Judge critical of prosecutors in Anna Nicole trial

The judge in the Anna Nicole Smith drug trial slammed prosecutors yesterday for their aggressive pursuit of convictions against three people accused of plying the actress with prescription drugs before her 2007 death.

Earlier yesterday, both sides rested their cases after a nearly two-month trial that saw prosecutors bring numerous witnesses whose testimony defence attorneys largely sought to discredit. All three defendants have pleaded not guilty.

Defendants Howard K. Stern (left), Dr. Khristine Eroshevich (centre) and Dr. Sandeep Kapoor are shown in a combination photo during their arraignment at the Los Angeles County Criminal Courts building in Los Angeles, California, in this May 13, 2009 file photo.





Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Robert Perry characterised the case as a “kitchen-sink prosecution” in which numerous claims and evidence are put forth “against these defendants in the hope that something survives.”

The judge’s comments came as he considered dismissing or reducing some of the charges against the realty TV star’s one-time boyfriend and lawyer, Howard K. Stern, and two of her doctors, Khristine Eroshevich and Sandeep Kapoor.

Closing arguments are set to begin Thursday and jury deliberations may start early next week.

Prosecutors allege Stern, Eroshevich and Kapoor conspired to funnel prescription drugs to a known addict, Smith, who died in February 2007 in Florida from an accidental drug overdose at age 39. They are not charged with directly causing her death.

Still, Perry’s comments seem to underpin weeks of reports that prosecutors were having a difficult time proving their case. The judge said yesterday that many of the charges should have been misdemeanors, as opposed to the felonies that carry higher penalties.

“The prosecution had a dead celebrity and a lot of low-level misdemeanors” from which they tried to build a case for more serious crimes, Perry said.

But Deputy District Attorney Sean Carney defended prosecutors by saying their two-year investigation convinced them that felonies had been committed.

For much of the afternoon, lawyers discussed the meaning of words like “addict,” “addiction” and “pain” that the judge will use when instructing the jury on deliberations.

Prosecutors have argued that the defendants unlawfully prescribed or obtained controlled substances that fuelled Smith’s addiction over a three-year period when she was known to be a drug addict.

Defence attorneys have countered that Smith was not an addict, but was a sufferer of chronic pain since 2000. She also battled anxiety, depression and lack of sleep.