"There are myriad claims they could make against a doctor/hospital for malpratice that don't have to do with the specific ingestion of the fentanyl on April 21, but focus on the events that led up to that."

If you take Dr. S out of it and assume that other doctors or treatments are involved then I agree . Prince may of have some treatment or other doctor involved that we the public know nothing about.

I also do not think any other aliment he had is anything to be ashamed of.

I feel that everything from joint pain, AIDS, or Cancer is found to impossible by a few on this board. Way past time for the fam to stop being weird and get down to business. If this suit moves things forward and give them closure good for them. As far as money they have no gurantee that they will see a dime and if they do it could take years.

disch said:

Laura, as I wrote, we don't know what the suit might be, if it materializes. There are myriad claims they could make against a doctor/hospital for malpratice that don't have to do with the specific ingestion of the fentanyl on April 21, but focus on the events that led up to that.

-

As for "finding things we don't want to know," if you're alluding to cancer or something of that nature, I have no idea why we "wouldn't want to know" that. Cancer isn't more devastating or tragic than an opioid addiction leading to a fatal accidental overdose.

-

I would wait and see what happens before we starting jumping to all kinds of conclusions about this.

laurarichardson said:

If they are doing it on a contingency basis the lawyers are not taking the case without believing they can win. ( The firm has to be since I do not know how the sibs would have the funds and no one is taking a case like this for free.) I do not think they would have a case if they were going after a doctor or hospital concerning the illegal drugs that killed him unless he obtained it from a doctor or hospital which seems unlikely.

I believe there is a whole another element that we the public have not been made aware of and I really think some fans (not all ) need to get ready to accept it.

If the sibs are successful with the motion and move forward with a suit we the public are going to find out a lot of things that we probably do not want to know.

[Edited 2/12/18 9:38am]

laurarichardson said:

Menes said:

So the cancer was in remission within the (3) three years she said she already knew he was dying of cancer? Then he stopped taking the medication and became terminal within recent weeks or months before he died? Do I have that right?

---- It is a theory that I have. I have no info that if he had PC how long this would have gone on or if it went into remission and returned. With better treatments people are living longer with Cancer and in the case of my cousin he was actually told he had a year to live and was given pain meds and sent on his way. He died a year to the day he was told he was going to die. Jackie Collins lived 8 years with breast cancer due to experimental treatments. So it is possible that Prince was struggling with Cancer and the side effects of the treatments a bit before getting a final case of it. I get thinking that the family would have little luck suing anyone over pain meds since Prince died from taking pain meds that were obtained illegally. That would not be the fault of a doctor or hospital unless he did get them from a hospital or doctor which seems unlikely or hard to prove. I am thinking he had some other illness and they feel he had poor care and advice. I am hope it was not some holistic nonsense. [Edited 2/12/18 4:06am] [Edited 2/12/18 7:53am]

I am not prepared to disagree with you that he had another illness ,but the drugs that were prescribed to him by Dr. Schulenberg indicates something very closely aligned with withdrawal symptoms. The only thing I can think of is this: Something that indicates that he did not get proper treatment for addiction. I have a sneaky suspicion that tying Prince's addiction to improper treatment for addiction is not too far of a stretch.

The opiates are a completely different matter and after reading the motion filed( and researching counsel that specializes in prescription overdose deaths) it reminds me of throwing everything at a wall to see what sticks. In essence, lawyers who want to get paid however they can.

Menes said:

laurarichardson said:

Menes said: ---- It is a theory that I have. I have no info that if he had PC how long this would have gone on or if it went into remission and returned. With better treatments people are living longer with Cancer and in the case of my cousin he was actually told he had a year to live and was given pain meds and sent on his way. He died a year to the day he was told he was going to die. Jackie Collins lived 8 years with breast cancer due to experimental treatments. So it is possible that Prince was struggling with Cancer and the side effects of the treatments a bit before getting a final case of it. I get thinking that the family would have little luck suing anyone over pain meds since Prince died from taking pain meds that were obtained illegally. That would not be the fault of a doctor or hospital unless he did get them from a hospital or doctor which seems unlikely or hard to prove. I am thinking he had some other illness and they feel he had poor care and advice. I am hope it was not some holistic nonsense. [Edited 2/12/18 4:06am] [Edited 2/12/18 7:53am]

I am not prepared to disagree with you that he had another illness ,but the drugs that were prescribed to him by Dr. Schulenberg indicates something very closely aligned with withdrawal symptoms. The only thing I can think of is this: Something that indicates that he did not get proper treatment for addiction. I have a sneaky suspicion that tying Prince's addiction to improper treatment for addiction is not too far of a stretch.

