1) 15 sec look at the upper arm vs lower arm - looks photo shopped 2) Why would his brother be the official to announce "from a hospital" the death of his brother this is normally done by a hospital spokesperson 3) legal name Michael Joe Jackson not Michael Joseph Jackson as indicated on this autopsy report 4) information about his income from tabloid magazines - I'm sure that information is not public or accessible by tabloids seriously and what does this have to do with his autopsy - added for "hype" sensationalism to sell sell sell 5) but when was the cream first used? was it used to lighten darker patches which were percentage wise less than the light ones. He said they first used makeup to darken the light spots - then later when the percentage switched lightening the dark was the treatment 6) The burn.... why aren't there scars indicated on the autopsy report that if this was Michael's body there would have been???? Not just one itty bitty spot - seriously... 11:03 look at the size of the burn and it's location top of the head not the back of the head! and What proof of multiple plastic surgeries . Where is all this information in the autopsy report... nothing said in the first 12 min comes from facts from the so called autopsy report - nothing about his medial history spoken about in this video are taken from Michael's actual medical records. Who are these "people" talking in this video they are not introduced or is it explained how they are experts on Michael Jackson's life and show no proof of anything they are saying. Arthritis is common in many people his age... limit his movement - ok - watch all of This is It - you'll see he does have the ability to move. The autopsy should indicate if "Jackson" acutally had Lupus - so why make up so story of why else the lungs might have been damaged. Autopsy reports given definitive answers not tabloid questions. World speculations - we've drifted totally away from any facts listed on this so called autopsy report. Showbiz Journalist... hmmm that sounds very tabloid to me. I beg to differ in opinion - at no point in This is It does Michael look like he isn't control of his body or ability. Urine sample - did they ever prove urine found in bottle at the scene was actually Michael's? No Demerol taken for some time - this directly contradicts what the tabloid guy said previously in this video so why talk about withdrawl from the drug - that just continues to imply he had used it recently. The only information correct in any of this are those spoken by the guy whose supposedly going over the autopsy report - however this video is still about the tabloid lies. If he would only have to go to the bathroom more frequently - then why the catheter - that would be used for someone who can't get up. This guy Jason - has made up lies about Michael - so why would we believe anything he said. Anything he says about Michael's medical treatments is a breach of confidentiality. The entry site of the iv in the leg is only related to Michael if the body that was autopsied belonged to the actually King of Pop whose legal name is Michael Joe Jackson. If you look at the autopsy report it indicates the person is a Michael Joseph Jackson - and it does matter - look at the actually name on the case in 2005 - Michael Joe Jackson is his legal name. HELLO - it's not MJ- All the drugs administered by "Dr. Murray" would have already expired from the body - so would have not contributed to the death of whomever this body belonged to.
You don't need an antidote for propofol - it is metabolized and out of the system very quickly.
If you actually only listen to the words spoken by the doctor that discusses the autopsy report you'll notice that most everything else in this video is not based on facts from the autopsy report of a person by the name of Michael Joseph Jackson vs that of Michael Joe Jackson. Notice how even this doctor stated "Michael Joseph Jackson" - - the world knows him as MJ or Michael - no need to use a middle name unless it differentiates one "Michael Jackson" from "another Michael Jackson" . Additional dose - he wouldn't have been awake long enough to give himself enough to kill himself... hello... think about it , Traces of the drug were never detected..... wow... that means the jury convicted an innocent man!!! Supported by the judge/court... hmmm this is our judicial system? I am now afraid - we all should be.
Comments
Post a Comment