Cause it aint no fun if mom can’t have some….SMH Mother Seduces Daughter’s Boyfriend And Convinces Him To Kill This is one sick and twisted crazy story straight out of Chi-town… via Chicago Tribune Sandra Rogers convinced her 17-year-old lover to help her in the 2003 sledgehammer attack of her ex-husband and his new wife by threatening to tell his 14-year-old girlfriend – her daughter – about their affair, the now-26-year-old man testified Monday at Rogers’ trial in Lake County. Jonathan McMeekin testified that the woman he referred to as “Sandy” allowed him to move into her home – and sleep in the same bed as her daughter Robin – when Robin was 13. He said Sandra Rogers bought him gifts including football cleats; let him use her car, though he didn’t have a license; took him out to dinner; and bought him drugs. “She would cook for me, clean, do my laundry, give me lunch money, those kinds of things,” McMeekin said. “She told me that I owed her.” This broad was a certified nut case….but it gets worse… Authorities assert that McMeekin and Rogers drove together to her ex-husband’s home in the middle of the night on May 19, 2003, broke in and surprised the couple in bed. Rogers struck both of them over the head multiple times with a sledgehammer, nearly killing the couple, prosecutors say. In his testimony, McMeekin said Sandra Rogers had her own motives: She was distraught over her ex-husband regaining custody of their two daughters, and child support payments had stopped, McMeekin said Monday. Also, Sandra Rogers told McMeekin she feared she was going to be arrested because she allowed her daughter to continue to see McMeekin against her father’s wishes, he testified. “She started talking about how she didn’t want to be arrested the next day,” he said. “She started talking about Rick, how she wanted to kill him. She said if I didn’t go with her, she would tell Robin that we had sex together.” We’re just wondering why it took 10 years for this to go to trial. Talk about a family affair… Photo Credit: Illinois Department of Corrections
Atlanta Pimp Sentenced To Life For Abuse And Exploitation Of Teen Runaway Looks like this time it’s pimps down – hoes up! A 30-year-old Atlanta man was sentenced to life in prison Monday after being convicted of charges related to sexually abusing and pimping a teenage runaway, the Fulton County District Attorney’s Office announced. A jury found David Pepe guilty of trafficking of persons for sexual servitude, pimping, aggravated child molestation, enticing a child for indecent purposes and contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Pepe sexually abused a 14-year-old who he forced into prostitution within three days of meeting her in April 2009, prosecutors said. The defendant had sex with the teen, took her to pick up customers, took half of the money they paid her and later said he deserved all the money, according to information presented in court. Text messages that the teen sent to her mother were forwarded to law enforcement authorities, who returned the teen to her family. Pepe was caught during a traffic stop in Cobb County. The case was the first to be prosecuted by the District Attorney’s human trafficking unit, which was funded by a 2011 grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, authorities said. SMH at this guy… Having sex with a 14-year-old and then prostituting her out! He’s definitely getting what he deserves. Guess now he’s gonna see how it feels to be sexually abused. Source
In late September, on KNUS’ Kelley and Company, Rep. Mike Coffman said Social Security was “obviously” a ponzi scheme . Kelley let it fly by, but I thought this should have been picked up by journalists, since it came from Coffman, especially given that Rick Perry, who was surging at the time, had just called Social Security a ponzi scheme. After I posted it on my blog, Coffman’s comment was reported… Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : ColoradoPols.com – Front Page Discovery Date : 08/12/2011 14:26 Number of articles : 2
Attorney General Eric Holder said Thursday guns from the botched Fast and Furious operation will continue to show up at U.S. and Mexican crime scenes “for years to come.” “It is an unfortunate reality that we will continue to feel the effects of this flawed operation for years to come,” Holder said during his testimony before the House Judiciary Committee Thursday. “Guns lost during this operation… Broadcasting platform : YouTube Source : The Blaze Discovery Date : 08/12/2011 16:49 Number of articles : 2
