From Newsgroup: alt.tv.general-hospital



No surprise that Michael is being questioned as to his whereabouts during
the shooting.

No surprise that he likely paid Jacinda, for mostly truthful testimony.

Interesting that during the interrogation, he did not mention the
bartender, who last week confirmed remembering that Michael was at the restaurant the night of the shooting. I guess he will make Anna and Dante
do the legwork. But why is Dante questioning Michael. Seems a poor
choice.

Also, Jacinda clearly recognized that her association with Michael might
result in great financial benefits.

Her presence in his life will certainly screw up his claims of parental
fitness in the custody case.

Heck, I can see her getting pregnant. She had that gold-digger look in her
eye.



--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.tv.general-hospital

marika <marika5000@gmail.com> said:

Interesting that during the interrogation, he did not mention the
bartender, who last week confirmed remembering that Michael was at the >restaurant the night of the shooting. I guess he will make Anna and Dante
do the legwork. But why is Dante questioning Michael. Seems a poor
choice.

Sigh. Maybe for a card transaction that paod for the drinks they could say someone else might have used Michael's card. But yet again: it's not credible that the bar/restaurant did not have security cams operating continuously.They haven't even made an excuse like "system was down", or shown any sign that it occurred to the cops to seek access to the footage.
--
for mail, use net not not
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: alt.tv.general-hospital

marika wrote in <5nowQ.58712$rQG1.25322@fx37.iad>:

No surprise that Michael is being questioned as to his whereabouts during
the shooting.

No surprise that he likely paid Jacinda, for mostly truthful testimony.

Interesting that during the interrogation, he did not mention the
bartender, who last week confirmed remembering that Michael was at the restaurant the night of the shooting. I guess he will make Anna and Dante
do the legwork.

Both the writers and Michael seem to have forgotten the bartender. If
the writers string us along to a trial, maybe Marco will call him as a
witness. <shrug>

Speaking of Marco, even tho Diane is unaware that he's in cahoots with
his daddy to bring down Sonny and Michael, she is aware that his daddy
is at war with Sonny, and she shouldn't have sent Marco to defend
Michael. That's a huge, honking conflict of interest, and highly
unethical, to boot. Actually, Miller & Davis, who represent Sonny
Corinthos, should have dropped Marco like a hot potata when they found
out that he was Sidwell's son.

But why is Dante questioning Michael. Seems a poor
choice.

Sure is. His actions are tainting the investigation. As Michael's
brother, Dante knows how Michael has behaved in the past when under
police suspicion, and the lengths he'll go to avoid prosecution. That is
a radically unfair and unethical investigative advantage. Michael's
defense could request that Dante's testimony at trial be stuck from the
record, assuming the court allows it into the record at all, and also
that any evidence resulting from such an advantage be disallowed. It's
sorta odd that Dante would be so willing insert himself into Michael's investigation, when he's always taken such pains to distance himself
from investigations involving Sonny. It's also the DA's bad luck that
there are only two detectives on the PCPD, and that their relatives seem
be to responsible for the majority of the city's crime.
--
K
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2