There are a few more tidbits to share about the unethical Judge Robert Perry who presided over the trial of Howard K. Stern, Khristine Eroshevich and Sandeep Kapoor that took place last summer. It was the trial that was supposed to shed some light and hold those responsible who illegally obtained drugs for Anna Nicole Smith. Those same drugs ultimately led to her death.

Judge Perry conducted himself as if there should be celebrity exceptions to the law. In his court room, if you are a celebrity, you can break laws that us common folk would be incarcerated for. This is even if what you do is instrumental in killing someone.

Think of the following scenario as compared to the trial and charges against the defendants;

There are four people in a car. Two people decide to commit an armed robbery. The other two supplied the gun and want to stay in the car and watch. The cops come and arrest the robbers. Not only do they arrest the ones who actually committed the robbery, they also arrest and charge the two who sat in the car and made the gun available to commit the robbery. They are arraigned and go to trial. All four are sent to prison even though no one died because of their actions. That is how the law is supposed to and does work if there is no interference. Those two who sat in the car could have chosen not to supply the gun and they could have gotten out of the car as soon as they saw a robbery was being planned. However they did not so all four serve prison time for robbery and being  accomplices to robbery.

Now take the same scenario and make the two in the back seat into celebrities (or leeches of celebrities or call themselves a celebrity doctor) who stayed in the car. In Judge Robert Perry’s court, those two walk free, just because they are “celebrities.” Instead of  holding an ethical trial as was done in the first scenario, the judge does his very best to befriend the defendants, admonish the prosecution plus go to extreme lengths to throw out all of their evidence and do a 180′ from the preliminary hearing.

As I watch a bit of the Michael Jackson trial, I see a normal trial as it should be in Los Angeles California. When the judge calls for recess, he leaves the courtroom and goes to his chambers like an ethical judge is supposed to. He does not scooche his chair over to schmooze with the defendants at their table.  Mainstream media does not seem to be frightened off by a Lin Wood/Steven Sadow type lawyer as they were in the Anna Nicole Smith criminal trial. It does not appear that Michael Jackson’s mother is barred from going into the court room until the exact time that court is to reconvene. It does not appear that the judge is excessively throwing out the prosecutions evidence.  And I bet we will also see that the jury will be respected and their verdicts will not be overruled by a biased Judge.

“Court Room Observer”, from the previous article about the trial said they had never seen a trial where the jury was told to leave the court room so many times as the Anna Nicole Smith trial jurors were. They even overheard a producer of a very prominent hit television show whose job it is to cover many high profile cases say THE SAME THING! Yet that jury was still able to convict two of the defendants on the tiny bit of evidence that they actually heard! Anyone can imagine what would have happened if the jurors were permitted to stay in the room and hear even half of what Judge Perry barred. They also recount one instance where Judge Perry sent the jury out of the room and they were kept out for the better part of an hour while Perry attacked and scolded the district attorneys. Sadow was also permitted to scream at and scold the prosecution team. It was just too outrageous.

There was someone else who attended the trial who left a comment on the first article recently and has given me permission to publish it on this post.  Unfortunately, I missed this important email sent at the end of August 2010. I want to thank them for coming to the back to the blog and sharing this with us.

I attended the trial for a few days as well. (I emailed QV when it was fresh in my memory but she never replied). Mrs. Arthur was not present (at that time) but I did notice quite a bit of what I felt was bias on the part of the judge. He seemed bedazzled by the defense attorneys, especially Kapoor’s and Sterns. Not only was he downright rude to the prosecutors and all smiles to the defense, but I felt his rulings were all for the defense . He ripped into the male prosecutor (outside of the jury’s presence) and told him he was taking too much time and he wanted to know where his questioning was going. He also told him that he felt he had a weak case. This was in reference to the testimony of Dr Gagne, I felt the questioning was very pertinent.
Dr Erosovich was very chummy with Linda Deutsh, as was Dr. Kapoor’s lawyer. Erosovich was showing her photos on her cell phone of her mother which Linda promptly ooohed and ahhhed over.. I’ve never been to a trial where the media is interacting with the defendant like this, and I’ve been to many. In my opinion, Judge Perry should not be presiding over a courtroom.

If the Anna Nicole Smith trial would have been televised as the Michael Jackson – Dr. Murray trial is, the public would have been outraged. However Perry most certainly knows what he did is unethical and apparently does not care. It was his decision not to allow the public to see what they should have seen. Most likely he would not have conducted himself in the manner that he did and the jury’s verdict would have been different and allowed to stand.

September  20th, 2011. Prosecutors in the Anna Nicole Smith drug trial have filed an appeal on that case saying Judge Robert Perry was biased toward the defendants and their attorneys and against the prosecution. They said that Perry created a celebrity exception to the law.

I’ve had the opportunity to speak to someone who actually attended the Anna Nicole Smith trial concerning the drugs that led to her death. Defendants Howard K. Stern, Dr. Khristine Eroshevich and Dr. Sandeep Kapoor were charged with excessive prescribing of opiates and sedatives to an addict, and fraudulently obtaining drugs by using false names.

I will call this person, “Courtroom Observer”. Courtroom Observer did not attend the whole trial but gave their take on what really happened in Judge Robert Perry’s courtroom during the time they attended.

