This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Mish1981
Filter to certain boards:
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 35
31
« on: October 21, 2011, 08:50:11 PM »
Makes sense. Now it looks like as when the prosecution or the defense asks a question, the witness can say 'Hold on, let me Google that for you'...
lolol/
32
« on: October 21, 2011, 08:46:28 PM »
And I also would like to know if it's allowed for witnesses to have laptops at hand or attend other testimonies. Seems a little strange to say the least.
Souza....I don't know what it's like in other areas of the world, but here in our little city in Michigan.....No one is allowed to take any electronic device into the courtroom. You have to go through a metal detector (just like they showed Michael going through during 2005 trial) and any cell phones either have to be taken to your car or left at the metal detector check in. I know this because my Mother in Law works at the courthouse as a court recorder, and my hubby works at our county jail as a corrections officer. My hubby can not even go into the courthouse with his cell phone...he has to leave it in our vehicle. I also have never heard of other witnesses being allowed in the courtroom while other testimony is being given....and they surely would not be allowed to have a laptop! It might be different in other courts, but that's how it is here!Love & Blessings to You All bearhug
Here in Virginia it is the same regarding cell phones or any electronics. When I have to go to court I don't even bother bringing my cell phone in with me, I keep it in the car. A friend of mine forgot to take her Ipod out of her purse and she wasn't allowed to bring it in so she had to make another trip to the car. I can only imagine that if it's a strict rule about cell phones and little things like Ipods that they would be this way with all electronics. I hope this helps.
33
« on: October 20, 2011, 09:29:36 PM »
As for Dr. White talking to the media he hasn't been the only witness to do so . On the first day of court Murrays Admin Assistant (I can't remember her name but she has blonde hair and glasses) stood outside of the courtroom holding a support Murray sign and she spoke to JVM. Not only did she talk to JVM but a MJ supporter came up and they started getting into a little debate until JVM broke it up.
34
« on: October 20, 2011, 02:16:50 PM »
There is an old thread that has this information on it but I thought I'd bring this back up. While playing around on Google I found this from TruTV. At first I just though it was just one article and from the looks of it since it talked about Cassandra Sims I also figured it was another person taking a shot at hoaxers and how unstable we are. After reading that the last article was written after the start of the trial, I'm wondering if this person writing the articles is keeping an open tab writing a little bit here and there. Here's the link: You are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login
35
« on: October 19, 2011, 08:48:04 PM »
He almost sounds hypnotised to me.
Propofol - The hypnotic-sedative etc. etc..
I said the same thing in another thread. My Aunt has audio tapes of her being hypnotized and that's the exact way she sounded.
36
« on: October 19, 2011, 08:27:06 PM »
Tweets from Paris:
,pariisjaxn Pαris Jαcksoη
"Before You Do Anything, Think. What Would Atticus Finch Do?" -Jaqueline Bernstein. a.k.a: JACKIE B!!!!" ( Michael loved To Kill a Mockingbird)
pariisjaxn Pαris Jαcksoη
i'm just going to delete the twitter app for tonight… it would sure make trying to fall asleep a lot easier. (Hmmm.sleeping problem>)
pariisjaxn Pαris Jαcksoη they told me a girl should be faithful. and walk when not able. and fight till the end, but i'm only human (Human Nature)
pariisjaxn Pαris Jαcksoη
Sitting In The Car Watching The People In The Front Of The Car Fight About Skittles. #TasteTheRainbow (She giggled about Skittles on the Oprah interview)
titojackson5 Tito Jackson
you're always in my heart......
titojackson5 Tito Jackson
CAN YOU FEEL IT!!!!!!!!!!!
Is it just me or are these tweets to reassure us??? bearhug bearhug
That's 'Will You Be There' not 'Human Nature', sorry...unless you meant something else.
37
« on: October 19, 2011, 07:33:46 PM »
Dr. Shafer explained how Michael couldn't have injected himself (it's not easy to get enough propofol in the syringe and takes a while) and how that bottle in the IV bag also wouldn't have done much. So how exactly did Murray gave him the overdose?
