disagree with what the district attorney’s office wanted to hear, thus they shopped for an expert who would agree with them about the car.
The defense team said Monday they’ve located two additional volunteers whose names did not appear on the list provided by Miller. Both of these individual’s claim they were in the same area where the toddler’s body was found, but did not find Caylee.
One of the volunteers, Laura Buchanan, of New Jersey, submitted a sworn statement that “may provide” ammunition for Casey Anthony’s defense team, per media in Florida
WE HAVE NOW EDITED THE STATEMENT OF LAURA BUCHANAN SINCE ONE OF OUR NEW POSTERS ON THIS CASE, tupelohonny, FOR PROVIDING US WITH A LINK WHERE WE COULD READ THE STATEMENT FOR OURSELVES. By doing this in all of the cases we follow we hope we stick to the facts as they are presented to the Court in flings, and not fall into the “hype, spin or sensationalism” as others who post might want to go. This is why we ONLY cover cases where we can get the actual court papers.
In the statement, Buchanan wrote:
“On September 3, 2008, the team in which I was assigned, [from TES], went to Suburban Street in Orlando and searched the area near where the remins of Caylee Anthony were found.
“We were in that area for approximately 3 to 4 hours. I personally searched near the privacy fence and worked my way towards and then beyond the spot where the body was found”
I did not notice anything unusual. I did not notice a strange smell. I noticed no buzzards, nor unusual animal or insect activity.
It is my opinion that the remains of Caylee Anthony were not there during the time of our search.”
Another volunteer said that Caylee’s body was not found when he searched the same area. This volunteer believes Casey Anthony killed Caylee, but that the family hid Caylee Anthony’s body and put it in the woods later after November 2008. If that proves true then what and why did Kronk called the Orange County Sheriff’s office those three times in August 2008?
Joseph Jordan statement reads, “On September 1, 2008, I and a group of approximately 30 TES volunteers went to the area of Suburban and Hope Springs Streets in Orlando, Florida. We went to that area to search for the remains of Caylee Anthony.
Although I was in the area with over 30 people, only five to six volunteers and I searched the ara by the stockade fence along the south side of Suburban Street near Hope Springs Street. Among the five to six volunteers with me were Danny Ibison and his dog and a Panama City Sheriff’s Deputy with one of his two dogs.”
My question with Mr. Jordan statement about the dogs is were they cadiver dogs? If not what they trained to look for? It is my understanding that trained dogs excel at what they are trained to do, but no where do I see where the two dogs were in fact specialized to hunt for remains of a human.
So who killed Caylee Anthony and why, if this is all true, did Kronk make calls in August 2008 when there are claims that there was no body there to be found?
Pick up a copy of the Motion with the two statements attached in our download section opened to all.
November 23, 2009 Casey Anthony’s legal team filed copy of Motion with Memorandum of law to modify the previous Court Order. Anthony wants the Court to order TES to turn over all material involving the search for Caylee Anthony. The Motions has 2 exhibits from TES’ volunteers that their names were not on the list provided to Anthony by TES. The Motions has two exhibits with it from TES’ volunteer statements that their names were not on the list of names turned over by TES.
If this does not prove that the sensationalized infotainment of Geraldo Rivera, Greta Van Susteren and Nancy Grace, once again being passed as news was the driving force of a conviction in the media, just as they have done to other cases we have been following, then I don’t know what does. When will these infotainment programs have to give a disclaimer as one watches that they are not reliable news sources but infotainment always following that illusive ratings sweep that brings in those advertisement dollars? We can only hope as other forms of media began to call them out on this type of total disregard for what the truth might be, via blogs and online news sites, they or the advertisers will began to insist on a disclaimer.
Why did it take over a year to finally check out all of the leads? Why has the infotainment shows such as Fox “News” and CNN’s Headline News just been allowed to run a muck? Hello, if some of this were real news, don’t you think CNN would have it on their “news” channel instead of the sensational part called Head Line “News” and Nancy Grace?
Stay with Rose Speaks.com as we try to sift through facts vs. infotainment in all of the cases we follow, hopefully continuing to give our readers food for thought and encourage our readers to hunt for the truth themselves even if we disagree.
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.
Here is the first group of filings unsealed in the New York Federal Court for the Southern District as Ordered by the Honorable Denny Chin.