Two lawyers watching the case weigh in on who presented strongest argument in Conrad Murray trial. By Gil Kaufman Dr. Conrad Murray (file) Photo: Getty Images It’s up to the jury now. After six weeks of testimony , the seven-man, five-woman jury in the involuntary manslaughter case of former Michael Jackson doctor Conrad Murray began their deliberations Friday morning (November 4). They’ve heard from 49 witnesses, including some of Jackson’s former employees, a number of Murray’s girlfriends and patients, medical experts, police investigators and ER workers. In closing arguments on Thursday, prosecutor David Walgren told them the evidence the state presented was “overwhelming” and showed that it was “abundantly clear” that Murray caused Jackson’s death by acting in a negligent manner in providing the singer with the surgical anesthetic propofol in a non-hospital setting. It capped weeks of prosecution testimony that pointed to the many alleged breaches of professional conduct by Murray, who Walgren painted as an opportunist lured by a big payday into providing medical services that were out of the norm, dangerous and, ultimately, deadly. Defense attorney Ed Chernoff countered with arguments that investigators were sloppy in collecting evidence and that it was Jackson, not Murray who was to blame because, according to the defense, the 50-year-old singer self-administered the fatal propofol dose that took his life on June 25, 2009. As we await the jury’s verdict, we asked a pair of lawyers not affiliated with the case to break down both sides’ arguments and weigh in on how each did in presenting their cases. “If he’s convicted, I’m not sure it will be due to any tactical errors on the part of his defense team,” said Robert Weisberg, a law professor at Stanford University and faculty co-director of the school’s criminal justice center. “This case does not jump out at me as one where there was any alternative strategy. If he’s convicted, it’s because he’s guilty, and based on the evidence it’s not looking good for him.” Weisberg praised the prosecution’s case, pointing out the strength of the rebuttal testimony of prosecution anesthesia expert Dr. Steven Shafer, who was recalled to the stand to poke holes in the alternate death scenario laid out by defense witness Dr. Paul White . Los Angeles-based criminal defense attorney Mike Cavalluzzi said he thought the prosecution told a “great and very tight” story over the course of the trial, beginning with Jackson’s longtime confidant and director/choreographer Kenny Ortega . It was the “This Is It” director who opened testimony in late September by telling the jury “my friend wasn’t right,” setting the chaotic scene at the rehearsals for the show. As for the investigative mistakes that Murray’s lawyers pointed out during their cross-examination of prosecution witnesses, Cavalluzzi said he felt those arguments were “grasping at straws” by the defense and had no real relevance to the negligence accusations against Murray. “Those felt like red herrings,” said Cavalluzzi, who has worked a range of criminal matters in L.A. courts from misdemeanor battery to homicide. “There was very compelling evidence from doctors about the extreme deviations from standard care by Murray even before June 25, by administering propofol in a residential setting and then laying out, piece-by-piece, how many deviations there were.” He also said that the testimony of nurse practitioner Cherilyn Lee , who was called by the defense, was very compelling. “I’m not sure it helped the defense,” Cavalluzzi said. “She said Jackson was begging for propofol and she knew never to accede to that request. It made the defense position so difficult when every objective medical professional said the conduct Murray engaged in was extremely dangerous.” What could the defense have done differently? Weisberg said he wouldn’t fault them for the case they put up, aside from what he called the very unusual tactic of voluntarily having Murray speak to police in a taped interview two days after Jackson’s death. The jury has to bring back a unanimous verdict on the single felony count, and Cavalluzzi said what they most likely took away from the testimony of the doctor and nurses who took the stand for the defense is that Murray should not have been administering propofol to any patient, let alone someone who clearly had substance abuse issues like Michael Jackson. “The character witnesses were brought up to make you think that Dr. Murray is a nice person, but involuntary manslaughter is not a crime of moral turpitude,” Cavalluzzi explained. “It is not a crime which bad people engage in bad behavior. Nobody is accusing Dr. Murray of stealing or intentionally harming anyone. What they’re saying is that he may have been a good man who made a horrible mistake and that the mistake that he made rises to criminal negligence, which makes him guilty of involuntary manslaughter.” If Murray gets off, though, Cavalluzzi predicted it would be because of his generous reputation as laid out by former patients , which could cause some doubt as to whether Murray did something that killed Michael Jackson or if Jackson administered the fatal dose himself. “It’s a very, very tough case,” he said. “I think it’s compelling in so many ways, as an insight into the genius of Michael Jackson and the price he paid … he wanted to deliver such an extraordinary concert and that, it killed him.” MTV News will be covering the Conrad Murray verdict live. Go to MTVNews.com for breaking news, reactions and analysis from Los Angeles or tune to MTV for the latest updates. Related Videos Remembering Michael Jackson – One Year Later Related Photos Michael Jackson: A Life In Photos Related Artists Michael Jackson