The opiates are a completely different matter and after reading the motion filed( and researching counsel that specializes in prescription overdose deaths) it reminds me of throwing everything at a wall to see what sticks. In essence, lawyers who want to get paid however they can.

Yes, Dr S claimed via his attorney he was not seeing Prince for withdrawals yet he prescribed drugs for withdrawals. It could be that Dr S or some other doctors were operating outside of their field. If this is the case they (he) had a duty to sent him on to a proper doctor or treatment center.

laurarichardson said:

laurarichardson said:

sonshine said:

laurarichardson said:

Yes, Dr S claimed via his attorney he was not seeing Prince for withdrawals yet he prescribed drugs for withdrawals. It could be that Dr S or some other doctors were operating outside of their field. If this is the case they (he) had a duty to sent him on to a proper doctor or treatment center.

Outside their field? He is a medical doctor. He is certainly qualified to guide a patient thru withdrawl. Plenty of medical doctors do it every day, including some that i have personally worked with.

Dr S had no background in addiction management. In fact he was not able to administor the Suboxone. I think he may have been helping Prince with his joint pain issues and crossed over to areas better left to other professionals. I question the Xanax Rx and turning around and writing a pain pill RX for Kirk.

Was he trying to help him withdraw ( which he claims he was not doing) and finding a means to slip him pills at the same time? Maybe he should have sent Prince or Kirk elsewhere else considering one patient is struggling with pain pills and you are writing them for his best friend the same day.

This all can be looked at as unethical. Maybe enough things were done to prevent criminal charges but I would really question what Dr. S was really treating Prince for? I know that at the end of the day Prince choose to see this doctor but this doctor also had a duty to turn patients to the proper medical professionals ( rehab center ) if this was the case. You do not have to accept a patient especially if you are being asked to do something illegal or unehtical.

We have seen too many doctors caught up in these types of stituations. I think the idea of filing a suit might explain exactly what was going on since they seem to be in the dark.

----------

[Edited 2/12/18 10:39am]

sonshine said:

laurarichardson said:

If they are doing it on a contingency basis the lawyers are not taking the case without believing they can win. ( The firm has to be since I do not know how the sibs would have the funds and no one is taking a case like this for free.) I do not think they would have a case if they were going after a doctor or hospital concerning the illegal drugs that killed him unless he obtained it from a doctor or hospital which seems unlikely.

I believe there is a whole another element that we the public have not been made aware of and I really think some fans (not all ) need to get ready to accept it.

If the sibs are successful with the motion and move forward with a suit we the public are going to find out a lot of things that we probably do not want to know.

This seems overly dramatic. I can't think of anything they could unearth that i'm not prepared to accept, or anyone else i could think of. The only things that may be found out that people don't want or need to know are more personal details that are better left private out of respect for the man.

Personal details is what I think some people do not want to hear.

Where did Dr S's lawyer say that Dr S wasn't treating Prince for withdrawals (or anything about what he was treating him for)? The only statement I could find from his lawyer was this one in April 2017:

"Schulenberg's attorney, Amy S. Conners, said in part, "Dr. Schulenberg has previously disclosed all information regarding his care and treatment of Prince to his former employer, law enforcement authorities and regulatory authorities in the course of his complete cooperation with the investigation of Prince’s death."

-

The statement added: "Dr. Schulenberg never directly prescribed opioids to Prince, nor did he ever prescribe opioids to any other person with the intent that they would be given to Prince."

laurarichardson said:

Menes said:

I am not prepared to disagree with you that he had another illness ,but the drugs that were prescribed to him by Dr. Schulenberg indicates something very closely aligned with withdrawal symptoms. The only thing I can think of is this: Something that indicates that he did not get proper treatment for addiction. I have a sneaky suspicion that tying Prince's addiction to improper treatment for addiction is not too far of a stretch.