These are the filings unsealed by Howard K. Stern, the filings by Rita Cosby and Hachette Books Ordered to be Unsealed have not appeared yet. As soon as they do we will have those as well which will be parts of depositions we don’t have this go around from Stern.
I have not read through these yet but wanted to get them all listed for you and then we will discuss and do articles on these documents as we go back through the debunking of the book to the lead up of the Jury Trial scheduled to begin on November 30, 2009, let the games begin!!!!
September 28, 2009 Howard K. Stern Unredacted Response Summary Judgment part 1 filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Howard K. Stern Unredacted Response Summary Judgment part 2 filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Howard K. Stern’s Unredacted Rule 56-1 Statement of Facts part 1 of 3 filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Howard K. Stern’s Unredacted Rule 56-1 Statement of Facts part 2 of 3 filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Howard K. Stern’s Unredacted Rule 56-1 Statement of Facts part 3 of 3 filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Howard K. Stern Unredacted Declaration dated February 5, 2009 filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Howard K. Stern’s complete Unredacted two days of depositions filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Rita Cosby’s complete Unredacted two different days of depositions filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment. This is part 1.
September 28, 2009 Rita Cosby’s complete Unredacted two different days of depositions filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment. This is part 2.
September 28, 2009 Rita Cosby’s complete Unredacted two different days of depositions filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment. This is part 3.
September 28, 2009 Bea Stern partial Unredacted deposition filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Don Clark partial Unredacted deposition filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Don Clark partial Unredacted deposition from the Florida Case filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Wilma Vicedomine’s partial Unredacted deposition with exhibits filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Jack Harding partial Unredacted deposition filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Mark Speer partial Unredacted deposition filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Ray Martino’s partial Unredacted deposition filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Virgie Arthur’s partial Unredacted deposition by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Stern’s Exhibit 4 Copy of emails from Jackie Hatten to Howard K. Stern and Anna Nicole Smith from September 2006 regarding Daniel’s death filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Stern’s Exhibit 6 Emails between Howard K. Stern and the attorney Tracy Ferguson regarding the transferring of the Title back to G. Ben Thompson without notifying Anna Nicole Smith in regards to Horizons in the Bahamas by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Stern’s Exhibit 8 emails from Melanie Thompson whose father is a Cardiologist about what she thinks might have happened in Daniel Smith’s death Bahamas filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
Employees of Hachette Books and Rita Cosby’s Co-Author
September 28, 2009 Bruce Littlefield with exhibits partial Unredacted deposition filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Amy Einhorn partial Unredacted deposition with exhibits filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment. She was an employee of Hachette Books.
September 28, 2009 Dan Wakeford partial Unredacted deposition filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Evan Boorstyn partial Unredacted deposition filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Jamie Raab partial Unredacted deposition filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Leslie Pockell partial Unredacted deposition filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Mitchell Hoffman partial Unredacted deposition with exhibits filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment. He was an employee of Hachette Books.
September 28, 2009 Stern’s Exhibit 31 Unredacted book notes and emails with notes in the margins of the book filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Stern’s Exhibit 32 Unredacted book notes and emails with notes in the margins of the book filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Stern’s Exhibit 33 Book promotion Notes and potential jacket covers with lead ins about the book filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Larry Birkhead partial Unredacted deposition filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Patrik Simpson’s partial Unredacted deposition filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Pol’Attue’s partial Unredacted deposition filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Copy of the Filing of Anna Nicole Smith’s Will from California showing Howard K. Stern as the Executor filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Stern Exhibit 16 Copy of partial Filing of Anna Nicole Smith’s Burial Proceeding hearing from Florida involving Ron Rale filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Stern’s Exhibit 5 Deed Information and value of Horizon’s in the Bahamas at the time Anna Nicole Smith bought it filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Stern’s exhibit 7 a Copy of the TRO against G. Ben Thompson and the Electric Company in regards to the house called Horizons in the Bahamas filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Stern Copy of Marshall Bankruptcy Litigation from Lexus Nexus filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
September 28, 2009 Stern Copy of Marshall Bankruptcy Litigation from Lexus Nexus part 2 filed by Lin Wood in the compliance with the Court’s Order to file Unredacted records used to decided Summary Judgment.