The first day of the trial, as soon as Anna’s mother, Virgie Arthur, arrived, Howard K. Stern’s lawyer Steve Sadow asked to approach the judge privately. When Sadow sat back down, Judge Perry made an announcement, before anything happened to warrant such a warning, that anyone caught making comments or bothering the defendants in any way would be removed from the courtroom.

As the trial moved forward, when the court recessed for breaks and lunch, there were times that Mrs. Arthur would return early. She went directly into courtroom and sat until court was called back into session so as to avoid the large crowds in the hallways.

About 4 or 5 days into the trial, there was a break. When Mrs. Arthur returned to the courtroom a little early, she and her family were shocked to find Judge Perry, the defendants and their attorneys having a conversation about boating and vacation spots etc.. Judge Robert Perry had wheeled his chair over to the defendants table in order to have a more intimate conversation. James Arthur, Virgie’s husband commented, “there will be no justice here.” However, Mrs. Arthur remained optimistic.

The next day, after lunch, when Mr. and Mrs. Arthur and those who were with them attempted to enter the courtroom as they had since the beginning of the trial, a deputy stopped them at the door and informed them that they were no longer permitted to enter the courtroom early. The deputy then said Anna’s mother and her husband had to wait until exactly 1:30 pm to enter.

It was then very apparent that Judge Perry, who runs the courtroom, and the defendants and their lawyers didn’t want Anna Nicole’s mother and husband to see Perry socializing with them. The disturbing part was that the media and press that were attending were permitted to enter early. The media was let in but Anna’s mother and family were left sitting in the hallway. It remained that way until Mrs. Arthur had to fly back home for health reasons. The deputy was asked why the media, the defendants and their attorneys were allowed to go in early. His answer was, “well, it’s because they are the media.”

The prosecutors had extensive evidence against these defendants, but time and time again Judge Perry would not allow them to present it. His rational was that the evidence was “too inflammatory to the defendants.” You did not have to be a lawyer to know that the prosecutors were simply doing their jobs and that was to present the evidence, and let the jury hear the full story no matter how inflammatory it was especially when it was facts as presented to law enforcement during the extensive investigation.

There were times when Anna’s mother and family asked the prosecutors why they could not get a new judge to replace Perry who was so obviously biased toward the defendants. Their answer was frightening as they said “Judge Robert Perry is not the worst judge in this courthouse.”

Judge Perry made it clear from the start of the trial that he did not believe the defendants did anything wrong and at times Perry even made objections for the defense. There was so much more that may never be known because most of the prosecutors evidence was thrown out by Perry.

When the prosecutors attempted to refresh a witnesses memory as to what they reported to investigators and testified to previously, the judge would abort their testimony and say, he/she said “they don’t remember, now move on!” Or he would again say “its too inflammatory.”

One day there was a video of Anna Nicole that the prosecutors wanted to use. Perry said he would take it home and watch it and then decide if it could be shown to the jury. When the subject of the video came up while court was in session, Judge Perry said, with Anna Nicole’s mother in the courtroom, that he had watched it and he thought Anna was very entertaining in her “voluptuous” kind of way.  Anna Nicole being “voluptuous” was not the point or reason why the prosecutors wanted to show the video. It was very inappropriate for Judge Perry to speak this way about evidence presented.

Over and over Judge Perry stopped the prosecutors from trying their case. They tried their best to get important evidence and testimony admitted, but Perry was not allowing the majority of it. Perry would say it was either hearsay, inflammatory,or irrelevant.

One of the most disturbing things witnessed was when “Big Moe”, Maurice Brighthaupt was testifying. Moe had been saying “everyone agreed Anna Nicole needed rehab, but no one ever did anything about it.” In other words Moe was saying, they all admitted that Anna Nicole Smith was an addict and needed intervention. Eroshevich and her lawyer Brad Brunon were sitting immediately in front of Mrs. Arthur and family. Brunon looked at Eroshevich and sang,“They wanted her to go to rehab but she said no no no.” Brunon and Eroshevich giggled like schoolchildren. It made one wonder if it was their daughter who was the subject of the trial, if they would find it so funny.

After Judge Perry threw out the jury verdicts, Los Angeles D.A. Steve Cooley had this to say:

“The jury deliberated more than two weeks and reached a fair and thorough verdict in accordance with the law and the evidence we were allowed to present.  Judge Perry’s ruling today is totally inconsistent with his previous rulings at the preliminary hearing, the trial itself and once again when the defense concluded their case. Each time, he refused to dismiss the conspiracy counts. The evidence has not changed from that time to now,” said Cooley.”

“His decision denigrates the substantial investigative efforts conducted by the state Department of Justice and the Medical Board,” said the L.A. District Attorney’s office in a statement. “It diminishes the huge social problem of prescription drug abuse facilitated by irresponsible caretakers and unscrupulous medical professionals …We will immediately pursue all appellate remedies to overturn Judge Perry’s decision.”

* Note. This is the same Judge Perry who appointed himself as a jury of one in the Oscar Grant killing. Basically Perry was saying the jury was stupid like he implied in the Anna Nicole Smith farce of a trial.

Dr. Sandeep Kapoor thought he would lend his support during the (non) sentencing of his co-defendants Howard K. Stern and (hand tap) Khristine Eroshevich in the Anna Nicole Smith drug trial. Surprise, he was served with a subpoena for a separate case.