Souza...
I missed the second half of the trial today as we had such high winds all the power in this area went out. I didn't get that part you are talking about. Are you saying that not only is it not possible for Michael to overdose with a syringe, but that Murray couldn't have overdosed him either?
What I'm saying is that the rubber stopper will make sure Propofol will not leak from the bottle, so the bottle in the bag didn't cause it. Makes sense, since the IV bag was clear. To be able to get the propofol out with a needle and syringe, you will have to put air back in the bottle, so it takes a while until you have enough propofol in the bottle. That means Mike didn't do it himself in those two minutes (if this all really happened). So the prosecution may seem to have a strong case, they were still unable to prove how Murray killed him. If Murray OD'ed MJ, then I would like to know HOW that happened. Did he inject it right into the veins? Could be, but if so; why weren't his prints on the 'broken' syringe?
This case doesn't add up at all. The defense is weak, but even though the prosecution SEEM to have a stronger case, they don't make sense either. I wonder if the jury can see that too.
Speaking of the jury: is there even a jury TS? 
Souza .... I agree. It seems as if the Prosecution and Defense are just going back and forth taking turns on answering all of the questions that have come up in the last 2 years.
38
« on: October 19, 2011, 07:21:30 PM »
The only issue that I think that still remains is that the mouth is different in each photo. The autopsy photo the mouth is closed in the In The Closet photo his mouth is open.
39
« on: October 14, 2011, 08:41:35 AM »
Murray is definitely in on the hoax and helping Michael, not trying to kill him. That is a far fetched theory and also underestimating Michael in my humble opinion. He planned this hoax for decades and thinking 'Murray was about to kill him and he escaped' makes him look like a vulnerable, weak person. Is this what people see in Michael? And I do not also understand how they believe Michael prepared ALL these huge things just in a couple days! This is his master plan, this is his SHOW, this is his REAL LIFE MOVIE. If you can not see it, I don't know if you learned a thing from this hoax. This is a perfect plan which could be be planned by a perfectionist like Michael and he planned it for decades. I hope people stop to underestimate him and what he is capable of soon.
Purelove I was coming here to make a comment and then noticed your post. Well said! So I don't have to make two post I'll just post my thoughts here: Sorry I don't mean to come out harsh but this is something I stayed up all night thinking about. By all means I am ready for the bashing and degrading comments that I am sure are to come but before people start typing just think about it for a few minutes. People can't have it both way! Either that's Michael dead on the autopsy table or this is a hoax. If we are to think that it is truly Michael (dead) then we have to dismiss everything else that we have learned in the last two years and chalk all of the "coincidences" that we have seen/heard to just that coincidences. All of the numbers are just written in the stars and the family members who have made "oops" slip ups are just greedy people who don't give a crap about Michael besides what they can get out of this mostly being money with all of the interviews and book deals that have gone on in the last 2+ years. We then would also have to accept that Michael was, as Purelove said, a vulnerable weak man who was so dependent on drugs which would make TII a complete fabrication to our minds of what we thought was a healthy Michael ready to rock the stage for all to see. To take it a step further we would then need to just accept that all of the inconsistencies that we have seen in the last 2 years (too many to count) and everyone who has opened up their mouth needs to see a doctor about memory loss because they can't remember what they have said from one interview to another. To take it one step further, Back, TS and Front then all have more then enough time on their hands and should seek immediate mental help for all of the post that they have done which in turn would mean that we too need to seek mental help because of the chain reaction. Meaning TS or Front post on this board and then the research starts and all of the connections that can be made are just the draw of luck. If that is truly the case then there is a whole lot of luck in the air and I should take a chance at playing the lottery. Is it that "coincidental" that Michael had this in the making for years and it just so happens that Murray comes along to kill him (hired or not) and everything just happens to line up with everything Michael had been working on to begin with? If we think that Murray was trying (again hired or not) to kill Michael and he found out and was able to escape then the sentence before has no standing and it again was just a coincidence that everything in the past connects and we should all quit and call it a day. With that being said, I feel better thank you for letting me get that out.
