| This thread has been locked, it will not receive new replies. |
|
Locked on 10/13/2007 6:39:17 PM PDT by Admin Moderator, reason:
New thread: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1910919/posts?page=1 |
Posted on 04/07/2007 3:14:35 PM PDT by mom4kittys
Thread Number 3
Well, I guess we’ll just have to wait and see which doctor it is IF the inquest ever happens I guess.
I tend to think they know how to spell the doctors names. They got Kapoor’s right. I guess it’s sit and wait huh? lol
Aye, aye! That’s my platform, too - with KE also getting what she deserves, for aiding and abetting.
It’s all the money stuff where it gets murky.
I think either the nannies are fibbing about that particular detail, or Anna thought she remembered that and thought wrongly. I don’t think Daniel ever left the hospital.
It was spelled Kapour, which is incorrect. Ford Shelley’s name was misspelled, Brian Capron’s, Findlay, Deveaux ... several more. I had to do a lot of sleuthing when it came out to ascertain the right people.
I don’t think he did, either. Then that Nassau newspaper compounded the problem by reporting that Daniel stopped off at the On-the-Run for dinner on his way to the hospital.
I don’t watch ET and those shows. ‘Course, don’t need to because what’s on all the shows is reported in various places online. Good old cross-examination and investigative reports are what I’m waiting for.
Looks like the problem we are having with communication is because we are not looking at the same list I guess. They are spelled right on the one I am looking at. LOL Go figure :)
http://etonline.com/documents/witnesslist_et.pdf
Same here. There are situations in life where you need to walk a certain line and I believe this is LB's. It's entirely possible that he is playing a very serious game. Maybe one day the dust will settle and we'll know more of "the rest of the story" as per Paul Harvey.
I hate moral relativism, and teach my kids of it’s dangers. I’ve said time and again Howard and Anna did wrong things. Lots of wrong things. I was just trying to get inside their heads so I could better understand their actions. How THEY perceived things. Where I differ from you is that I don’t see Howard as a pathological sociopath. I WILL change my mind if the inquest shows otherwise. I just have never been able to put HKS in the same league as Ted Bundy, OJ, Jeffrey Dahmer, etc. Partly because I don’t think he intentionally murdered anyone, or would. I know I’m not the only person in the world who thinks this, and there are very intelligent folks on both sides of the aisle, and both sides have valid and intelligent reasoning.
That’s the cleaned up one they did later. When they were teasing and just showing parts of it scrolling on-screen, they had a bunch misspelled. I see they only changed the more obvious ones, but not Ford Shelley, just as an example. I’m not going to go through the whole list again.
That’s what it looks like to me, too, blue. See, since Stern was with Anna during much of her detoxing period/s, I haven’t been able to place all the blame on him for what happened to her after Daniel died. I place more blame on Dr. E. Anna may have really, really flipped out, more even than we know. She may also have had ongoing mental problems, such as borderline personality disorder or some other such thing, that we aren’t privy to. And, there are still some private medical records we’ll never see that could help explain more of the drug situation, too. I just hope we get enough answers during the inquest. Just because we want all the answers doesn’t mean we’re entitled to them. The people entitled to them are law enforcement and her family, IMO.
Virgie said she is out for "justice". Which means whether she gets money in the process or not, she's looking to make Stern pay for what she perceives as being the person who caused her daughter and grandson's death.
The argument of late [on this board] seems to be whether Virgie is looking for money as the primary goal. I think the tabloids have painted her a certain way and people are making their assumptions. Personally, I don't know any of these people and tend to believe the truth lies somewhere in the middle with ALL of them. But whether people believe she is in it for the money or not, they can't take away the fact that this is still a mother who is has a legal right to answers.
Virgie's lawyer went on television twice. What he actually said was that his client believed that Stern was a murderer because he was responsible for their deaths and that the deaths had to do with drugs. (In fact, Virgie said drugs before the autopsy results were in.) Then he added that he concurred with his client. For that, he is being sued for defamation.
Two problems for Stern here with his defamation lawsuit:
a) He doesn't consider attorney special privilege wherein a lawyer has not only the right, but the duty to investigate the suspicions of his client and can concur on behalf of his client during representation;
b) Stern has to prove the allegation is false, was done with malice and where Virgie should have reasonably known it was false but said it anyway. Damages and punitive damages come AFTER that threshhold is met.
Example of the hypocrisy in this lawsuit: Stern, in his representation of Smith in the Marshall case, knew his client should not have been speaking publically about the J. Howard Marshall case. That was a court order if memory serves me right. Yet Stern went on her show with that intention and comforted her as she recollected his memory and how her husband's son screwed her out of her inheritance. I'm sure he was bargaining for attorney special privilege there yet he doesn't see it when it comes to Virgie's version to O'Quinn. It's a double-standard. I do know the Marshall family was outraged.
Be that as it may, Stern is now ironically suing for his own defamation but I predict it will be withdrawn before O'Quinn gets a chance to dig into the happenings before, during and after the autopsy and which are sure to come as a result of the Inquest. There is absolutely no way I believe the States and Federal levels are not watching closely. I hope O'Quinn has a good counter-suit to keep it alive because he's going to need that to give his client what she wants.
By asking for Guardianship, Virgie may get money in a wrongful death claim (which she will probably do with or without Birkhead's permission) but obtaining Guardianship means she'll also get the right to sue jointly with her grand-daughter, speak on her behalf and keep Stern from controlling the estate.
For whatever reasons, I'll make the assumption that Virgie does not believe that Birkhead will proceed against Stern with further litigation. If she has any doubts and wants to pursue this, people are either going to have to want to see Stern answer to the law, or just drop the whole thing and send Virgie back to Texas with her own recourses and watch Stern stay intermingled in Smith's affairs. Either way, someone is going to be disappointed because public opinion is not a court of law and ultimately, it's the courts that will decide.