Eroshevich next? I certainly hope so and then the California Bar Association needs to take a look at ethical issues concerning Stern.  Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert Perry’s reasoning for dismissing charges against Stern is shocking. Perry dismissed the felony charges against Howard K. Stern saying,

“I don’t think there’s evidence that a layperson knows it’s illegal to write a prescription in another name for a celebrity,” the judge said, noting that Stern is not a doctor..

Puhlease! He is a lawyer. He has a law degree. Add to that, how many criminals say, “I didn’t know that I was doing anything wrong.” As far as I know, ignorance is not an acceptable defense in a REAL courtroom.

Judge Perry was not scheduled to try this case but somehow he ended up with it. Seeing that he expressed his personal opinion and support for the defendants about the case during the preliminary hearing, he should have recused himself before the trial even started. He did not allow important evidence and refused the victim and her family a fair trial. I am told Anna Nicole’s mother was not consulted about the final outcome as she should have been under California’s Marsy’s Law, The Victim’s Bill of Rights Act of 2008.

Perry also said he did not agree that Smith was an addict. Yes, Anna Nicole Smith was a SELF ADMITTED ADDICT.

As far as celebrities being above the law, Judge Perry obviously agrees. What a good judge would do is encourage stiff penalties for any HIPAA medical privacy violations. Judge Perry should encourage that laws be upheld and not the violation of laws as he is condoning in this case.

Judge Perry overstepped. He ignored advice to trust the jury and made a sham of their good work and lengthy deliberations. There is more to come on this. As has been said before, Perry threw out a lot of damning evidence that should have been allowed to be presented to the jury. Details about some of this behavior is in the pipeline to be revealed and hopefully can be published in the not so distant future.

Now, the California Medical Board is coming after Sandeep Kapoor. What a lot of people may not know is that Kapoor, who once placed an advertisement boasting that he practices, “Entertainment Medicine”, was under investigation for prescribing practices with other patients. When the California Department of Justice looked into the Anna Nicole case they found that Kapoor excessively prescribing controlled substances for other than a legitimate medical purpose to nine other patients. The details can be found in this document and starting on page 36. A companion document can be found at this link.

Here is a taste of what Kapoor over prescribed in the opinion of doctors and investigators with some of the amounts being labeled as “massive”. There are least a couple of celebrity names in the document as well.

Patient #1
Patient’s mother, a registered nurse filed a complaint with the CA medical board against Kapoor for what she thought was excessive and dangerous prescribing practices with her daughter.
Phentermine (Schedule IV weight loss)
Clonazepam (Schedule IV sedative)
Oxycodone (Schedule II narcotic)
Methadone (Schedule II narcotic)

Patient #2
Dextrostat (Schedule II amphetamine)
Methadone (Schedule II narcotic)
Morphine Sulfate (Schedule II narcotic)
Endocet (Schedule II  narcotic)

Patient #3
Methadone (Schedule II narcotic)
Hydrocodone (Schedule III narcotic)

Patient #4
Hydrocodone Bitartrate (Schedule III narcotic)

Patient #5
This person has a criminal record as a controlled substance offender.
Hydromorphone (Schedule II narcotic)
Methadone (Schedule II narcotic)
Oxycontin (Schedule II narcotic)

Patient #6
Methadone (Schedule II narcotic)
Adderall (Schedule II stimulant)

Patient #7
Ritalin (Schedule II stimulant)
Adderall (Schedule II stimulant)

Patient #8
Oxycontin (Schedule II narcotic)
Oxycodone (Schedule II narcotic)
Hydrocodone (Schedule II narcotic)

Patient #9
Methadone (Schedule II narcotic)
Oxycontin (Schedule II narcotic)

With the publication of Khristine Eroshevich snorting a white power substance from a straw and the bath tub pictures of the psychiatrist and Anna Nicole, her patient,  I expect the CA Medical Board has a surprise for her too.

I also want to mention as I watched the post “sentencing” interviews, I saw two lawyers either lying or they were misinformed by their clients.

Stern attorney Steve Sadow has said repeatedly that Anna Nicole Smith has suffered from chronic pain her whole life. Not true. A source close to the family denies that claim. Also offered is that Smith did not suffer seizures as a child or young woman. Robert S. Fisher, M.D of epilepsy.com has published a partial list of drugs that will actually cause seizures. Just a glance at his list shows that Smith was on some of the drugs that will cause seizures. Was she ever tested to see why she suffered seizures?

Eroshevich’s attorney Brad Brunon said Eroshevich acknowledges that “she could have done things differently and perhaps better.”

“Dr. Eroshevich accepts this and would rewrite history if she could,” said the motion, calling it her only inappropriate action in a 30-year medical career.

Either she lied to her attorney or he is lying. In 2007 columnist Roger Freidman was the first to expose the fact that Eroshevich had been fired from her job with a medical group because she farmed out the work instead of doing it herself.

Freidman also said,

We told you “Entertainment Tonight” and “The Insider” paid her for interviews as part of a complex deal cooked up by Howard K. Stern. And then, on one of those shows, Eroshevich showed off another drug memo for Anna Nicole and bragged that she had administered all the drugs to the late Playboy Playmate herself.

If that was not an admission of guilt, I don’t know what is…

**A couple of great articles about the horrible behavior of Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert Perry.

Attorney Janice Brenman says “Celebrity justice dismissal in Anna Nicole Smith case insults America’s jury system.” Click here to read.