40
« on: October 13, 2011, 11:48:02 PM »
Just thinking out loud here regarding the dramatic feel of showing the photo. The prosecutors did it on purpose, probably for many reasons but I think this is another one we should consider. Remember TMZ gave us the "low-down" of the jurors and we all joked about how the majority of them were MJ fans, appreciated his music, saw TII etc. What better way to get the jury to despise Murray then to show MJ "dead", the man that they saw on film, sang along with and appreciated?
41
« on: October 13, 2011, 11:22:19 PM »
Thank you for the post. Maybe someone will have a clip of it later on YT for us to watch.
42
« on: October 13, 2011, 10:18:04 PM »
If the Lawyers such as Ed Chernoff and David Walgren are in the hoax, how were they chosen?...were they chosen by the FBI or by MJ?
Also why were these particular lawyers chosen?...is it to do with the Sting, if there is a Sting court? I do know that David Walgren is apart of the major crime unit (since 2005) which deals with public corruption.
The primary objective of Major Crimes Division is the prevention of significant disruptions of public order in the City of Los Angeles. The Board of Police Commissioners authorizes Major Crimes Division to investigate individuals or groups who plan, threaten, finance, aid, abet, attempt or perform unlawful acts which threaten public safety.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or Login
This reminds me of what was talked about in the TIAI sting thread about public corruption.
Glad to see you made this thread, hopefully with a little digging around we can get a better view on things.
43
« on: October 13, 2011, 07:47:16 PM »
from Bec I don't have a problem with non-believers, I have a problem with assholes. An asshole is apparent regardless of what hoax classification they fall under.
^^^ Quote of the day!
and…..
they're called ASS-HOLES because they expend all their time & energy stating ASSumptions based on theories full of HOLES! :lol:
from Anna I said above that I am afraid to trust anyone's good intentions, including you, Front. I know you understand me, you are not stupid, I know you get me...Behind a screen ID there can be anyone. Reason why this "unknowness" is taking the worst out of me. You certainly perpetrate the fact that Michael is alive when all this has gone into such graphic proof as the autopsy photo. So do others.
Anna dear--- you don't need to trust anyone behind a screen ID; you need to trust yourself and Michael. If you believe in yourself and you believe in him and all the clues that he has set forth---even PRIOR to Jun 25, which are STILL being found…that's all you NEED. Noone can convince anyone that he is dead or alive --- you must do that on your own, as others here have done. beLIEvers do not beLIEve MJ is alive just because someone told them so! They beLIEve because they have studied, observed, analyzed, researched…they SEE…they understand…they KNOW.
Stated a million times over: Do not let others---including Yours Truly!---dictate your beliefs. Seek the answers YOURSELF and make your OWN decisions. MJ has/is/will continue to provide the building blocks with which you can utilize---or not! your choice--- to pave the way and make this journey a little smoother. What you choose to CONSTRUCT with those "building blocks" is totally…YOUR choice.
I hope you get what I'm saying. I care more than you'll even know yourself. Otherwise I wouldn't be here, i wouldn't suffer and I wouldn't engage in this discussion with you.
Ditto!
P.S Your posts scream out to me that you are a hardcore non believer or a tabloid trash employee trying to work "undercover".
:shock:
WTF??
At first I thought this was directed at me--and I just about FLIPPED out of my chair and had the urge to post an image of that "smiley" that Souza won't install! :lol: :twisted:
from Sarahli Again it's been said over and over and OVER again, Michael has not elaborated this Plan just for entertainment. Serious issues are involved and WE must SUPPORT Michael in all this, not too much the other way around in my opinion...even though he did support us as well , I hope you understand what I am trying to say.