Any way you want to look at it, all of these people have the prospect to make a considerable amount of money via books, interviews, pictures, etc. One doesn't really need Guardianship to be a millionaire in this. Guardianship is leverage that Stern refuses to give her because if Virgie gets it, Stern realizes he'll not only fight to have any leverage, he'll be dragged through one lawsuit after another or worse. Virgie believes this man murdered her daughter and grandson.
What swayed me, was knowing that Virgie could make much money on this without Guardianship but many seem to believe that's the only way she can. Not so. She's a millionaire waiting to happen the minute the gag order is released.
Birkhead seems to be content with getting his daughter and the millions he has the opportunity to receive. Virgie on the other hand, is out for Stern's head. Both of them (at least), Stern's head or not, are going to be millionaires.
I’m not fond of Virgie, for a whole host of reasons, and don’t want her to get any form of custody or guardianship, but I do want her to just be a grandma. DL can make up her own mind when she’s older who she wants in or out of her life.
One thing that I think we ALL can agree on is: are we sick and tired of this whole mess and want resolutions in fairly short order? I say, Yes.
I’m hoping for good news Friday!
Dr. Timothy Barrett listed as being on staff under “Family Medicine” not “Psychiatry” at Doctor’s Hospital where Daniel died and where Anna delivered her baby. Since Anna was an addict on multiple psychiatric medications, and Dr. KE did NOT have a license to practice in the Bahamas, the hospital would have had to have assigned one of their staff to oversee her psychiatric medications, preferrably a psychiatrist — such as Dr. Barrett SOMETIMES calls himself.
I don’t see anything to indicate that Timothy Barrett MD, misspelled by Perper as Timothy Baretts, MD, consulting psychiatrist was an ObGyn.
Disturbingly, I can find no evidence that he ever completed any residency in anything other than possibly a Family Medicine residency at the College of Medicine in the West Indies or perhaps an Osteopathic residency. I am simply guessing at that, as a PERHAPS residency program because of the department under which he is listed. Again, I find no proof of his completing any residency. I can only find evidence that he finished medical school at that college. That is on the Bahamian govt. site on credentialed doctors on the island.
However, on NONE of the sites on which Dr. Barrett claims to be a psychiatrist - the school sites, the media mental health site and the addiction site, does he EVER say that he has completed a residency. Perhaps it is just one of those things that doctors sometimes do. Theoretically, a doctor can CLAIM to be anything they feel competent to be and can practice as such unless there is some proof they are incompetent. Some hospitals will not allow such doctors to practice on their staffs without residency training, but some hospitals will still allow it.
Dr. Barrett is never referred to as being TRAINED in psychiatry nor does he claim to have completed a program on any link that was posted. I think he has been careful in this since doctors CANNOT simply claim to be board eligible (meaning they completed a specialty training program) or board certified (meaning they completed specialty training AND passed their specialty board exams). It would be somewhat sleazy to claim to be a psychiatrist with no evidence of any specific training, BUT NOT ILLEGAL, technically.
It WOULD BE ILLEGAL for Dr. Barrett, or any doc, to claim to be an MD if he is really a DO, a doctor of osteopathy. Point being, since Barrett is on the Family Medicine staff at the Doctors Hospital and not on their psychiatric staff, I am assuming he did not complete a residency in psychiatry, but simply PRACTICES as a psychiatrist (as evidenced in all the links).
I was wondering about the OB/GYN reference myself. I have never seen anything to indicate that at all. Perhaps Rte66 will share some more info with us that we might have missed.
But you just exhibited moral relativism in your response yet again. Yes, psychopaths feel justified in what they do, but in the end, so what? How does that understanding help us? Seeing it from his point of view doesn’t make his behaviour right. Sure, any criminal is gonna have their own POV and it may even be understandable, from their perspective. Which again, I will argue, is moral relativism, because frankly, that kind of view invites mitigation.
I. Don’t. Think. So.
I can understand where you don’t think Howard is a psychopath, a la Dahmer and Bundy. I think that’s where most people get their ideas, from the creepy killers.
The fact is that there are lots of socialised psychopaths- that psychopathy is not just about behaviour, it’s about a state of mind. Best book on it, ever, is Harvey Cleckley’s “Mask of Sanity”,
“Intentional murder”? Perhaps not. Perhaps not in a conscious manner, a crime of passion a la OJ. As for Dahmer, he wasn’t a psychopath in the pure sense- he was a disturbed serial killer. Period. Howard’s murder of Anna was a slow thing, IMO, perhaps calculated, perhaps from indifference and neglect (jury’s still out for me). Whatever. He had a hand in the deaths of both souls, IMO- in Daniel’s and Anna’s. Left devastation in his wake. I think he just wants to get away with whatever comes his way.
Oh, puleez. The guy is a lawyer, no dummy. Are you telling me you would buy his "oh gosh, golly gee" performance in front of Judge Siedlen that he didn't know nuthin 'bout drugs? Especially considering the fact that most of the drugs found in Anna's death room were prescribed to him?
Shyeah.
Dr E had a hand in it for sure, but Howard is no dummy and why would you even begin to go that way, or think it? Really, you are insulting the psycho's intelligence.
I believe Virgie is out for Stern’s head too, no matter what. End of story. Personally, she is my kinda gal. Thanks for placing an imprimatur on it :).
I agree completely. I read another book on this subject, by David Lykken, PhD, written more recently that explains this kind of everyday antisocial personality in the workplace, next door, etc. and what I found most upsetting, it explained — why they are often “successful.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.