NEWEST PAPERS IN THE SOUTH CAROLINA CASE BOTH OF G. BEN THOMPSON’S LAWYERS FILE MOTIONS TO WITHDRAW AS HIS COUNSEL.
September 28, 2009 G. Ben Thompson’s lead attorney in South Carolina Lead lawyer, R. Scott Joyce, filed a Motion to Withdraw as Thompson’s attorney and asked for an “In Camera” hearing at the earliest possible date for the judge. In camera does NOT mean Ex Parte, I believe it means just closed to the public but it could mean without Stern’s lawyer if there is some possible ethics or criminal charges looming.
September 30, 2009 G. Ben Thompson’s attorney from Georgia, Susan M. Brown, filed a Motion to Withdraw as Thompson’s attorney and asked for an “In Camera” hearing at the earliest possible date for the judge. In camera does NOT mean Ex Parte, I believe it means just closed to the public but it could mean without Stern’s lawyer if there is some possible ethics or criminal charges looming. This occurred less than a week after Brown’s deposition and Order to turn over exhibits had to be completed by Brown.
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.
In a stunning potential horrendous defeat Georgia Attorney Susan M. Brown has been Ordered to turn over documents and sit for a deposition in the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith vs. G. Ben Thompson, Ford Shelley and others.
It appears at first read of the papers that Brown must give up all information involving any third person conversations she had with anyone else about giving the Estate property to the media and having it copied by other parties involved with other lawsuits as well as Danny Santiago of the California DOJ, although she, [Brown], sent multiple letters to the Estate stating she had the hard drives and would turn them over.
The court’s Order also would appear to open the door of federal criminal fraud against Susan M. Brown Esq. in some of the actions she allegedly took as not being protected under the client-attorney privilege.
The Estate of Anna Nicole Smith lost its attorney fees in pursuing Brown. The Court also tightened up subpoena with subject matter by the Estate in four (4) of the requested production of documents, but definitely Ordering Susan M. Brown Esq, an Atlanta Georgia Attorney to sit for a deposition. However, it opens the door for a wide variety of questions concerning how that Estate property ended up in other people hands and/or copied by others with Brown’s knowledge.
Brown must comply with the request including contracts, bills etc. within twenty (20) days from today which is September 19, 2009.
Is the South Carolina Federal Suit the beginning of the end of all of these cases?
How damaging is it for Susan M. Brown Esq of Georgia and her clients with the federal court saying she with her client, Ford Shelley made have committed federal criminal fraud?
In South Carolina the Court has Ordered a new scheduling Order to be submitted by the Estate, via the Executor Howard K. Stern, and Ford Shelley extending deadlines currently due to accommodate what the Georgia Court Order entails. It also appears to once again open the door for additional depositions from many of the same people we see entwined in these multiple over lapping lawsuits in multiple federal and state jurisdictions and allegations by Howard K. Stern and/or the Estate of Anna Nicole Smith.
LATEST PAPERS IN THE SOUTH CAROLINA FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT INCLUDING SETTING A NEW SCHEDULING ORDER. CASE
August 31, 2009 Order from the Northern District Federal Court of Georgia, granting in part the Motion to Compel deposition and discovery from attorney Susan Brown, but limiting the deposition and discovery to scope as ordered.
August 31, 2009 the Court Order from the federal Court in South Carolina setting new schedule of due dates and trial date to accommodate the Court Order that came out today involving the Georgia attorney for Ford Shelley, Susan M. Brown Esq.
LATEST PAPERS IN THE TEXAS STATE DISTRICT COURT CASE
August 28, 2009 Court Order Denying Art Harris’ Motion to Reconsider and setting deadline of when production is required and to not destroy or alter anything of the media not ordered to be turned over so that if it is needed at a later date and the Court Orders for it to go to the Special Master it will be intact.
August 28, 2009 Exhibit A copy of dismissing State Bar Complaint on Neil McCabe filed with Plaintiff Virgie Arthur’s Response to Art Harris Motion to Reconsider the Appointment of Craig Ball with a Request for Protective Order and Stay in the forensic exam of his electronic media.