Lawyers reiterate their cases in closing arguments before jury deliberations begin Friday. By Gil Kaufman and Kara Warner Dr. Conrad Murray Photo: Pool/ Getty Images Following 22 days of testimony from 49 witnesses, the closing arguments were presented Thursday (November 3) in the involuntary manslaughter trial of former Michael Jackson doctor Conrad Murray. Nearly six weeks after he kicked off the trial with a headline-grabbing image of an emaciated Jackson on a gurney following his death in June 2009, Deputy District Attorney David Walgren was first up with his closing argument. Walgren told jurors the evidence in the case was overwhelming and Murray’s actions directly led to Jackson’s death from an overdose of the surgical anesthetic propofol. “The evidence in this case is abundantly clear … that Conrad Murray caused the death of Michael Jackson, that Conrad Murray left Prince, Paris and Blanket without a father,” Walgren said of the late pop singer’s three children. The DA reminded jurors that a number of medical experts called to the stand by both prosecutors and the defense said physicians had a legal and ethical obligation to deny a patient’s request to provide medical treatment that could end up harming them. Returning to an argument the prosecution had made all along about Murray’s alleged motives for giving chronic insomniac the anesthetic, Walgren said, “Conrad Murray sought payment for services rendered, the services rendered being the provision of propofol. … Michael Jackson trusted Conrad Murray. But Conrad Murray corrupted that relationship, and for that, Michael Jackson paid with his life.” Walgren said the evidence against Murray was “overwhelming,” stating that his guilt in the matter is “abundantly clear” and that testimony from defense anesthesiology expert Dr. Paul White that blamed Jackson for giving himself fatal doses of several drugs was “junk science.” The prosecutor also reminded jurors about how they heard that Murray was speaking to one of his ex-girlfriends , cocktail waitress Sade Anding, when he realized Jackson had stopped breathing, proof that the physician was not properly monitoring the singer’s health. “Was Conrad Murray in another room? Did Michael Jackson yell out for help? Did he gasp?” Walgren asked. “Did he choke? Were there sounds? We don’t know, and we’ll never know because of the neglect and negligence of Conrad Murray.” Then it was defense attorney Ed Chernoff’s turn to present his closing argument, which included a detailed breakdown of the prosecution’s key witnesses and why their collective testimony “can’t prove [Murray committed] a crime, and they really need to prove a crime,” Chernoff told the jury. Chernoff first attempted to discredit the testimony of Michael Jackson’s bodyguard Alberto Alvarez . He said it didn’t make sense that Murray would ask Alvarez to hide evidence since the two barely knew each other and that none of his fingerprints were found on the allegedly hidden evidence. The defense then went after the L.A. County coroner’s investigator for not taking proper notes and photos, as well as not providing a proper chronology. Chernoff emphasized that out of the evidence discovered in Jackson’s bedroom, none of the tubing found had propofol in it. Chernoff also accused prosecution expert Dr. Shafer of having a biased agenda and that his simulations had nothing to do with the case. Chernoff told the jury there are two reasonable scenarios for Jackson’s death and that is the reason they should acquit. “What the [prosecution] is really asking you to do is convict Dr. Murray for the actions of Michael Jackson. Somebody has got to tell the truth. If it were anyone else other than Michael Jackson, would the doctor be here today?” he asked, reminding them that Murray’s other patients valued and appreciated the doctor’s care. Chernoff claimed Murray only wanted to help Jackson. “He was a little fish in a big dirty pond,” he said. Furthermore, Chernoff defended Murray not immediately calling 911 because he was trying to save Jackson’s life and that his attempts at CPR did not work. Chernoff cautioned the jury that there is a tremendous desire to paint Murray as the perfect villain, but that there is “no perfect villain or perfect victim.” Chernoff agreed that administering propofol in a home setting may be inappropriate but emphasized the fact that Murray never gave Jackson any illegal drugs or substances. He also asked that the jury not hold Murray responsible just because the victim was Michael Jackson. Prosecutor Walgren then took over to present the final closing arguments in the case. He reiterated that if Murray had used the proper monitoring devices or administered proper resuscitation or had not left the room, Jackson’s death “wouldn’t have happened.” “We cannot prove exactly what happened behind closed doors,” Walgren said. “Michael Jackson could give answers, but he’s dead.” Walgren reminded the jury that they know Jackson died from acute propofol intoxication and that Murray had plenty of opportunities to prevent it. “Actions speak far louder than words,” he said. “At the end of the day, the issue is not that complicated. Murray was conducting a pharmaceutical experiment in a bedroom. I ask you return with a verdict of guilty on the count of involuntary manslaughter based on his actions alone.” Judge Michael Pastor earlier instructed jurors that they had two theories they could rely on