Prior to the "malpractice" trial, Michael wanted to appear for the jury to be a devoted husband. As soon as he won the malpractice judgement, Michael ceased to be a devoted husband.
Do you have any evidence that the benificent behaviors you are attributing to Michael in fact continued after 1993?
What are you talking about? You and others here are the ones taking accusations and other vile things as face value. There is no, zero evidence that this man has done anything wrong. I have read enough regarding this case to stand by my claim.