Couldn't agree more.
from Mish I like where you are going with this UYI, for a long time we've had non-believers come in stating that we are in the wrong and basically need to wake up and see the light. With nothing to back their statement it seems they just come in to stir the pot and get every one discouraged causing a frenzy in our forum. I for one would be very interested in having a non-believer debunk everything that we have concluded to. I think it would be nice to bounce things back and fourth, who knows something could be learned for one or both parties. I think non-believers might be able to see things with fresh eyes that we can't because of our mind frame. I'm willing to give it a whirl. I of course would like to see this happen in a peaceful manner without anyone putting someone else down, degrading their thoughts and without unnecessary bickering.
Mish, unfortunately that won't happen. How many times have beLIEvers invited nonbelievers into a discussion on this very same topic? And how many times have they accepted and engaged in intelligent conversation with evidence to support their "facts" and/or debunk beLIEvers' conclusions? ZERO! It always ends up the same way. Yep, you said it-- "they just come in to stir the pot". But when ASKED for evidence -- or even a HALF-witted SHRED of evidence………….no answer. Wonder why! :roll: It would be nice if theories were presented by BOTH sides---WITH corroboration…but THAT remains to be seen. p.s. allow me to make a suggestion --- admin/mods, correct me if I'm wrong --- but IF the above ever does take place, beLIEvers vs. nonbeLIEvers should start another thread and debunk/refute/validate there. This is not the place for it.
Front it's saddening that the outcome is already known isn't it!? I know in the past that the two sides haven't been able to hold hands and play nice but I would like to hold on to hope that one day it will happen.
Also Front Admin and Mods I completely agree that this isn't the thread for it, I simply mentioned it because it was brought up in this thread. If for ever it were to come up another thread would be more suitable.
44
« on: October 13, 2011, 07:22:33 PM »
Does anyone know why court won't resume till Monday? I know they ended early because of a medical convention in Chicago ( the docs are going to it) is that the reason why?
Judge Pastor said that because of scheduling conflicts for the witness for today and tomorrow. Is this something that is usually done? A witness can't take the stand on a certain time so they just postpone the whole day?
45
« on: October 13, 2011, 07:20:59 PM »
I decided to call a pathologist today. I ended up with a very helpful doctor who is a clinical pathologist. This means his profession is not really to cut into corpses (he is not a coroner or forensic pathologist) but he investigates organs and tissues of living people. However, he does perform autopsies sometimes as well, but that is around 2-3% of his work. I called and told him I was doing research because I am writing a medical thriller and had some questions so i could form a factual and accurate murder plot. He was very helpful and asked me if I could let him know when my book will be published... poor guy. However, I got some very interesting information from him about dead people, freezing them and embalming them. Here is the info he gave me in no particular order:
Freezing a body and then melting it and heating it up is possible and it will indeed make a body look fresh. This however requires a quick freeze (professional) and immediately after death. The freeze will stop the decomposition of the body. From the outside, you will not see that the body isn't fresh. So far it seems that the EMT's. the doctors and the coroner could have been fooled with a long-dead corpse. HOWEVER... the moment the body is at a room temperature, rigor mortis and decomp will start and at a room that is heated up like that, it will go very rapidly, most definitely when the body is thin. If we believe that the EMT's found the body with the eyes open, we can be sure that there was no way that the doctors would be able to close the eyes after pronouncing him dead 2 hours later. And according to the official story we have been fed, they did because Jermaine tells us in his book that he opened one of the eyes when he went to see the body in the hospital. Besides that, it is standard procedure.
As for the coroner: he can not be fooled. According to the pathologist I talked to, there is no way that a coroner wouldn't notice a body has been in deep freeze before. When you freeze a corpse, your tissue -that contains water- will crystalize. He called it 'freezing artifacts' (literally translated from Dutch). Standard procedure with every autopsy performed is making slices of all the organs and putting those slices under a microscope. If tissue has been frozen before, the slices of the tissue will show tiny 'holes' because the crystals damage the tissue. By all means, the autopsy report will state that certain 'freeze artifacts' are present in the tissue and it will also state that itt was most likely caused by freezing.
What they can also see under the microscope, is if the patient has been ill before death. As he explained it to me, the organs that would have been affected by the illness, would show deformation of the cells. The coroner would definitely see if the patient was terminally ill before death.