The opiates are a completely different matter and after reading the motion filed( and researching counsel that specializes in prescription overdose deaths) it reminds me of throwing everything at a wall to see what sticks. In essence, lawyers who want to get paid however they can.

Yes, Dr S claimed via his attorney he was not seeing Prince for withdrawals yet he prescribed drugs for withdrawals. It could be that Dr S or some other doctors were operating outside of their field. If this is the case they (he) had a duty to sent him on to a proper doctor or treatment center.

I remember seeing it in news reports. I do not remember seeing it as a statement by the doctor or his lawyer that he was treating Prince for withdrawals. I do remember seeing in the media that he was treating him for joint pain. You realize that Dr S has no background with addictions or the management of them. The suit could be about him, another doctor Prince might have been seeing or another illness. They want to sue someone with big pockets.

disch said:

Where did Dr S's lawyer say that Dr S wasn't treating Prince for withdrawals (or anything about what he was treating him for)? The only statement I could find from his lawyer was this one in April 2017:

"Schulenberg's attorney, Amy S. Conners, said in part, "Dr. Schulenberg has previously disclosed all information regarding his care and treatment of Prince to his former employer, law enforcement authorities and regulatory authorities in the course of his complete cooperation with the investigation of Prince’s death."

-

The statement added: "Dr. Schulenberg never directly prescribed opioids to Prince, nor did he ever prescribe opioids to any other person with the intent that they would be given to Prince."

laurarichardson said:

Yes, Dr S claimed via his attorney he was not seeing Prince for withdrawals yet he prescribed drugs for withdrawals. It could be that Dr S or some other doctors were operating outside of their field. If this is the case they (he) had a duty to sent him on to a proper doctor or treatment center.

[Edited 2/12/18 11:27am]

sonshine said:

Many people here have dogged the family since day 1 about their money-making activies in regards to Prince. I was never one who particularly disagreed with the things they have done along those lines in the past. But this lawsuit is not sitting right with me for some reason. I wonder its an attempt to ease their personal guilt they feel for not doing more to help him. Or its an attempt to do some damage control over the anger and blame some people have towards them for not getting involved when he was still here. Or perhaps a bit of both. But i think its entirely possible this could be their motivation. A public relations effort to put a positive spin on the issue, plus the possibility of a pay out in the end. Win-win.

I am not sure they should have guilt it is possible he did not want or need their help. They are not doctors and the certainly would not have been able to force him to do anything.

They come off as the gang that cannot shoot straight. I have said before I think Prince was found on a doorstep and dropped into this family.

If they think someone could have done a better job helping him and failed to do so they are right to look into. People sometimes learn their lesson when money is involved.

[Edited 2/12/18 11:36am]

ok -- so it sounds like comments about what Dr S was treating him for might not have come from Dr S or his lawyer. I believe in one of the search warrants, Kirk was quoted as saying that Prince had seen Dr S for hip pain, but that's all I recall about that.

laurarichardson said:

I remember seeing it in news reports. I do not remember seeing it as a statement by the doctor or his lawyer that he was treating Prince for withdrawals. I do remember seeing in the media that he was treating him for joint pain. You realize that Dr S has no background with addictions.

disch said:

Where did Dr S's lawyer say that Dr S wasn't treating Prince for withdrawals (or anything about what he was treating him for)? The only statement I could find from his lawyer was this one in April 2017:

"Schulenberg's attorney, Amy S. Conners, said in part, "Dr. Schulenberg has previously disclosed all information regarding his care and treatment of Prince to his former employer, law enforcement authorities and regulatory authorities in the course of his complete cooperation with the investigation of Prince’s death."

-

The statement added: "Dr. Schulenberg never directly prescribed opioids to Prince, nor did he ever prescribe opioids to any other person with the intent that they would be given to Prince."