August 28, 2009 Exhibit F copy emails between Nancy Hamilton of Jackson Walker and Neil McCabe of the O’Quinn law firm in reference to the Friday, August 28, 2009, filed with Plaintiff Virgie Arthur’s Response to Art Harris Motion to Reconsider the Appointment of Craig Ball with a Request for Protective Order and Stay in the forensic exam of his electronic media.
August 28, 2009 Exhibit G Plaintiff, Virgie Arthur’s, Response to Art Harris and Bonnie Stern special appearance filed on November 21, 2008 as an exhibit in reference to the Plaintiff’s Response to Art Harris Motion to Reconsider the Appointment of Craig Ball with a Request for Protective Order and Stay in the forensic exam of his electronic media.
August 28, 2009 Exhibit K email from Teresa Stephens to the Court dated June 25, 2009 filed as an exhibit in reference to the Plaintiff’s Response to Art Harris Motion to Reconsider the Appointment of Craig Ball with a Request for Protective Order and Stay in the forensic exam of his electronic media.
August 28, 2009 Exhibit L email from Lyndal Harrington to all parties on February 3, 2009 advising of the robbery at her home on December 18, 2008 filed as an exhibit in reference to the Plaintiff’s Response to Art Harris Motion to Reconsider the Appointment of Craig Ball with a Request for Protective Order and Stay in the forensic exam of his electronic media.
August 28, 2009 Exhibit M copy of the Court Order from May 22, 2009 where Lyndal Harrington to be arrested and kept over the Memorial Day weekend holiday, filed as an exhibit in reference to the Plaintiff’s Response to Art Harris Motion to Reconsider the Appointment of Craig Ball with a Request for Protective Order and Stay in the forensic exam of his electronic media.
August 28, 2009 Exhibit 0 copy of the colored picture of the three feet of emails between Defendant Art Harris and Rose Turner previously turned over filed as an exhibit in reference to the Plaintiff’s Response to Art Harris Motion to Reconsider the Appointment of Craig Ball with a Request for Protective Order and Stay in the forensic exam of his electronic media.
August 28, 2009 Exhibit P copy of emails between Defendant Art Harris and Rose Turner dated December 10, 2008 previously turned over filed as an exhibit in reference to the Plaintiff’s Response to Art Harris Motion to Reconsider the Appointment of Craig Ball with a Request for Protective Order and Stay in the forensic exam of his electronic media.
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.
In “A Question of Murder,” the true crime book that gives an insider view of the death investigations of Daniel Smith, his mother Anna Nicole Smith, and others, famed forensic pathologist and lawyer Dr. Cyril H. Wecht, and his coauthor Dawna Kaufmann, reveals facts never disclosed before.
The following is a brief summary of Wecht’s take on the case — but you’ll want to get a copy of the book and savor it yourself.
In September 2006, Howard K. Stern and Michael Scott, at that time Anna Nicole Smith’s lawyer, placed a conference call to Dr. Wecht, asking him to perform a second autopsy on Daniel Smith. Wecht agreed, as long as it was understood that he would report his findings to them—even if they were not the findings they had hoped for—and that his report would be made public. With Stern and Scott’s assurance, Wecht flew to the Bahamas.
Wecht had noticed that coroner’s representative Linda Virgill had been in the media, feeding the frenzy that Howard K. Stern was a suspect for having harmed Daniel, his girlfriend’s 20-year-old son. It was time for Wecht to learn for himself why the lad died.
In Nassau, Bahamas Dr. Wecht met with Stern; Anthony McKinney Michael Scott and his associate Tracy Ferguson; and Wayne Munroe at a local beach club after being checked into the Atlantis, one of the Caribbean’s premier resorts. Wecht spent a lengthy brunch getting their background on Daniel, Anna Nicole and Stern. Stern said that Daniel had lost 25 pounds during the summer of 2006 and that he and Anna were alarmed. Stern gave a general rundown of the boy’s health, including hospitalizations, but there was no mention of Daniel having ever had a Valium addiction. When Daniel had arrived in Nassau to meet his baby sister and see him mom again, he was so excited he practically ran into the hospital room, according to Stern.
The book discusses Stern’s financial dealings with various magazines and TV shows, which Wecht felt was common practice in the entertainment industry and good business. Photo shoots of newborns and happy families always command a top price, Wecht explains.