Crookston Times Editor Natalie J. Ostgaard says; “Judges shouldn’t be able to toss out verdicts on a whim.” Click here to read.

The woman who cared for Anna Nicole Smith with boatloads of drugs that eventually killed her is joining Howard K. Stern in asking Los Angeles Judge Robert Perry to drop the charges against her or for a new trial. Dr. Khristine Eroshevich and Stern both think they should not be held culpable for illegally obtaining the drugs even though Eroshevich and Stern were told by an expert that prescribing the same for Smith was pharmaceutical suicide.

Below are the drugs found by Florida toxicologists and pathologists in Smith’s system after she died . That would be the SAME Florida that Judge Perry said should have been prosecuting the case he is presiding over now. One would have to assume he meant for homicide since Florida will (and should) charge a person for homicide if they are found guilty of illegally obtaining the drugs that end up killing a person. Yet these two people professional people, a doctor and a lawyer, claimed to love and care for Anna Nicole Smith.

Chloral Hydrate =  THE KILLER. Is a hypnotic sedative schedule IV CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE
Klonopin (clonazepam) = Benzodiazepine hypnotic agent Schedule IV CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE
Valium (diazepam) = Benzodiazepine hypnotic agent Schedule IV CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE
Lorazepam (Ativan) = Benzodiazepine hypnotic agent Schedule IV CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE
*
SOMA = a muscle relaxer and its active metabolite of Meprobamate,
Robaxin = a muscle relaxer and metabolite Guaifenesin

Methadone, a pharmaceutical opioid and Schedule II drug was found in her bile indicating usage several (two to three) days before her death. Sandeep Kapoor was the prescribing doctor.

WHOSE NAMES WERE THE DRUGS IN???

CHLORAL HYDRATE. Killer drug caused Anna Nicole Smith’s death = HOWARD K. STERN
VALIUM = HK STEARN (Deception for Howard K. Stern)
LORAZEPAM = BEN STERN (Deception for Howard K. Stern)
KLONOPIN = HOWARD K. STERN
SOMA = HOWARD K. STERN
ROBAXIN = HOWARD K. STERN

WHO PRESCRIBED THE DEADLY DRUGS AFTER BEING WARNED BY EXPERTS NOT TO???

CHLORAL HYDRATE.  Killer drug caused Anna Nicole Smith’s death = Dr. Khristine Eroshevich
VALIUM = Dr. Khristine Eroshevich
LORAZEPAM = Dr. Khristine Eroshevich
KLONOPIN = Dr. Khristine Eroshevich
SOMA = Dr. Khristine Eroshevich
ROBAXIN = Dr. Khristine Eroshevich

The other drugs in her system..
Benedaryl= antihistamine
Cipro = antibiotic
Topamax = anticonvulsant

Metab0lites
Oxazepam = (Benzodiazepine Metabolite)
Temazepam (Benzodiazepine Metabolite)
Nordiazepam (Benzodiazepine Metabolite)

Actions speak louder than words. She is dead. Any questions?

Source*** Autopsy and investigative reports as well as crime scene investigations in Hollywood Florida where Smith died.

Thursday, October 28^th, a Los Angeles jury, or at least six of them made a very grave mistake. I wonder though if they even knew it. As much as I want to, I just can’t be upset at the jury who let Dr. Sandeep Kapoor walk, only find Dr “Death” Eroshevich guilty on four counts and let Howard K. Stern, as usual, slither into the middle with two felony convictions.

Three words. Judge-Robert-Perry. I hope the jury is appalled when they figure out how much good evidence was kept from them. I hope it disgusts them when they find out that witnesses were not allowed to repeat their original statements as they occurred and as was told to CA DOJ investigators.

JRP shouted “inflammatory” in his defense of the defendants sometimes up to 20 times per day according to a person in the court room. That person also said Judge Perry pretty much let the defense know they didn’t even need to present a defense in that Perry’s actions and words let them know he was on their side.

According to AP Reporter Linda Deutsch (who reportedly sleeps during court proceedings), Judge Perry verbally abused prosecution attorneys and raised his voice and shouted at them in advocating for the trio who were on trial. During closing arguments Judge Perry even let Stern’s attorney Sadow scream until Perry offered that Sadow should look at the jury while he desecrated the prosecuting attorneys with half baked truths and innuendos.

How disgusting it was to watch this video of Stern saying he was vindicated of guilt in supplying Anna Nicole Smith with up to 2300 pills per month of narcotics and benzos (that she sometimes washed down with expensive champagne) like that was a good thing. He did not get her any real help. The only thing he helped her to was death’s door.

I never did hear of any proof or anything indicating a PROPER diagnosis of chronic pain syndrome and yes without me making this even longer, there are ways to do it. That’s how it’s done in the real world.  It’s more than horrible that Smith was given more medication than a hospice cancer patient dying in agony.

Where did Stern ever care about Anna Nicole Smith’s privacy and confidentially, as he says in the after trial interview? Did he care that the whole world saw her humiliating herself being drunk, high, trashed, whatever?

Some examples. Click on thumbnails to enlarge:

Anna Nicole ushered off stage at VH1 Big In ’04 Awards

Anna Nicole’s Booby Trap. MTV Awards In Sydney AU.

Anna Nicole Drunk at American Music Awards. CBS News link.

