0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Haven't done this in a long time.....the case number given by the court clerk: FA073164FA = 7also 7+3+1+6+4= 21 (7+7+7)so....we have 7 777also just for fun, I put in the letters SPH...those are the letters you take out of Joseph to make Joe:SPH= 43 = (4+3=7) it also equals the word: falseJust a curious thing........Blessings
May be this is off topic now.....TS... is it time for level 7 yet?? :?: :?: :?: :?: :?: :?:May be 11.11.11 might be a suitable date.....I am not good at numerology, but this is what I thought aboutBlessings
You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginYou are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginRemember Murray was not charged with murder. He did not have to push the fatal dose himself to be guilty of involuntary manslaughter. There were huge unsatisfactorily unanswered questions in the trial re how the 'fatal dose' was administered and who by, but that doesn't alter the fact that NOTHING bad should have happened to MJ on Murray's watch. He failed in his duty of care by his actions and inactions. Therefore I think the jury made the right decision.I don't agree with this. To me Murray is guilty for Michael's death if he injected the fatal dose. That wasn't proved and maybe it is even impossible to prove.It's one thing to fail to watch the patient and totally another thing to inject a fatal dose of drug. Let's say Murray went to the bathroom and someone else came and gave the fatal dose. Why would Murray be guilty of manslaughter in this case?!?!?!?Because as Curls said, he did not have to push the fatal dose himself to be guilty of involuntary manslaughter.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginRemember Murray was not charged with murder. He did not have to push the fatal dose himself to be guilty of involuntary manslaughter. There were huge unsatisfactorily unanswered questions in the trial re how the 'fatal dose' was administered and who by, but that doesn't alter the fact that NOTHING bad should have happened to MJ on Murray's watch. He failed in his duty of care by his actions and inactions. Therefore I think the jury made the right decision.I don't agree with this. To me Murray is guilty for Michael's death if he injected the fatal dose. That wasn't proved and maybe it is even impossible to prove.It's one thing to fail to watch the patient and totally another thing to inject a fatal dose of drug. Let's say Murray went to the bathroom and someone else came and gave the fatal dose. Why would Murray be guilty of manslaughter in this case?!?!?!?
Remember Murray was not charged with murder. He did not have to push the fatal dose himself to be guilty of involuntary manslaughter. There were huge unsatisfactorily unanswered questions in the trial re how the 'fatal dose' was administered and who by, but that doesn't alter the fact that NOTHING bad should have happened to MJ on Murray's watch. He failed in his duty of care by his actions and inactions. Therefore I think the jury made the right decision.
You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginYou are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginYou are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginIronically, TS and Front almost always log in and post something on the same day. I wonder if that is a coincidence or those are the same person with different user name.I think that you are onto something... suspicious//Finally... lolol/ Actually I have been trying not to accept the fact because it is NOT a good thing finally. It is a deception and manipulation to members. Not necessary to be TS on the TIAI and Front on the 'Back' thread to play game of "2 different insiders".
You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginYou are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginIronically, TS and Front almost always log in and post something on the same day. I wonder if that is a coincidence or those are the same person with different user name.I think that you are onto something... suspicious//Finally... lolol/
You are not allowed to view links. Register or LoginIronically, TS and Front almost always log in and post something on the same day. I wonder if that is a coincidence or those are the same person with different user name.I think that you are onto something... suspicious//
Ironically, TS and Front almost always log in and post something on the same day. I wonder if that is a coincidence or those are the same person with different user name.