Yes, I never saw anything from Dr. S or his lawyer about what Prince was being treated for. I suspect HIPPA would stop that but the Dr. was very clear that he never prescribed pain meds and it was Kirk who said something about hip pain in the search warrants and the withdrawals I think came from unamed sources. It is all very fishy and strange. Also remember someone would have to actually complain about Dr. S in order for the medical board to investigate him and at this point it appears the family has no info ( who else is going to complain) and the police will not release any info.

disch said:

ok -- so it sounds like comments about what Dr S was treating him for might not have come from Dr S or his lawyer. I believe in one of the search warrants, Kirk was quoted as saying that Prince had seen Dr S for hip pain, but that's all I recall about that.

laurarichardson said:

I remember seeing it in news reports. I do not remember seeing it as a statement by the doctor or his lawyer that he was treating Prince for withdrawals. I do remember seeing in the media that he was treating him for joint pain. You realize that Dr S has no background with addictions.

disch said:

Where did Dr S's lawyer say that Dr S wasn't treating Prince for withdrawals (or anything about what he was treating him for)? The only statement I could find from his lawyer was this one in April 2017:

"Schulenberg's attorney, Amy S. Conners, said in part, "Dr. Schulenberg has previously disclosed all information regarding his care and treatment of Prince to his former employer, law enforcement authorities and regulatory authorities in the course of his complete cooperation with the investigation of Prince’s death."

-

The statement added: "Dr. Schulenberg never directly prescribed opioids to Prince, nor did he ever prescribe opioids to any other person with the intent that they would be given to Prince."

laurarichardson said:

Yes, Dr S claimed via his attorney he was not seeing Prince for withdrawals yet he prescribed drugs for withdrawals. It could be that Dr S or some other doctors were operating outside of their field. If this is the case they (he) had a duty to sent him on to a proper doctor or treatment center.

Just because he didn't prescribe opiates for Prince does not negate the fact that he did prescribe him medication that very closely align with dealing with symptoms for withdrawal. That's the gray area. Either he knew or didn't know that Prince was dependent .

It appears that he (Dr.S) did everything within his restricted limitations but it may not mean it was the proper protocol. For instance, if Prince had cancer and Dr. Schulenberg knew it, what was the protocol?If Prince had organ damage from ingesting "x' substances and Dr. Schuleneberg knew it, what is the protocol? So far, there doesn't seem to be anything that Dr. Schulenberg prescribed that would indicate serious care for either of the two. These are just examples . This is why I can't see this being a terminal issue . The care just doesn't add up unless Prince flat out refused it all. Addiction I can clearly see.

If there was foreknowledge of dependency ( which I believe he knew) any competent lawyer will drill deep down to root out why he was prescribed said medications and whether it would meet the standard of care when a patient is known to suffer from addiction. There is some interesting statements made in reference to that. If I'm not mistaken while Prince was in Atlanta , Kirk spoke to Dr. Schulenberg in order to have a prescription ready for Prince. Prince, supposedly had the "flu" but none of those prescribed medications indicate treatment for the "flu" .

Dr. Schulenberg's attorney'statement is exactly what she is supposed to say. I woud fire her if she didn't .

laurarichardson said:

Yes, I never saw anything from Dr. S or his lawyer about what Prince was being treated for. I suspect HIPPA would stop that but the Dr. was very clear that he never prescribed pain meds and it was Kirk who said something about hip pain in the search warrants and the withdrawals I think came from unamed sources. It is all very fishy and strange. Also remember someone would have to actually complain about Dr. S in order for the medical board to investigate him and at this point it appears the family has no info ( who else is going to complain) and the police will not release any info.

disch said:

ok -- so it sounds like comments about what Dr S was treating him for might not have come from Dr S or his lawyer. I believe in one of the search warrants, Kirk was quoted as saying that Prince had seen Dr S for hip pain, but that's all I recall about that.

Can we agree that if Chazz was to ever testify , his (3) three remaining teeth would walk out in protest?

Mumio said:

Menes said:

. It's true. Spotify reported that Londell ( her business advisor) wanted to test the North African market first before releasing the "Hidden Talent" E.P. in the U.S.

.

Good one!!

Menes said:

laurarichardson said:

Yes, I never saw anything from Dr. S or his lawyer about what Prince was being treated for. I suspect HIPPA would stop that but the Dr. was very clear that he never prescribed pain meds and it was Kirk who said something about hip pain in the search warrants and the withdrawals I think came from unamed sources. It is all very fishy and strange. Also remember someone would have to actually complain about Dr. S in order for the medical board to investigate him and at this point it appears the family has no info ( who else is going to complain) and the police will not release any info.

