Exactly. So far, the defense is trying to build a case based on "someone else did it," and "someone else was responsible for NOT saving Michael." A kind of "dog ate my homework" defense? But the medics will be purely unassailable in terms of any kind of "conspiracy," or incompetence." As experienced professionals, what they saw made NO sense from a medical standpoint.
Now that we're a bit into the trial, we can see that the defense is using a "pasta method?" Throw the wet noodles at the wall and see which ones stick? There is the "demerol withdrawal" line of defense. Easily refuted by frequency of Klein visits (no more than three a week. Not enough to cause addiction), and also can be refuted by the AR. There is the "Alberto should have called 911" defense. But, NO. Murray was there, with Michael, for a long time, and failed to call 911. There is the "Kai Chase should have callled 911 defense." She had NO idea what was going on, and if Murray had time to stand at the head of the stairs, surely he had time to dial three little numbers on a phone? There is the "Michael did it to himself" defense. I'm sure medical testimony will prove the impossibility of that scenario. Even if he could have injected the propofol, he never would have done it without the lidocaine. (If he did, his scream would have been heard around the world!)
So far, no "defense" is actually sticking to the wall, and the EMTs should be major points for the prosecution. IMHO.