As I watched the talking heads on TV after the verdict, I saw disbelief. Professional commentators saw all the things that myself and other bloggers have been listing and talking about since the trial started on August 6^th. What a tragic reflection of our society that a judge can cross ethical boundaries in a high profile case and get away with it.  See: The American Bar Association. Model Code of Judicial Conduct. Canon 32. A JUDGE SHALL PERFORM THE DUTIES OF JUDICIAL OFFICE IMPARTIALLY AND DILIGENTLY. http://www.abanet.org/cpr/mcjc/canon_3.html *Thank you to Topix bloggers for this link and many others they have supplied over the years.

There is some comfort for Anna and Daniel’s family and that is, two of the culprits who mishandled Anna Nicole are CONVICTED FELONS now. Unless Judge Perry tampers with the jury’s work, that is. He has already “warned” that he can nullify the jury’s verdict. I will not be a bit surprised if  he will do just that when sentencing occurs on January 6^th, 2011. But Florida is still watching. A spokesperson said “if authorities find evidence one or more people illegally supplied Smith with the prescription drugs” blamed for her death, a charge as high as first-degree murder could result.” Click here for full story.

On another note, shortly before the trial started, a source who did not attend the proceedings told me that congratulations are in order for Howard K. Stern’s attorney Krista Barth. She gave birth to a new baby this past year. I don’t have any more details than that.

And finally, I have some things I want to say to the people who have frequented this site since it opened under another name on February 14th of 2007 and will do that in the next few days. God willing, I am also hoping to obtain some fascinating reading material to share with all who support justice for Anna Nicole and Daniel and mother and grandmother Virgie Arthur. I’m keeping my fingers crossed hoping to be able to obtain this information in full.

As I was putting this article together I noticed a news update saying the defense in the case won’t be calling any witnesses.

I think most of the world knows that Anna Nicole Smith was a very troubled woman who died of a drug overdose because she was enabled to death. Would Anna Nicole still be alive today if it were not for the extraordinary measures that Howard K. Stern and the two doctors Eroshevich and Kapoor took to make sure Anna Nicole Smith had all the dangerous drugs she craved?

Why did Howard K. Stern wake a devastated and depressed Anna Nicole up every four hours to administer narcotics and sedatives  after her son died and other times coo these sticky sweet and deadly words, “Baby, come and we’ll take our medicine.”

Why did Khristine Eroshevich disregard expert advice more than once when she was told the drugs she was trying to score for her would kill Anna Nicole.

Why did Sandeep Kapoor after promising a hospital psychiatrist he would let her handle any prescribing of methadone… prescribe methadone and Xanax immediately after Anna Nicole was released from hospitalization detoxing from the very same drugs?

Recent testimony in the drug conspiracy trial by a defense hired gun, Dr. Perry Fine from Utah says that just because Anna Nicole Smith was taking an average of 1500 controlled substance pills per month she was not an addict. He claims that addiction is an inherited condition and Anna Nicole Smith was not an addict and there are no records saying so.

(Excuse me while I LOL!!!).What physician is going to put in their records they are prescribing addictive drugs to an addict???

Even I can tell you that a person who has used the same drugs that Anna Nicole did and at the same quantities, if humanly possible, will become “chemically dependent” which is another term for the word “addicted”. Well, I suppose they could do like Kapoor did and keep three different sets of records for his addicted patient.

Let’s compare to what other “professionals” have said…

Dr. Victor Kovner was Anna Nicole’s personal physician who sold his medical practice to Dr. Kapoor and had this to say in court:

“She refused my suggestion to enter rehab.”

“She had a substance abuse disorder so severe that she could become addicted to Jello.”

“Anna Nicole Smith has two diagnosis, chronic pain and addiction to prescription drugs.”

~***~

Dr. Greg Thompson—a pharmaceutical expert:

Reported that the drugs might work for a drug addict under supervised care, or with a dying cancer patient in a hospital, or ‘if you were going to kill someone.”

He admonished Dr. Eroshevich about the drugs she was requesting for Smith and told her she was way out of her league.

~***~

Dr. Nathalie Maullin on staff at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in April 2006 treated Anna Nicole:

Resumed but then started weaning Anna Nicole off of  Xanax and Methadone when Anna Nicole tried stopping them cold turkey.

She believed Smith had “a borderline personality disorder” and was addicted to prescription medications.

Said: “She was on medication that seemed like overkill for the type of pain she was in.” (Prescribed by Kapoor)

She conferred with Kapoor by phone, shared her plan for weaning Smith off Xanax and any drugs known as benzodiazopines which can be addictive. She said Kapoor agreed and told her he would leave the prescribing of Methadone to her. Maullin told the court that the day Smith left the hospital, defendant Dr. Sandeep Kapoor wrote her new prescriptions for the very medications she had just discontinued.

Remember, this is also the hospital visit where Larry Birkhead swore that Anna Nicole and Howard K. Stern were adding drugs from the infamous duffel bag to her detox regimen, because the IV drip was not enough to satisfy her.

And lets not forget Ira Freeman who told Eroshevich her medicine request was “pharmaceutical suicide.”

Here are a couple of videos to compare from Anna Nicole’s Trim Spa days. The first looks like an appearance (yeah, she appears to be totally blasted) and the second is a commercial (perfect speech, no slurring).

