Brandy's Lawyer to CHP -- You Did Her Wrong

76. CAN ANY OF YOU BITCHES COMPREHEND WHAT YOU'RE READING, OR IN THE VERY LEAST READ? ALLOW ME TO DUMB IT DOWN FOR YOU DUMB@$$&$.

1. DEAD WOMAN HIT THE CAR INFRONT OF HER CAUSE SHE HAD MARIJUANA IN HER SYSTEM.

2. BRANDY WHO WAS NOT DRUNK OR HIGH OR MEDICATED WAS BEHIND HER AND COULD NOT STOP IN TIME

3. THEN ANOTHER CAR CAME AND SIDE SWAPPED THE DEAD HIGH WOMAN GOD BLESS HER SOUL.

4. WHERE I'M FROM ACCIDENTS HAPPEN EVERYDAY AND PEOPLE DIE EVERYDAY, TIS LIFE

5. JUST A FEW MONTHS AFTER THE ACCIDENT THE FAMILY FILES A $50 MIL LAWSUIT MINUS THE FACTS AND THE TRUTH IN THE CASE (HOW'S THAT WORKING OUT BTW?) JUST LIKE EVERYONE IN AMERICA, TRYING TO GET RICH OF OF LAWSUITS INSTEAD OF THE GOOD OL WORKING YOUR BUTTS OFF FOR WHAT YOU HAVE.

SO IN CONCLUSION, DON'T GET HIGH AND DRIVE THEN MAYBE YOU WILL GET TO LIVE ANOTHER DAY. I FEEL BAD FOR THE KIDS OF THE DEAD GIRL BUT NOT SORRY FOR HER, SHE CHOSE TO DRIVE UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF SOMETHING AND GLAD SHE WAS THE ONE WHO PAID FOR IT AND NOT SOME INNOCENT DRIVER LIKE MY BROTHER WAS. ALRIGHT KIDS HOPE THIS HELPED CATCH YOU GUYS UP NOW STOP FORMING DUMB SENTENCE LIKE "SHE GOT AWAY WITH MURDER" CAUSE MURDER IS GOING AFTER SOMEONE WITH INTENT TO KILL AND DOING IT. ALRIGHT CLASS DISMISSED GO REST YOUR LITTLE BRAINS ITS BEEN A LONG DAY!

Posted at 10:32PM on Dec 28th 2007 by Ms. Mitchell

77. I never thought she was to blame! Sensationlism has taken over REAL journalism. Its not about reporting the facts anymorem its about causing a sensation. I knew there was somehtin weird going on when the family filed suit, I was thinkin shouldn't they wait for her to be charged with a crime. I hope Brandy will be able to get her life back together, she was one of my favorite singers and a decent actress as well (better than Beyonce). I can't belive some of the comments I have read on here, it really shows the very WORST of our culture!

Posted at 10:59PM on Dec 28th 2007 by STOP THE MADNESS!!

78. Petunia, please read up before you make statements that are not accurate. Google is a real good method to get accurate news articles.

1) Await Aboudihaj's Toyota Corolla hit the 1989 Toyota Tercel driven by 82-year-old Donald Lite 2) Brandy's car hit Aboudihaj's Toyota Corolla and it slide sideways into the center divider then 3) 50-year-old Mallory Ham, broadsided Aboudihaj's vehicle.

The DA issued this statement: "After conducting a thorough investigation, which included consulting with some of the top accident reconstruction experts in the country, city prosecutors concluded there was insufficient evidence from which a jury could find Ms. Norwood guilty of such a charge beyond a reasonable doubt." Which means that based upon the evidence they could not find Brandy at fault, otherwise they would have proceeded with charging her. The CHP jumped the gun with issuing the statement of charging her without completing proper investigation. The toxicology tests also make it difficult to point the fault at Brandy.

