truth?

So my question is: why is the mainstream media not reporting the evidence that is against Michael... for instance that the police first on the scene at the time of her accident thought there had been a homicide, or that the first doctor to examine her thought that she had been strangled, or that she had unexplained broken bones not caused by falling in a heart attack, or the nurses that have sworn under penalty of perjury that Michael repeatedly refused Terri therapy and said things like "isn't that B**** dead yet?"... the "facts" go on and on...

Why is the media so intent on portraying Michael as a caring husband? Why wait 7 years to even begin to state adamantly that Terri didn't want to live... and what about the first trial when Michael sued trying to get 25 million and he restated his vows on the stand saying he was going to give her the best help she could get.. Did he ever try to give her the best... evidence seems to point out that when Michael received the money he made sure no therapy was given (nurses testified that he clearly stated he was going to be rich and blew up at a nurse that was giving therapy to Terri)... and started sleeping with other women... Something stinks... why cover this up??? Isn't there enough evidence to at least suspect that maybe Michael is not what he is trying to say he is... maybe he never wanted her to get therapy so that she could never tell what really happened? There is more to this story ... someone please start telling all the truth!

Fine day to start blogging

It is officially my first posting...now if i only knew what to say...