to find Murray guilty: If they believe he committed an illegal act by providing the propofol to Jackson in a negligent way, or if they believe he failed to perform his legal duty as a doctor by acting in a reckless manner that created a high risk of death. The seven-man, five-woman jury has to unanimously agree on one or the other theory. In addition to considering the testimony of medical experts who have divergent opinions on the level of care provided by Murray, Pastor asked the jury to weigh the testimony of character witnesses who attested to the physician’s generosity when weighing the verdict. The judge’s instructions were given in a standing-room-only courtroom that included several members of Jackson’s family, including his parents and siblings LaToya and Randy. Jury deliberation will begin Friday and, if convicted, Murray could face four years in prison and the loss of his medical license. Related Artists Michael Jackson
Judge suspends trial of Dr. Conrad Murray due to a death in key witness’ family. By Gil Kaufman Conrad Murray Photo: Pool/ Getty Images After taking the day off Friday just as the prosecution was preparing to wrap up its case, the involuntary manslaughter trial of Michael Jackson’s physician, Dr. Conrad Murray , is on hold due to the death of the father of the prosecution’s final witness. According to , the Los Angeles Court public information office sent out a notice Sunday explaining that details on the resumption of the trial will be sent out “when further information is available.” After two weeks of evidence attempting to portray Murray as negligent and reckless in his care for Jackson, the prosecution was close to wrapping up its part of the case when testimony was suspended Friday to allow final witness Dr. Steven Shafer to travel to a previously scheduled anesthesiology conference in Chicago. But, en route to the conference, Shafter learned that his father had died, and he never made it to the event. Shafer, described as a highly respected anesthesiologist and pharmacologist, was expected to testify about the effects of the surgical anesthetic propofol on the human body. Jackson died as a result of propofol intoxication, and the case against Murray hinges on the prosecution’s theory that the cardiologist gave the pop icon a lethal dose of the drug and then provided substandard care when Jackson went into cardiac arrest as a result. The Associated Press reported that the trial will resume Wednesday, after the judge in the case agreed to give the defense more time to prepare their response to tests the coroner’s office conducted last week on the level of the sedative lorazepam in Jackson’s system. Shafer is also expected to give a key piece of evidence to counter the defense’s claim that Jackson self-administered the fatal 25mg dose of propofol through an IV catheter in his leg. After pursuing a strategy in which the defense intended to portray Jackson as having taken the deadly dose of propofol by himself when Murray was out of the room, the doctor’s legal team pivoted last week and appeared set on focusing on an allegedly self-administered overdose of lorazepam instead. Once Shafer gives his testimony, the defense will present its case and call an estimated 15 witnesses, which could take the testimony through Friday or next Monday. Related Artists Michael Jackson
Among other testimony, a much-hyped slurred phone recording is played in full. By Gil Kaufman and Kara Warner Dr. Conrad Murray looks on during trial at the Los Angeles Superior Court on October 5 Photo: Getty Images After bringing a succession of Dr. Conrad Murray’s girlfriends to the witness stand, on Wednesday (October 5), prosecutors in the involuntary manslaughter trial of Michael Jackson ‘s personal physician focused on the kinds and amounts of drugs Murray ordered in the months leading up to the pop star’s death at age 50 on June 25, 2009. The most anticipated moment of the day was the promise of the full recording of a slurred-sounding Jackson recorded on Murray’s phone in the weeks before the “Thriller” singer’s death. Bits of the tape were played during the prosecution’s opening statements. Among the testimony Wednesday:
Piers Morgan wears many hats: talk show host, America’s Got Talent judge, former Daily Mirror editor. But one thing the British celebrity swears he is not? A phone hacker. Morgan was forced to defend himself today after Louise Mensch – a Conservative member of Parliament on the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee, who grilled Rupert Murdoch during that News Corp. chief’s hearing in London – accused bragging about his own history of breaking into voicemails. Said Mensch: “[Morgan] said in his book ‘The Insider’ recently, and I quote, that that little trick of entering a standard four-digit code allows anyone to call that number and hear your messages…” This is simply untrue, Piers Tweeted in response: “That MP just claimed I boasted in my book of using phone-hacking for a scoop. Complete nonsense. Just read the book. I’ve never hacked a phone, told anyone to hack a phone, or published any stories based on the hacking of a phone.” What a mess. Literally! Someone slammed a whipped cream pie into Murdoch’s face during his testimony!