In regards to her not issuing an apology, you are way off. Brandy issued a statement shortly after the accident , Courtney Barnes through her publicist. "She wishes to publicly express her condolences to the family of the deceased. Brandy asks that you respect the privacy of everyone involved at this time." Read it up on TMZ: http://www.tmz.com/2007/01/24/brandy-causes-fatal-car-crash/

And if you really want to talk about sleazy lawyers, lets look at all the lawsuits that are out there going after Brandy. Awatif Aboudihaj's parents filed a $50 million lawsuit and they ARE NOT next of Kin and are living in Morocco. The second lawsuit was on behalf of the two children which first claimed that they would suffer permanent disability which is now been changed to emotional strife from losing their mother. The third lawsuit is from the husband for forever been deprived the support and maintenance, services, guidance, companionship, comfort, affection, solace, moral support, society, care, love, consortium and other benefits.The fourth lawsuit is from Mallory Ham saying Brandy was negligent but it was Ham who slammed into the Toyota Corolla and Brandy filed a counter suit against those claims.

In light of the direction of the case, the parents lawsuit will be thrown out. And if the more than likely the other two, for the children and husband, will be throughout out too, if Aboudihaj is at fault. Clearly the Aboudihaj's family has exploited the accident for the $$ involved. Wrongful death cases have to assume that the person who died did not CAUSE the accident. Based upon what has been presented Aboudihaj's are at fault for the accident.

Petunia it is obvious that you don't drive on the highway or live in California. Otherwise you would know that if you are driving in traffic and someone swerves into your lane and you rear end them, THEY are at fault for improper lane changes. Multiple car pile ups are not the fault of the last person standing, but the person who initiated the initial crash which has been proven that it was Aboudihaj's actions that created the pile up. It is tragic all the way around, but trying to exploit for a big pay day is wrong on so many levels.

Posted at 11:00PM on Dec 28th 2007 by Serious lack of education on the facts

79. #77 Serious lack of Education on the Facts

Thank you for stating the facts clearly and accuratly, Couldn't agree with you more.

Posted at 11:12PM on Dec 28th 2007 by Ted

80. Way to go, Brandy. I love it when racists get pissed. AHHHHH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA

Posted at 12:05AM on Dec 29th 2007 by Goliano

81. RIGHT. SHE REAR-ENDED SOMEBODY, THEY DIED....AND SHE WALKS. OUT HERE IN ARIZONA, IF DRIVERS HIT ANYONE FROM BEHIND THEY ARE CONSIDERED AT FAULT FOR NOT PAYING ATTENTION AND KEEPING A SAFE DISTANCE FROM ANOTHER CAR. REPEAT....KEEPING A SAFE DISTANCE. YOU ALWAYS NEED TO BE READY TO HAVE TO SLAM YOUR BRAKES, BECAUSE ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.
WHAT WAS BRANDY DOING ? TAILGATING ? SPEEDING AND TAILGATING LIKE CRAZY ? OR WHAT ?

Posted at 12:14AM on Dec 29th 2007 by lori

82. #77, "Serious lack of education on the facts" is a good name for you. But perhaps "Serious reading comprehension inability" would better.

"1)Await Aboudihaj's Toyota Corolla hit the 1989 Toyota Tercel driven by 82-year-old Donald Lite 2) Brandy's car hit Aboudihaj's Toyota Corolla and it slide sideways into the center divider then 3) 50-year-old Mallory Ham, broadsided Aboudihaj's vehicle."
Are you able to comprehend what you posted? It states that Brandy's car hit Aboudihaj's car. Can you really not comprehend the written English language?

"city prosecutors concluded there was insufficient evidence from which a jury could find Ms. Norwood guilty of such a charge beyond a reasonable doubt."
This is exactly what I have already stated. They determined that there is insufficient evidence to convict Brandy. They did NOT determine she was not at fault. In fact, by your own posting, she was at fault for rear-ending the dead woman's vehicle. The prosecutors only determined that they cannot prove that Brandy's negligence resulted in the woman's death.