I pray the jury does their job. I pray they disregard  Judge Robert Perry’s horrible blatant bias and holds those who had a hand in drugging Anna Nicole Smith to death, responsible for their actions.

Anna Nicole Smith trial scam. September 20th, 2010

Judge Robert Perry is up for reelection and does not want the doctors and pill poppers voting against him. That’s the only reason that I can think of for his apparent love affair with the defense in The State of California vs Howard K. Stern, Khristine Eroshevich and Sandeep Kapoor.

In reference to this article by AP Reporter Linda Deutsch, I have a lot of questions for this judge.

Did any doctor order testing such as, MRI, CT  and other brain scans, EMG, GI tests, extensive blood work etc…  for Anna Nicole Smith to rule out other conditions to arrive at this diagnosis of  “Chronic Pain Syndrome”? I do hope the court remembers there was no disease found in Anna Nicole’s body at autopsy to warrant the drugs she was taking. Anna Nicole also did NOT suffer with seizures as a child.

When was “Chronic Pain Syndrome” diagnosed and by whom?

Is this diagnosis of “Chronic Pain Syndrome” in any of her records?

What about the other tranquilizers and sleep drugs and muscle relaxers that she was taking?

Those were:

Xanax (Tranquilizer)

Oxazepam (Tranquilizer)

Valium (Tranquilizer)

Lorazepam (Tranquilizer)

Klonopin (Tranquilizer and sometimes seizures)

Ambien (Sleep)

Chloral Hydrate (Sleep medication)

Soma (Muscle Relaxer)

Robaxin (Muscle Relaxer)

Chloral Hydrate (Sleep), Klonopin (Tranquilizer), Valium (Tranquilizer), Oxazepam (Tranquilizer), Lorazepam (Tranquilizer) and Bendaryl (which causes sleepiness and magnifies the effect the other drugs) were ALL FOUND IN Anna Nicole’s AUTOPSY RESULTS. She was taking all of the same class of drugs at the same time which was over-kill and it certainly did kill her.

The most incredible part is if I am reading her autopsy correctly, the only pain medicine that was in her system was a small amount of methadone found in bile of her liver. If she had “Chronic Pain Syndrome”, why was she not using pain medicines at her death???

Did Anna Nicole exhibit drug seeking behaviors? She didn’t have to. She had Kim Walthers, Howard K. Stern, Dr. Khristine Eroshevich and Dr. Sandeep Kapoor and others to do her dirty work for her.They were the ones doing the seeking with Kapoor even acknowledging possible “Benzo” addiction in his journal.

Instead of breaking the law to keep Anna Nicole in supply of truckloads of drugs, they could have engaged a real professional and done an Intervention for her. Watch the dang show on TV, Judge Perry. It shows how even horribly addicted people still have plenty of lucid moments.

And where’s the perjury threat and witness coaching accusation for the so called prosecution witnesses Birkhead, Big Moe, Ford and Gina Shelley? They all changed their stories and they all had personal interest to do so no matter if they did it before or now. If you take every single person who is not an expert and has testified in this trial, the only ones who came close to replicating prior testimony or interviews were the two nannies. All their prior statements are available.  Those affidavits they signed were altered after or the wording was not all read to those women because when they found out about what the affidavits really said back in 2007, they went on American national television to complain about their signatures being on statements that were altered or not explained to them.

I hope for the sake of no more “death by entourage” happening, this case is retried if it keeps heading the way it is and not by Judge Robert Perry.

“Celebrity doctors to the stars”, you are free to keep writing scripts for those addicts so they will adore you and allow you into their private circles.

Celeb and rich people addicts. You can keep selling your souls for drugs you should not be taking thanks to Judge Robert Perry.

Don’t forget to vote!

It is not complete and is subject to revision as more information is made available..

If anyone has any corrections or additions they would like to submit along with proof of accuracy, it would be much appreciated. Just click the “contact” tab on the top of the page to email me. Thank you.

Anna Nicole Smith Drug Procurement Chart\

Since the first week of August a small parade of prosecution witnesses have one by one sat in the witness chair in this Anna Nicole Smith felony drug trial, swore to tell the truth and then they lied or withheld evidence. What the jury must think of these people, I don’t know. The little I do know is what has been reported by a lone Associate Press reporter who is known to be biased toward the defense in the trials she covers

Yesterday the fresh scent of honesty and integrity permeated the news. Even the AP reporter wrote about the horrific details offered by two women who were nannies for Anna Nicole Smith’s new born infant.

The news of what the prosecution had to do to get those women from the Bahamas to the United States was not a surprise. It has been no secret that Quethlie Alexie and Nadine Alexie have been in fear for their lives since 2007 when they gave that first interview to Lincoln Bain aka Mr. Controversy without showing their faces.

Also notable is that the Nannies were expected to testify in the inquest into the death of Daniel Smith. New York District Court Judge Denny Chin sent a request for “judicial assistance” wanting the two women to appear for Howard K. Stern’s lawsuit against Rita Cosby and her book Blonde Ambition.  They never showed up.

They came for California though and I for one praise their bravery, and honesty. Being in fear for their lives also explains the need to bring their family members to this country with them. I believe that would fall under the category of witness protection.

An important point to remember is that the “Nannies” have not wavered from their original story like so called “friends” of Anna Nicole’s have.