involuntary manslaughterThe act of unlawfully killing another human being unintentionally.Most unintentional killings are not murder but involuntary manslaughter. The absence of the element of intent is the key distinguishing factor between voluntary and involuntary manslaughter. In most states involuntary manslaughter results from an improper use of reasonable care or skill while performing a legal act, or while committing an act that is unlawful but not felonious.Many states do not define involuntary manslaughter, or define it vaguely in common-law terms. Some jurisdictions describe the amount of Negligence necessary to constitute manslaughter with terms such as criminal negligence, gross negligence, and culpable negligence. The only certainty that can be attached to these terms is that they require more than the ordinary negligence standard in a civil case. With this approach the state does not have to prove that the defendant was aware of the risk.Other jurisdictions apply more subjective tests, such as "reckless" or "wanton," to describe the amount of negligence needed to constitute involuntary manslaughter. In this approach the defendant must have personally appreciated a risk and then chosen to take it anyway.There are two types of involuntary manslaughter statutes: criminally negligent manslaughter and unlawful act manslaughter. Criminally negligent manslaughter occurs when death results from a high degree of negligence or recklessness. Modern criminal codes generally require a consciousness of risk and under some codes the absence of this element makes the offense a less serious Homicide.An omission to act or a failure to perform a duty constitutes criminally negligent manslaughter. The existence of the duty is essential. Since the law does not recognize that an ordinary person has a duty to aid or rescue another in distress, a death resulting from an ordinary person's failure to act is not manslaughter. On the other hand, an omission by someone who has a duty, such as a failure to attempt to save a drowning person by a lifeguard, might constitute involuntary manslaughter.In many jurisdictions death that results from the operation of a vehicle in a criminally negligent manner is punishable as a separate offense. Usually it is considered a less severe offense than involuntary manslaughter. These jurisdictions usually call the offense reckless homicide, negligent homicide, or vehicular homicide. One reason for this lesser offense is the reluctance of juries to convict automobile drivers of manslaughter.Unlawful act manslaughter occurs when someone causes a death while committing or attempting to commit an unlawful act, usually a misdemeanor. Some states distinguish between conduct that is malum in se (bad in itself) and conduct that is malum prohibitum (bad because it is prohibited by law). Conduct that is malum in se is based on common-law definitions of crime; for example, an Assault and Battery could be classified as malum in se. Acts that are made illegal by legislation—for example, reckless driving—are malum prohibitum. In states that use this distinction, an act must be malum in se to constitute manslaughter. If an act is malum prohibitum, it is not manslaughter unless the person who committed it could have foreseen that death would be a direct result of the act.In other states this distinction is not made. If death results from an unlawful act, the person who committed the act may be prosecuted for involuntary manslaughter even if the act was malum prohibitum. Courts will uphold unlawful act manslaughter where the statute was intended to prevent injury to another person.Source: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login
“Look at us. Everything is backwards; everything is upside down. Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, governments destroy freedom, the major media destroy information, and religions destroy spirituality.” ~ Michael EllnerThis is quite an amazing quote and I really think that this epitomizes the general reason for the hoax. As for the technicalities, I’d rather not make any assumptions because I believe that there is more to this than we can ever imagine and all of us have found truth in our own way and we have all brought something of value to the table. But I will say one thing.If you really think about it, (and trust me, you probably don’t have to lol) the moral degradation of humanity can be attributed to everything being ‘backwards.’This ‘backwards’ sequence that the world is living by is contrived and has been manufactured by TPTB.As we all know, this is all part of the plan that TPTB have in order to plunge the world into chaos and disorder. They know that fear (false prophet doomsday BS) and hate (caused by religious, racial and homophobic discord) are the perfect catalysts for this to happen according to their plans. The ONLY way that we can win this war is with unconditional LOVE. LOVE for our brothers and sisters of humanity regardless of who they are and how they live their lives. It’s our job is to LOVE one another and it’s God’s job to judge. I would like to quote one of Michael’s songs titled ‘Jam’ to reiterate this.“What has come of all the peopleHave we lost love of what it’s aboutI have to find my peace cuz no one seems to let me beFalse prophets cry of doom what are the possibilities……The world keeps changing rearranging minds and thoughtsPredictions fly of doom……She pray to God to Buddha then she sings a Talmud songConfusions contradict the self do we know right from wrong.”Thank you Shining Light for posting the lyrics!:Now here’s one of my favorite lyrics from ‘Keep the Faith’“Any road that you take will get you thereIf you only try”Though some may differ, there is no one right way. No one has the complete and ultimate truth. That’s why we have a free will. We must search for our own truth and ‘seek our own salvation.’ Man-made religion cannot do this for us. It dampens our spirituality and it only serves to distance us from each other and most importantly, from God, The Creator. The same principle applies to the hoax investigation. Not one of us has all of the answers. If we did, I don't think we would feel the need to be here.As for the verdict, I was not too surprised. This is just the beginning. My faith is strong and I am even more confident that Michael is alive. This does not shake my faith at all. But I must say that I was VERY worried about what would have happened outside the courthouse if he had been found ‘not guilty’. My heart was racing while I watched the verdict reading live on TV. (LOL...It was actually my B-Day on 7-11. heh)I must admit and agree that I found it sad that the fans cheered with such joy after hearing the verdict. If I was an uninformed non-believer, like I’m sure that most of them were, I would not be happy no matter what the verdict was. (Thinking in the uninformed ‘non-hoax’ mindset,) - It would not bring Michael back and a man who has loved ones as well as children was sent to prison. I think it would be quite a sad scenario either way if one were to look at this with the eyes of an uninformed non-believer. But perhaps it’s just me thinking this way. But of course I know that this is all a part of the plan and I think we are still in for quite an adventure! BTW, the posts that you all have been making are amazing! I have been brought to tears!