He also said that in case of a heart attack, they will notice inflammation of the heart muscle under the microscope. I didn't dare to ask if that would be the same with a cardiac arrest, because I was afraid I would give myself away, hahaha. Maybe one of the medical experts here will know that. But as far as I know, the heart did not show any signs of inflammation in the AR, but maybe I overlooked something.
Latsly, since I had the feeling the doktor enjoyed my crazy questions, I also decided to ask about embalming, to make sure La Toya is full of shit in her book about the body looking stunning after 10 weeks.
He explained that they embalmed the people that were used by the students for research and class. They use a 4% formaldehyde and use a lot to make sure the whole body is fixed and that the decomp will stop. But to make sure the corpse will not dry out and 'schrink', they also put it in a bath of formaldehyde. If you don't lay the corpse in such a bath, the corpse will not look very pretty within a few days and will dry out completely. The body will also be fixed, so we now officially have confirmation that La Toya was lying when she said that MJ (who was allegedly embalmed) looked awesome without that bath after 10 weeks, and that she could bend the body.
So who saw the 'body'?
The family: obviously in on it
Security: Alvarez is the one calling 911 at exactly 12:21 pm. His testimony was full of fat BS and I think we can safely say he is in on it. Not to mention that we have a video of the security doing high fives later on as if they were happy they pulled it off.
Murray: obviously in on it, the guy didn't kill anyone and is on trial for something he didn't do, yet looks pretty relaxed when he let's Ben photograph him at the barber/pedicure/Disneyland/tie-shopping etc.
Paramedics: Didn't compare notes and their stories differ. If they were so truthful about what they have seen, why isn't their story identical? Plus they lost PRECIOUS moments by backing out that ambulance. Why didn't paramedic #3 testify? Who is that anyway? And why are they on a fake ambulance picture? Why did they back out of the property without that being necessary?
Dr. Cooper: Pronounced MJ in the field, yet worked on the body for over an hour, even though she testified that he was clinically DOA. She also pronounced him at 2:26 which ties in with the hoax, plus she allegedly closed the eyes of a corpse that was dead for hours (or months for that matter). Same goes for Nguyen. Both women are nowhere to be found on the internet with pictures (except for some linkedin profile of Nguyen with only UCLA as working experience and 1 connection ... ) while the mysterious Dr. Daniel Cruz, who IS on the internet with pictures, and who is a cardiologist! has not been on the prosecution's witness list.
Helicopter crew: I'm not even starting on them, they had the body on the seats for the crew in plain sight. Besides that, they could have been told that they had to transport a dummy like that to distract, so the real body could safely be transported by van. No need for a real dead body either way.
Coroner: Dr. Rogers, who said he did the autopsy, looked UNREAL and lied as soon as he lowered his right hand. "What is your profession Dr. Rogers?" -> "I'm a deputy medical examiner".. ORLY? BS! He is a Chief forensic MD, as stated on the website of the LA County Coroner. Besides that, the coroner in charge of the autopsy was Lakshmanan, why isn't HE on the witness list of the prosecution? And we know that the coroner must be in on it if he did not get a MJ look-a-like on his table that died the exact moment MJ decided (years ago) to hoax his death. Either he has seen no body at all and still made a bogus report, or he had a body on his table that had been frozen and still made a bogus report.
LAPD detective Martinez, who has NOT been on the witness list for the prosecution.
Forest Lawn director Scott something, according to La Toya, plus Jeffré Phillips. Both were present when the coffin was opened after 10 weeks and they lifted the body to get palm prints... 'nuff said :lol:
There is still no reason for a real corpse. For who? To fool Martinez? Is he the target of the sting? Just he? And if so, why didn't they let him take the stand?
But anyways, I wanted to let y'all know that there is no way a coroner can be fooled with a terminally ill patient that died 6 months ago and has been on ice, no way.
I bet that was an interesting conversation!
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 35
|
Show Posts