Howard K. Stern describes the minute-by-minute events in Anna Nicole’s hospital room during Daniel’s visit. Smith only drank water or juice, as she had never developed a taste for carbonated drinks, it was reported.
Everything seemed great, although Daniel Smith once wondered aloud why he was so tired. Howard told Wecht that the comment later haunted him.
Nassau medical examiner Dr. Raju, with whom Wecht had worked previously on other cases, performed Daniel’s primary autopsy. He welcomed his friend Wecht and together they assessed the young man’s body once more, comparing notes. They looked at his stomach contents, but there was nothing noteworthy there, such as undigested pills or capsules. As Wecht worked, he made notes which have never been reported elsewhere.
Raju had attributed Daniel’s cause of death as “accidental multiple drug toxicity,” and Wecht concurred. Raju had sent tissue samples to LabCorp, an excellent basic toxicology lab in Tampa, Florida. When the results came back, Daniel was found to have had methadone, Zoloft and Lexapro in his system at death. All three were of a high therapeutic level but the combination of the three was what sent him into a fatal downward spiral.
SSuicide was ruled out because of, among other reasons, the open joy Daniel had shown with his new baby sister, “This family that should have been looking forward to the approaching holidays together, instead of having one of them dead and the others left to defend themselves against baseless charges,” Wecht wrote.
With suicide eliminated, murder, accidental death, or undetermined were the other options for manner of death. Dr. Cyril Wecht would have his own independent toxicology tests conducted with a separate lab, before he could assert how and why Daniel expired.
Dr. Wecht sent his own samples, collected during Daniel’s second autopsy, to the National Medical Services lab in Willow Grove, Pennsylvania. In Wecht’s opinion, NMS is the premier forensic toxicology experts in the U.S., if not the world.
Following Daniel’s procedure, Dr. Cyril Wecht was met outside the morgue in the Bahamas by a barrage of media, consisting of reporters and camera crews. With Stern’s permission Wecht held an impromptu press conference, with attorneys Scott and Ferguson also present. In more than four decades of doing this work, Wecht had never seen such a constant and intense barrage of news media inquires, at the scene and for weeks to come.
After the press conference Dr. Wecht was driven to Horizons. He saw happy family photos adorning the walls, in sharp contrast to the red-rimmed eyes of Howard Stern and Anna, with whom Wecht had a touching and interesting exchange. Before she returned to her bedroom, Anna squeezed Wecht’s hand and thanked him for examining her son. “I don’t know how this happened,” Anna sobbed. “Daniel was a good boy — he wasn’t into drugs.”
The people at Horizons gave Dr. Wecht a good overview about who Daniel was and his relationship with his mother and Stern.
Later, still at Horizons, Wecht had a phone conversation with Dr. Sandeep Kapoor, who was both Anna Nicole and Daniel’s doctor. Kapoor confirmed that he had prescribed methadone for a then-pregnant Anna because it was safe for a fetus, but he had never prescribed that drug to Daniel.
When Dr. Cyril Wecht returned to the states, he saw that public interest in Daniel’s demise was still raging. Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren led a panel where talking heads suggested there had been foul play. Wecht marveled that so many people had opinions, without having seen the toxicology results yet.
Wecht spends a fair amount of time discussing how Daniel might have come to ingest the drugs that killed him. Both Stern and Anna Nicole said they did not furnish the pills, so where did Daniel get the medicine, who prescribed it to him, and why?
Over the next several weeks, Dr. Wecht continued to appear on TV shows to discuss this case, always with Stern’s blessing — but by no means did Stern have input on what Dr. Wecht would say.
Coauthor Dawna Kaufmann describes playing for private eye Jack Harding the video clip of Anna Nicole inviting Daniel to visit her in the Bahamas. This fresh insight is also exclusive to the book and fascinating to read. Harding tells of his encounters with Daniel, asking for the P.I.’s help in saving his mother.
Multiple sources—from Harding, to Anna’s mother Virgie Arthur to former pals and employees—have said Stern controlled Anna and doled out drugs to her every four hours. This book analyzes ever person’s commentary and their possible motivations.
Dr. Cyril Wecht says he received at least 20 phone calls from Stern, at all hours of the day and night, making specific requests, seeking information and urging the doctor to communicate with the toxicology labs and various people. Stern seemed to be aware of every comment about the case on every cable TV news program and in every magazine and newspaper, and appreciated Wecht’s skill in getting across accurate information in those sometimes fast-talking, sound-bite environments.
