0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Please don't bash me, cos I don't post often at all, though I read sooo much on here.I've been reading this thread from the start and I don't know why but the question suddenly came to me the other day about whether there were any photos taken of the ambulance(s) actually arriving at Michael's house?(...) If this has been discussed and dispensed with I am sorry for bringing it up again - I'm not very good at all this Sue
finfin wrote: Do you remember this on the 3rd September 2010, one year after the burial?No coincidenceSee postviewtopic.php?f=135&t=13924You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login ... eral-scams
Just the fact that the ambulance had trouble leaving the property is enough for me to doubt that it was a real ambulance in a real emergency situation. I'm sure Ambulance drivers aren't permitted to drive at high speeds weaving in traffic, as they do, without superior driving skills to other drivers - their training must be rigorous. The guy backing out seems to take too long and needs too much assistance for a real driver who knows his vehicle. Why did he go in there frontways without checking how hard it was going to be to get out? I need to find the aerial view of the house to check this - I know I've seen it on this site somewhere - but isn't their a circular drive?Also - why was the fire engine there? Station 71 knew from the 911 call that the emergency was medical not a fire or rescue. Is that normal practice? It seems a waste of resources, but I suppose those guys made themselves useful, by setting out the witches hats that stopped traffic in the street and by guiding the ambulance through the gates. I believe that whatever Ben filmed that day could not have involved real paramedics believing it to be a real emergency (and anyone who has carefully watched that video would understand why). I think the fire truck was needed to prevent vehicles into the area and so the ambulance had to back out to explain why the whole raod need to be cut from traffic. So I believe the whole thing was staged including the timing of the tour bus.
can someone answer if the hospital was notified ahead of time that this person was enroute where would the hospital staff be at the time of arrival? waiting further inside or directly at the door?
You sure it is not against the HIPPA law? Btw: I have a background in medical coding and billing. I have worked for a private Dr.'s office and I have worked for a health insurance company processing claims and customer service. I legally could not say (outside of the realm of my job) I didn't work on so and so claim. Only exception to that would be if I was given certain privilege to speak on it.Quote from: becIt's not against the HIPPA law for a paramedic to say that is not him (self, the paramedic "it's not me") appearing as a subject in a famous photograph of the victim of a high profile manslaughter case.I don't buy it... that the authenticity would never be questioned if real paramedics (not in on it) were involved on 6/25/09.I'm sticking to common sense dictating that the paramedics were actors, both that day and the other day-- even if that means the LAFD (or at least one) were working as actors at one point.Quote Protected health information (PHI), under the US Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), is any information about health status, provision of health care, or payment for health care that can be linked to a specific individual. This is interpreted rather broadly and includes any part of a patient’s medical record or payment history.The paramedics are providing the patient health care therefore they become part of the privacy issue. They also become part of the patient's medical record.official story, have often given one or more of the following reasons against the hoax: there would be way too many people “in on it” (so surely someone would’ve let the cat out of the bag by now); or, many of the things that have happened would be illegal, if it was a hoax; or, the government would not be in on a plan to expose corruption in the government, etc.
It's not against the HIPPA law for a paramedic to say that is not him (self, the paramedic "it's not me") appearing as a subject in a famous photograph of the victim of a high profile manslaughter case.I don't buy it... that the authenticity would never be questioned if real paramedics (not in on it) were involved on 6/25/09.I'm sticking to common sense dictating that the paramedics were actors, both that day and the other day-- even if that means the LAFD (or at least one) were working as actors at one point.
Protected health information (PHI), under the US Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), is any information about health status, provision of health care, or payment for health care that can be linked to a specific individual. This is interpreted rather broadly and includes any part of a patient’s medical record or payment history.
Please don't bash me, cos I don't post often at all, though I read sooo much on here.I've been reading this thread from the start and I don't know why but the question suddenly came to me the other day about whether there were any photos taken of the ambulance(s) actually arriving at Michael's house?I am really sorry if this has been discussed - I do try and keep up with everything all you amazing "detectives" are doing, but I could have missed this.I have gained the impression that there was always "someone" outside the gates of his house, and if so, why are the only photos we see of vehicles already inside the property boundaries, or leaving to go to the hospital - did no-one think it important enough to photograph an ambulance actually arriving at his house - or was no-one there?If this has been discussed and dispensed with I am sorry for bringing it up again - I'm not very good at all this Sue
Do you remember this on the 3rd September 2010, one year after the burial? No coincidenceSee postYou are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginYou are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
i'm having a hard time with some things if FBI are involved and MJ's in WPP then why a)have Murray in the mix at all b) leave clues, would the FBI agree to this? c) would the FBI bother with numerology, or let MJ bother with it?