"In regards to her not issuing an apology, you are way off. Brandy issued a statement shortly after the accident , Courtney Barnes through her publicist. "She wishes to publicly express her condolences to the family of the deceased. Brandy asks that you respect the privacy of everyone involved at this time." "
Again, reading comprehension? That was not an apology. Find a dictionary, they have them online now. "Condolences" are not the same thing as an apology.

I lived in Cali for two years and have driven on their roads as well as on interstates all across the country. Not that this is relevant. My personal driving experience does not somehow release Brandy from her negligence in this accident.

Posted at 12:30AM on Dec 29th 2007 by Petunia

83. I am glad for her, BUT....I think she also needs to grow up a bit, I hope this was an eye opening and life changing experience for her.

Posted at 1:17AM on Dec 29th 2007 by sherricheu

84. people on sugarlandy.blogspot....r sharing her picture sand vedios , she is fantastic.

Posted at 1:30AM on Dec 29th 2007 by louise56563

85. just another case of money hungry relatives trying to cash in on a tragedy. i'd be rolling in my grave if any of my relatives ever did that. bottom line was that this woman was NOT an innocent victim, she was high (or had pot in her system); this could have happened to her at ANY time. brandy did not cause the accident. yes, its unfortunate but i don't feel sorry for this woman. we all make choices that bring about consequences and she made her choice by driving high. i don't understand why everyone wants to see brandy take the blame for this when she did nothing wrong

Posted at 10:24PM on Dec 29th 2007 by hora

86. #81 (Petunia)

"It states that Brandy's car hit Aboudihaj's car. Can you really not comprehend the written English language?"

No one is denying that Brandy hit the woman's car. What's at issue is WHY she hit the woman's car. Was it because of negligence or was it because she had no control over what was happening in front of her (an accident) and couldn't respond to it the most effectively?


"This is exactly what I have already stated. They determined that there is insufficient evidence to convict Brandy. They did NOT determine she was not at fault. In fact, by your own posting, she was at fault for rear-ending the dead woman's vehicle. The prosecutors only determined that they cannot prove that Brandy's negligence resulted in the woman's death."

You are really cracking me up with this explaination above! First of all it's not up to the investigators to "prove her guilty". They are suppose to just look for the facts!! They aren't suppose to go "Let's target this person" they are ONLY suppose to look for the FACTs, and the fact is there is insufficient evidence to charge her with anything... thus they cannot PROVE that she IS at fault. Also if they really felt that they she WAS at fault there would have at least been a grand jury hearing.... if the department believes that she's guilty, are you telling me that they wouldn't had at least brought it to a grand jury, so they could at least hear what (you seem to imply) convinced them that she was?

We have grand juries to determine if someone should go to trial---- that didn't even happen!

If she was at fault, they would have EVIDENCE. But it appears that they don't. What you are saying is that the police have insufficient evidence yet have something to determine that she was at FAULT too.... that doesn't go hand and hand in the court of law.

A woman is dead here, and games shouldn't be played. If they felt that she was at fault, they would have at least filed charges... especially since the time to do so was running out. At least dragged the thing out and see if they could get a conviction--- not just drop it all together.

At the most, the police statement is just professional language to say they have no reason to prosecute her, because the evidence to show that she was at fault is just not there.

Now if you would like to play the "they must state it" game, then ok.



"Again, reading comprehension? That was not an apology. Find a dictionary, they have them online now. "Condolences" are not the same thing as an apology."

Does she have to issue an apology to you personally? She released her "condolences" through her publicist to solve PUBLIC AFFAIRS. You have no idea if she did or did not issue a sincere and personal apology to the family of the dead woman. What she does privately is none of your business.

I really can't imagine any celebrity having their publicist release their actual personal apologies. Could you imagine that?
"This A List Celebrtiy would like to apologize to their mother for forgetting her birthday". "This A List Celebrity would like to apologize for breaking their friend's glass."

If she would have gotten a video camera and the papparazi and went to this family's doorstep to apologize you would probably dog her out and call it a publicity stunt.... I could just see how the people who hate Brandy and feel that she isn't sorry enough would interpret it.