Bodyguard Big Moe came clean so he gets a pass but loses points regarding his fondness for Eroshevich who is called Doctor Death in the Blogosphere. The drugs that killed Anna Nicole were all prescribed by her or in fake names for Stern and meant for Anna Nicole.

Also remember Eroshevich is a psychiatrist and NOT ONE PRESCRIPTION SHE WROTE WAS FOR ANTI-DEPRESSANTS! Sure she might be a nice lady, a people pleaser… but its well known that it was her drugs and under her care that Anna Nicole died. The jury is not allowed to consider that fact but the court of public opinion is.

Larry Birkhead was reportedly contentious during his turn to testify and then hit the talk show circuit after his testimony to praise and defend Howard K. Stern. After all the things he said about Stern when he was engaged in his paternity fight, he should be ashamed of himself.  He is the father of Anna Nicole Smith’s baby and has a duty to protect his child. It was widely reported that Birkhead would not repeat his 2006 declaration where he stated as a fact that Anna Nicole Smith became addicted to methadone. He would not call her an addict.

I expect Judge Perry will probably rule most of what the Nannies have to say as “inflammatory” as been his reasoning for throwing out evidence in this trial. That is something that should be explored but at a later time.

In anticipation of more witness gagging, I watched once again the three videos in the previous article and made some notes. Just to be sure I don’t mix up their names I am going to simply use “Nannie” for both ladies.  Here is what the Nannies had to say.

REMEMBER THIS WAS FROM 2007

Looking for a variety of reports about the Anna Nicole Smith drug trial? Sorry, you aren’t going to find many. Linda Deutsch appears to be the only reporter consistently covering this important trial.  Why is this important?  California Attorney General Jerry Brown is very concerned about the rash of celebrity deaths from prescription drugs and the trend must stop. “Just because it’s in a nice little package and has a name on it and a date and a doctor’s name under it, doesn’t mean that it can’t kill you,” he said.

The list of dead celebrities gets longer and reported addicts are being outed with the lucky ones being forced into rehab. And don’t forget the reality television show about celebrity addicts called “Celebrity Rehab with Dr. Drew”. One of the defendants Dr.Kapoor in the Anna Nicole Smith trial once advertised himself as an “Entertainment Doctor”. But what does that have to do with a reporter and the judge on the case? Hold on, I’ll get to it.

Background

More than 20 felony drug charges were brought against Howard K. Stern, Dr. Khristine Eroshevich and Dr. Sandeep Kapoor because boat loads of drugs were being prescribed for Anna Nicole Smith. Fake names, misspelled names  and borrowed names were used to procure the same drugs that killed the late model and occasional actress. Warnings issued by pharmacists to Stern and both doctors that drug combinations and amounts ordered would kill the patient, were ignored.

After the sudden and unexpected death of Anna Nicole’s son Daniel there is no doubt that the woman was depressed however, not one single antidepressant was found in her system after her death. What was found were downers. That’s right. A horribly depressed woman was prescribed downers.  The autopsy report showed that she had ingested Klonopin, Valium, Oxazepam and Lorazepam which are all anti-anxiety medicines aka tranquilizers. Methadone which is only supposed to be prescribed for the most severe pain or surgery was found in her liver bile. Methadone is also what killed Daniel.

Tranquilizers make a person less anxious by slowing down the central nervous system to produce a calm affect.  Ok, maybe one of them for Anna Nicole but four at the same time? In addition to that she was also taking Chloral Hydrate which is a rarely used and dangerous sleeping medication. Benadryl was in Anna Nicole’s system too. Benadryl has been found to enhance the affects of other drugs and alone makes a lot of people feel drowsy. Does that sound like Stern and the doctors were trying to help Anna Nicole? If a random blogger knows that you don’t take those six to seven medications in combination, why doesn’t a lawyer and two doctors know that?

The trial. What is really happening?

So here is the problem. Except for a few stragglers, veteran Associated Press reporter Linda Deutsch is speaking for the media in this case. She actually is, because if you “Google” any key words associated with the trial, 95% of the coverage is her articles rewritten and re-posted. What is wrong with that? Deutsch is said to be “pro-defendant.” I visited a blog called “Trials and Tribulations” written by a lady who is called “Sprocket”. This is what she had to say about Linda Deutsch.

It’s been widely recognized on every crime form/message board I’ve ever read for the past four years, that Linda Deutsch’s reporting is obviously biased towards the defense side of the case. This is not a new opinion I’ve developed since attending this trial. I’ve felt this way for a long time. When I was covering the Robert Blake trial, I read as many of the reporters that I could and back then I often wondered if Linda and I were watching the same trial. Don’t get me wrong. I have a ton of admiration for Linda. She is a world famous reporter, and is highly respected among her peers. And, you will not find one of her colleagues who will go on the record and publicly say she is pro defense. I also have to note that I’ve often seen Linda in very warm conversations with virtually every member of the defense team on this case.

I also found a site who ranked “America’s Worst Journalists” and why.

Blogger Roscoe Daily ranked Deutsch the 11th worst journalist due to……wait for it……..“BIAS.”

There are more complaints out there in comments by bloggers and forum members and I know what I feel when I read her articles. I even read accusations of napping during trials. Deutsch has been a reporter for over 40 years so I guess that is not unexpected. But if  true, let her take her nap at a fashion show or she can cover when Larry Birkhead has leaked a big media event happening in the swing set area of his local playground.