Can we agree that if Chazz was to ever testify , his (3) three remaining teeth would walk out in protest?

.

........Oh Lord, this place!!

Menes said:

disch said:

Where did Dr S's lawyer say that Dr S wasn't treating Prince for withdrawals (or anything about what he was treating him for)? The only statement I could find from his lawyer was this one in April 2017:

"Schulenberg's attorney, Amy S. Conners, said in part, "Dr. Schulenberg has previously disclosed all information regarding his care and treatment of Prince to his former employer, law enforcement authorities and regulatory authorities in the course of his complete cooperation with the investigation of Prince’s death."

-

The statement added: "Dr. Schulenberg never directly prescribed opioids to Prince, nor did he ever prescribe opioids to any other person with the intent that they would be given to Prince."

Just because he didn't prescribe opiates for Prince does not negate the fact that he did prescribe him medication that very closely align with dealing with symptoms for withdrawal. That's the gray area. Either he knew or didn't know that Prince was dependent .

It appears that he (Dr.S) did everything within his restricted limitations but it may not mean it was the proper protocol. For instance, if Prince had cancer and Dr. Schulenberg knew it, what was the protocol?If Prince had organ damage from ingesting "x' substances and Dr. Schuleneberg knew it, what is the protocol? So far, there doesn't seem to be anything that Dr. Schulenberg prescribed that would indicate serious care for either of the two. These are just examples . This is why I can't see this being a terminal issue . The care just doesn't add up unless Prince flat out refused it all. Addiction I can clearly see.

If there was foreknowledge of dependency ( which I believe he knew) any competent lawyer will drill deep down to root out why he was prescribed said medications and whether it would meet the standard of care when a patient is known to suffer from addiction. There is some interesting statements made in reference to that. If I'm not mistaken while Prince was in Atlanta , Kirk spoke to Dr. Schulenberg in order to have a prescription ready for Prince. Prince, supposedly had the "flu" but none of those prescribed medications indicate treatment for the "flu" .

Dr. Schulenberg's attorney'statement is exactly what she is supposed to say. I woud fire her if she didn't .

I am sure he knew Prince was dependent or sick with something ( he looked like death warmed over in those Atlanta pics ) and I do not think any law firm would take this case on a contingency basis if they did not have some info we are not aware of.

sonshine said:

It's going to be hard (as it should be) to prosecute physicians who are also struggling to deal with the ramifications of the opioid crisis. Hard for some folks to believe that most doctors are not the sinister players in this issue that they want them to be. This public health crisis is incredibly complicated with plenty of blame to go around. But contrary to the commentary here most doctors are sincerely trying to do their best in the face of challenging conditions. These are people who have devoted their careers to helping others and have invested a lot of resources into their education and oftentimes reluctantly get involved in delicate situations trying to treat patients who are less than honest and/or cooperative with the instructions they are given. Doctors now have to spend a great deal of time trying to figure out if their patients are telling them the truth, but many older doctors still practice with a lot of faith in their patients. Those doctors are the ones i see getting into hot water. Even so criminal intent is rarely involved and it would be wrong to prosecute every doctor who has a patient OD since there is usually a lot more involved other than the doctor's actions.

.

Very good point.

sonshine said:

It's going to be hard (as it should be) to prosecute physicians who are also struggling to deal with the ramifications of the opioid crisis. Hard for some folks to believe that most doctors are not the sinister players in this issue that they want them to be. This public health crisis is incredibly complicated with plenty of blame to go around. But contrary to the commentary here most doctors are sincerely trying to do their best in the face of challenging conditions. These are people who have devoted their careers to helping others and have invested a lot of resources into their education and oftentimes reluctantly get involved in delicate situations trying to treat patients who are less than honest and/or cooperative with the instructions they are given. Doctors now have to spend a great deal of time trying to figure out if their patients are telling them the truth, but many older doctors still practice with a lot of faith in their patients. Those doctors are the ones i see getting into hot water. Even so criminal intent is rarely involved and it would be wrong to prosecute every doctor who has a patient OD since there is usually a lot more involved other than the doctor's actions.