Posted at 11:01PM on Dec 29th 2007 by HmmOK

87. You people are a piece of work. So Brandy should be in jail because she is alive? She should be in jail even though a thorough investigation cleared her of any wrong doing? Even in the face of justice you still want to crucify her. You want her to go to jail because she is black and because she is a celebrity.

Why was she the only one charged or being sued by the family? Because she is a celebrity that's why...and they were looking for $$$$. Why didn't they sue everyone involved in the accident?

The woman was high and speeding...she is the cause of her own death and no one else. I personally am happy that brandy is cleared and I know some of you are burning mad about that. LOL losers.

BTW, in a civil suit they would have to prove that it was the impact of Brandy's car that did this woman in...and they can't. So I doubt that a civil suit will even be filed. They would have to prove that Brandy was neglectful...and they can't. She wasnt high (unlike the deceased), she wasnt on her cell, she wasn't speeding,etc. The woman stopped short in front of her car...and brandy might have hit the breaks but it might have been too late to not hit the car infront of her. Even if she breaked in time...the car behind her would have hit her forcing her to hit the deceased woman's car in front of her. Its a freakin chain reaction.

I'm glad that most of you are mad about Brandy being cleared...as of matter of fact I find it most amusing.

And to the person who said sarcastically "I hope Brandy is having a Happy Kwanzaa because the person who died isn't"...I am sure she is having a GREAT KWANZAA, a GREAT CHRISTMAS, AND A VERY VERY HAPPY NEW YEAR! I am sure her and her baby will go on a luxurious much needed vacation somewhere over seas. I am sure Brandy will wake up tomorrow with a smile and the sun shining on her face. She will go on with her life and make a record...maybe act some more...and raise her daughter.

Posted at 2:25AM on Dec 29th 2007 by Heidikins

88. RIGHT. SHE REAR-ENDED SOMEBODY, THEY DIED....AND SHE WALKS. OUT HERE IN ARIZONA, IF DRIVERS HIT ANYONE FROM BEHIND THEY ARE CONSIDERED AT FAULT FOR NOT PAYING ATTENTION AND KEEPING A SAFE DISTANCE FROM ANOTHER CAR. REPEAT....KEEPING A SAFE DISTANCE. YOU ALWAYS NEED TO BE READY TO HAVE TO SLAM YOUR BRAKES, BECAUSE ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.
WHAT WAS BRANDY DOING ? TAILGATING ? SPEEDING AND TAILGATING LIKE CRAZY ? OR WHAT ?
+++++++++++++++++++++++

1. The person that is dead died because of her own fault. She was high.
2. Thank you for stating the laws of AZ...but this happened in CA...so what is your point exactly?
3. Brandy was not high, she was not speeding, and she was not tailgating.
4. I think you are crazy and ignorant

Posted at 11:26AM on Dec 29th 2007 by Heidikins

89. I was driving on the freeway I had a 1 glass of wine with dinner, I was driving on the freeway when a lady driving a volkswagon Jetta turn back to slap one of her kids then traffic in front of her started to slow down she panicked and slammed on her brakes. This caused me to hit her as I slammed on my brakes.
I was honest and explained I had one glass of redwine with dinner, The officer did not take me to jail but he said we should exchange information It was her fault for back handing her kids in the back seat.

The woman that caused the accident made me pay for damages to her car and threatend me? She was the one who caused it. Depending on what state you live in you can be at fault if you hit someone from behind beacuse of the 5 car lengths behind each car Law. Depeding on the traffic it's crazy how these laws exist but they do. I think if your driving but someone in the car is under the influence it makes the process of the investigation take longer like with Brandy. she was cleared I dont think she was at fault but TMZ makes celebrities GUILTY before INNONCENT.

Posted at 3:48AM on Dec 29th 2007 by THE SOURCE

90. I keep wondering how the 82 year old that Aboudihaj hit first figured into this. Have you ever driven with an 82 year old?

Posted at 6:38AM on Dec 29th 2007 by Against Orange People