The Judge

That brings us to Judge Perry. Did he really say these things? Or is the reporter taking his words out of context?

The death of Daniel Smith is irrelevant.

Why? The methadone that killed him was most likely supplied by one of the doctors on trial and it did not just walk into the house that Anna Nicole and Howard K. Stern occupied and then fly to the hospital where Daniel died all by itself.

Perry said outside the jury’s presence that he was concerned about the prosecution’s case.

“It’s the people’s position that Anna Nicole was kept in a drugged state,” Perry said. “They claim she was a pawn in the hands of her handlers and doctors who kept her in a drugged state to control her and her money.”

The evidence so far does not support that, he said.

“I’m seeing a strong-willed person who ordered people around and was her own boss,” Perry said.

The trial just started.  He answered his own statement though. She may have been strong willed but was kept drugged because it was easier to control her. 

Its too bad that the DA has to not only argue with the defense but the judge too.

Deputy District Attorney Renee Rose protested that she could understand the court’s rulings if the case was going to be decided by a judge. “But this is a case for a jury.” she said.

The judge told Rose he saw the issues in the case as limited to whether Smith was an addict who was getting too many drugs and whether prescriptions were obtained under false names.

The judge is limiting the states case?

He said he was unable to tell whether Smith’s demeanor in the 2004 American Music Awards videotape was the result of drugs or her normal acting style at staged events. He pointed out that a second video given to him by the defense showed Smith making statements four days later that the appearance helped her career.

“She’s fairly entertaining and at her voluptuous best,” Perry said. “It is, in the court’s view, a very strong representation of the Anna Nicole personality … My question is, is any of this real.”

I think its inappropriate for a judge to remark about any woman being “voluptuous.”

Of course its “real”, Anna Nicole nor her handlers cared about her appearing in public drunk, smashed or wasted on drugs. Some actually profited from it. Larry Birkhead included.

Perry went on to say, “The problem I have with this case is we have a very public figure …. We are a movie-watching, TV-watching nation. And as the defense has said, what we see on television is not always real.”

When jurors returned to the courtroom, they were shown the AMA video as well as a pre-interview in which Smith touted her weight loss on a product she was promoting. In both segments, she waved her arms and was speaking with a slight slur.

Judge Perry has ruled that numerous pieces of evidence can not be used. He barred the infamous “Clown Video”, he said the cause of her death could  not be discussed even though the cause was “drug overdose”. Perry told experts and pharmacists to “tone down their remarks.”  Why must those witnesses tone down their remarks when they are recounting what was actually said?

The defendants are claiming they did not know that Smith was an addict. Come on!

In an exclusive interview 10 years ago, Smith told ABC News that she had serious drug problems.

“I was on prescription pain medication and I was taking too much and I went into a coma for that,” she said.

Once an addict, always an addict!

Perry also barred a taped TV interview of Smith when she left the Betty Ford Center after treatment for drug and alcohol addiction in 1996. He said it was too far removed in time from events involved in the trial.

“For you to say this lady was loaded on drugs for 10 years before these people came along — I don’t know how this helps your case,” the judge told Rose. He said jurors could be told Smith had undergone treatment at the center.

Perry also said he was uncomfortable with the prosecution’s claim that the doctors violated the law by prescribing to Smith under assumed names. Witnesses are likely to testify that is the norm in the celebrity community.

“That’s not what this case is about,” Perry said. “The case is about were they overprescribing and was she addicted.”

Perry said he might allow a brief snippet of video from a party showing Kapoor nuzzling Smith. The prosecution claims the interaction shows a breakdown of the doctor-patient relationship.

The same allegation was raised regarding photos of Smith and Eroshevich naked in a bathtub together.

The judge asked for more legal briefs on whether the photos should be admitted to show the breakdown of the doctor-patient relationship. He said he felt they showed nothing sexual beyond depicting a “playful” relationship.

For the DA to say that Anna Nicole was an addict as long as ten years ago is actually good for the prosecutions case. It was established back then she was an addict and was an addict until the day she died of her addiction. However her death did not happen by her hand alone.

And saying that two naked women in a bath tub showed only a “playful” relationship is outrageous. But did Judge Perry really say that? E! Online reports the judge said, “”None of the jurors have gotten naked and got into the bathtub with their doctors,”"..

Did the judge say he was uncomfortable about the charge of prescriptions for Smith under assumed names? If its the law, it should be upheld. If the trio are found not guilty of the assumed name part, does that mean it will be a California free for all with doctors writing any name they want on a prescription?

“I don’t know why it wasn’t tried in Florida,” the judge said. I can not imagine a judge who has trouble with the prosecutions case wondering why the case was not tried in Florida. Does he mean a murder case? All three defendants are licensed to practice their trades in California. Most of the drug activity was in California. Their residences were in California. What happened in Florida was her death. So does Judge Perry believe Anna Nicole’s death should have been tried as a homicide? Or are we not getting the full picture?

The defendants reporter…

“Ms. Rose, you are overreaching,” he (Perry) said. “Time and again you are grasping at straws. I’m very concerned about the way this case is charged and being prosecuted. If you’re going to accuse someone, you should have some evidence.”

Rose responded, “We understand the court doesn’t like the way we are putting on our case, but we have a job to do.”

*******

Here’s a great article about the problem with “court managed media”, written by a “friend of Linda Deutsch.”