There are doctors who have been prosected and recent changes is making it more diffcult for doctors to skirt the law but doctors giving their DEA numbers to dope peddlers is not unheard of.

Not all are bad but someone came on this board and said they had some affilation with Dr. S's hosptial and it was said he had stars in his eyes. It happens.

sonshine said:

It's going to be hard (as it should be) to prosecute physicians who are also struggling to deal with the ramifications of the opioid crisis. Hard for some folks to believe that most doctors are not the sinister players in this issue that they want them to be. This public health crisis is incredibly complicated with plenty of blame to go around. But contrary to the commentary here most doctors are sincerely trying to do their best in the face of challenging conditions. These are people who have devoted their careers to helping others and have invested a lot of resources into their education and oftentimes reluctantly get involved in delicate situations trying to treat patients who are less than honest and/or cooperative with the instructions they are given. Doctors now have to spend a great deal of time trying to figure out if their patients are telling them the truth, but many older doctors still practice with a lot of faith in their patients. Those doctors are the ones i see getting into hot water. Even so criminal intent is rarely involved and it would be wrong to prosecute every doctor who has a patient OD since there is usually a lot more involved other than the doctor's actions.

I can agree with that above, however, negligence is an entirely different matter and does not mean intentional. We need to know if any physician treating Prince did what is customary under the circumstances. It may all amount to nothing. I still believe that its a "hail mary" audible grab for cash while the grabbing is good. We shall see.

Menes said:

sonshine said:

It's going to be hard (as it should be) to prosecute physicians who are also struggling to deal with the ramifications of the opioid crisis. Hard for some folks to believe that most doctors are not the sinister players in this issue that they want them to be. This public health crisis is incredibly complicated with plenty of blame to go around. But contrary to the commentary here most doctors are sincerely trying to do their best in the face of challenging conditions. These are people who have devoted their careers to helping others and have invested a lot of resources into their education and oftentimes reluctantly get involved in delicate situations trying to treat patients who are less than honest and/or cooperative with the instructions they are given. Doctors now have to spend a great deal of time trying to figure out if their patients are telling them the truth, but many older doctors still practice with a lot of faith in their patients. Those doctors are the ones i see getting into hot water. Even so criminal intent is rarely involved and it would be wrong to prosecute every doctor who has a patient OD since there is usually a lot more involved other than the doctor's actions.

I can agree with that above, however, negligence is an entirely different matter and does not mean intentional. We need to know if any physician treating Prince did what is customary under the circumstances. It may all amount to nothing. I still believe that its a "hail mary" audible grab for cash while the grabbing is good. We shall see.

Yes, I do not think any doctor was trying to kill him but doctors are human and they can make mistakes just like anyone else. They have standards of care they have to comply with just like any professional.

As far as money the sibs are going to get money from the estate and they will probably get that money before anything from a lawsuit. No insurance company is just going to roll over and give them money quickly and easily.

[Edited 2/12/18 13:19pm]

I read an article yesterday about aging rock stars retiring. I think it was in Rolling Stone. Anyway, the writer said the Fentanyl-caused deaths of Prince and Tom Petty are hanging very heavily over the older music community (mid-60s and up) who have been out there for 40 or 50 years. They are stopping before their bodies just wear out and they will need loads of medications to make it through each day. I agree that any type of lawsuit for malpractice, wrongful death, etc., is simply a cash grab. But it is a complicated issue and we don't have all of the facts.

1Sasha said:

I read an article yesterday about aging rock stars retiring. I think it was in Rolling Stone. Anyway, the writer said the Fentanyl-caused deaths of Prince and Tom Petty are hanging very heavily over the older music community (mid-60s and up) who have been out there for 40 or 50 years. They are stopping before their bodies just wear out and they will need loads of medications to make it through each day. I agree that any type of lawsuit for malpractice, wrongful death, etc., is simply a cash grab. But it is a complicated issue and we don't have all of the facts.

It is complicated because the medical community does not want to come out say that in the end they cannot do much about aging. People get old joints wear out. All the surgeries and pain pills is not going to stop what is naturally going to happen.

Baby Boomers and Generation Xs make up a large segment of the population and they are getting older so the medical community needs to stop pushing these pills and dozens of surgeries as some cure all for old age.