Drs. Raju and Wecht spoke frequently via their respective offices in Nassau and Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, while awaiting the final toxicology results. There’s some charming personal information about how these two expert medical detectives viewed the media storm surrounding this case.
On Nancy Grace’s Cable Headline News’ program, information was given as fact that was later disproved by toxicology reports. But Grace’s show wasn’t the only one where wild speculation occurred. Wecht talks about watching many of them and wondering if they were more vested in promoting an agenda, rather than following the facts.
Dr. Wecht has many cogent observations about Virgie Arthur and her clear pain over losing a beloved grandchild and fearing for her daughter’s well-being. And Wecht gives rich details about his views of Stern, whose sincerity seemed genuine. Of course, Wecht was also mindful of the potential giant pot of gold these people, and others, might be chasing. In looking at the motivations of the many people who had been around Anna and her son, Wecht performs psychological autopsies and holds back nothing.
This riveting book also contains new details surrounding Daniel Smith’s funeral that I have never read in any other accounts. Included is Anna Nicole Smith’s plaintive wailing: “I don’t want my husband, I want my son back. Leave me alone, leave me alone. Don’t touch me!” Rosespeaks.com readers know what the nannies’ account of the day was like, but “A Question of Murder” offers another view.
Also revealed in the book is a prescription drug that Daniel took, which Wecht declined to identify during his Nassau press conference. Wecht explains his reason for mentioning it in the book, and why it should be part of Daniel’s autopsy record now. I must say the inclusion of this drug stunned me.
Daniel Smith’s full autopsy results, including the NMS Labs toxicology, were made public in January 2007. Around the same time, in Nassau, attorney Wayne Munroe became the sole attorney for Howard K. Stern and Anna Nicole Smith. Munroe would be behind every important behind-the-scenes move for the pair from then on.
More surprises come with Dr. Wecht’s accounts of the Bahamian Coronial Inquest, including how and why it seemed to start and stop. Wecht found two inquest witnesses especially problematic, and he paints a vivid picture as to who and why. One man’s testimony was so troubling to Wecht, it evokes a series of emails and calls between the doctor and Stern.
In the final analysis, Wecht writes his truthful views of all of the players in this case — the people we know so well at Rosespeaks.com. You may agree with him, or you may disagree, but you can’t help but be impressed by his decision to expose the full spectrum of personalities and events surrounding Daniel’s death.
And Dawna Kaufmann’s research and writing nicely fills in who this tragic 20-year-old was in life, making him a complex and fun human being who never got the chance to live his life to the fullest.
As convoluted as Daniel’s investigation was, Wecht notes the sorrow he left in his loved ones’ hearts. He ends the chapter with this thought about Daniel: “Hopefully, when [people] think of him, they will remember the joy of his life, rather than the mystery of his death.”
Rose Speaks.com readers will have unprecedented access to the authors, if you bought the book and have questions, ask them here, when Rose Turner talks to the co-authors if they can they will answer them. Don’t miss this rare access to the authors of “A Question of Murder”. If you have not picked up a copy of the book both Amazon and our favorite online store Barnes and Noble has it in stock.
NEWEST FILINGS IN THE TEXAS STATE DISTRICT COURT FOR HEARING ON AUGUST 28, 2009
August 27, 2009 Rose Turner’s Objection to Art Harris Motion to Reconsider the Appointment of Craig Ball with a Request for Protective Order and Stay in the forensic exam of his electronic media.
August 27, 2009 Rose Turner’s Exhibits B-H filed with Objection to Art Harris Motion to Reconsider the Appointment of Craig Ball with a Request for Protective Order and Stay in the forensic exam of his electronic media. Exhibit A as stated was filed for an in camera review before becoming part of the Judicial Record.
August 28, 2009 Plaintiff Virgie Arthur’s Response to Art Harris Motion to Reconsider the Appointment of Craig Ball with a Request for Protective Order and Stay in the forensic exam of his electronic media.
May 2009 Texas Appellate Decision of Designation of Responsible Third Parties is NOT wrong and in fact should and can be used to avoid the statute of limitations.
The expressions in this blog article are based on the opinions of Rose Turner with Dawna Kaufmann 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.
Entries (RSS)