I hope a lot of those musicians in the late 50s and 60 do retire but with the dwindling income due to streaming many may not be able to do so. I am sure many believed 40 -50 years ago those royalties would still be rolling in.

[Edited 2/13/18 9:34am]

Who is pulling down the tour money these days? Legacy acts and older groups, like Foo Fighters, Maroon 5, Bon Jovi, and the like. Yes, Taylor Swift is making a good chunk of change but she is not the norm. When Billboard puts out the receipts for tours - what each show brought in - it is really eye-opening as to who is bringing in the money.

laurarichardson said:

sonshine said:

laurarichardson said: This seems overly dramatic. I can't think of anything they could unearth that i'm not prepared to accept, or anyone else i could think of. The only things that may be found out that people don't want or need to know are more personal details that are better left private out of respect for the man.

Personal details is what I think some people do not want to hear.

I think personal details are what we are all here for. It's too late now.

1Sasha said:

Who is pulling down the tour money these days? Legacy acts and older groups, like Foo Fighters, Maroon 5, Bon Jovi, and the like. Yes, Taylor Swift is making a good chunk of change but she is not the norm. When Billboard puts out the receipts for tours - what each show brought in - it is really eye-opening as to who is bringing in the money.

Yes, older acts are making more then ever. Remember Prince was getting a million dollars a show. The AGE Live people said when they handed him a check for 40 million and another for 6 million off the CDs he jumped off the ground and said he never made that much money from a tour before.

The lure of money keeps the older acts going but it is not worth their health.

I remember reading this blog not long after Prince had passed. The writer makes some very good points, although I don't agree with everything he said. This part seems on-point, and describes the way a lot of us felt when the devestating news surfaced......

.

Prince’s last Instagram really doesn’t sound like a man in any eminent drug or medical crisis. More and more, it seems as if Prince died all alone underneath a freeway overpass in Los Angeles instead of his castle. All the people surrounding Prince, his music and millions suddenly have no names or faces. They want us to believe that Prince, a giant in the American music industry for decades, took off into the ocean on a rowboat without a paddle, or took off on the interstate highway on a skateboard.

.

But Prince was no more protected in his home and castle then a man living underneath the freeway. If you believe the corporate mass mediaPrince Storyline, then you will fall for anything, and that endangers this nation’sdemocracy. The public has a right to answers in a case of homicide, a possible crime against SOCIETY. Right now, Prince’s death is a puzzle wrapped up inside an enigma. This is the time to stop crying with the doves whatever that means, stop partying like its 1999, ask and demand answers, and make this system act like its a democracy versus a secret society and an island for the few.

.

......He goes on to talk about the day Prince died and the Kornfelds, etc. He has a lot of different theories (as we all do).

.

http://www.blakkpepper.co...ood-stars/

cloveringold85 said:

I remember reading this blog not long after Prince had passed. The writer makes some very good points, although I don't agree with everything he said. This part seems on-point, and describes the way a lot of us felt when the devestating news surfaced......

.

Prince’s last Instagram really doesn’t sound like a man in any eminent drug or medical crisis. More and more, it seems as if Prince died all alone underneath a freeway overpass in Los Angeles instead of his castle. All the people surrounding Prince, his music and millions suddenly have no names or faces. They want us to believe that Prince, a giant in the American music industry for decades, took off into the ocean on a rowboat without a paddle, or took off on the interstate highway on a skateboard.

.

But Prince was no more protected in his home and castle then a man living underneath the freeway. If you believe the corporate mass mediaPrince Storyline, then you will fall for anything, and that endangers this nation’sdemocracy. The public has a right to answers in a case of homicide, a possible crime against SOCIETY. Right now, Prince’s death is a puzzle wrapped up inside an enigma. This is the time to stop crying with the doves whatever that means, stop partying like its 1999, ask and demand answers, and make this system act like its a democracy versus a secret society and an island for the few.

.

......He goes on to talk about the day Prince died and the Kornfelds, etc. He has a lot of different theories (as we all do).

.

http://www.blakkpepper.co...ood-stars/

Omg, this website and this person Sounds straight out of the FB murder groups, maybe even a friend of crazy Abigail. There's info there that's not even accurate ffs