Latest on MJJC

For Translation teams: Information, organization and discussions thread

AriAnge said:
Me too....I thought they would be already posted when I woke up in the morning....
Click to expand...

Yeah, we'd have 2 days for them now, hope they will be posted today and not tomorrow, or we'll only have one day.
 
Milka said:
Well, I think it just sounds confusing because it IS confusing. I watched the stream, but couldn't really follow, the guy was rambling and never really finished sentences, etc. But what I did hear was what I then read in the summary here.

Ok, looking at your first post again - the defense claimed that Murray didn't want to give Michael Propofol that day, he wanted to wean him off. But then Michael was begging for it, so in the end he gave him Propofol, but just a very small dose, only 25 mg. And that before that, Michael had already taken 8 pills of Lorazepam, when Murray wasn't in the room, because Murray had refused to give him Propofol. Then Murray gave him the 25 mg of Propofol, not knowing that Michael already had 16 mg of Lorazepam in his system. And then later, Michael gave himself another dose of Propofol, when Murray again wasn't in the room, and that's what killed him. I'm guessing what they mean by "he didn't have Propofol in his system when Murray left the room" would be the second time when he left the room, by that time the 25 mg Propofol that he had given him, wouldn't be in his system anymore. With 25 mg Propofol he would have only been out for a few minutes.
Click to expand...

That's why I asked the question, to clear it up, cuz it doesn't appear that way in the summary, nor in Chernoff's mouth. According to this latter, Murray hadn't been giving Propofol for three days including the day of death and that's why Murray didn't talk about Propofol to the paramedics, cuz he was reportedly unaware that Michael took it. However, if Murray gave Propofol at 10:00, even if it wasn't in the system any more, he never mentioned it to the paramedics (2 hours prior to MJ's death!). Now why would he omit saying it at all? Only because he was "sure" that it wasn't in the system any more? The defense is quite confusing on this part, and I understand they are doing it on purpose. That's how I understood it from the summary.
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
That's why I asked the question, to clear it up, cuz it doesn't appear that way in the summary, nor in Chernoff's mouth. According to this latter, Murray hadn't been giving Propofol for three days including the day of death and that's why Murray didn't talk about Propofol to the paramedics, cuz he was reportedly unaware that Michael took it. However, if Murray gave Propofol at 10:00, even if it wasn't in the system any more, he never mentioned it to the paramedics (2 hours prior to MJ's death!). Now why would he omit saying it at all? Only because he was "sure" that it wasn't in the system any more? The defense is quite confusing on this part, and I understand they are doing it on purpose. That's how I understood it from the summary.
Click to expand...

I'll go read the summary again now. I just know that they came up with all kinds of strange scenarios and nothing made much sense. I'll look at it again.
 
Just read it again, so yeah, I think it's like I explained above. And why did Murray not tell the EMT's or the doctors at the hospital that he had given him Propofol? Because he knew that giving him Propofol was wrong. He needed time to think. Also, he may have hoped that for some reason they wouldn't find it anymore, since it doesn't stay in the system for long.
 
10 screen pages - without pictures. Help? I have to eat now, and after that I'll start, but I need help.

funny-pictures-cat-needs-help.jpg
 
Pace said:
Milka, I just sent you a PM. I'll do Johnson, Russell and Senneff, if you take over after Senneff, we're fine. Just start after Senneff and see how much can do, we can always divide that up as well. I survived Alvarez gargantuan testimony, I'll survive the rest, lol.
Click to expand...

I wanted to start with Johnson and Russell, because it's already evening over here and I didn't want to wait for the next post in the summary thread.

Mods, please delete posts #17, 18 and 19 in the German translation thread.
(they are placeholders that are not needed)
 
Last edited:
Milka said:
To those translators who don't have a team, but have to do this alone - a lot of respect to you, I don't know how you do this.
Click to expand...

Thank You! I do it alone and I try to keep up with the translation, but it's hard. Especially when the summaries aren't already posted in the morning when I have more free time. I don't have time to make summaries in English, then translate them. I don't even read the press...
 
Sorry. But I don't find in any of the languages??, the details of the testimonies yesterday. Only a very brief summary of what was said by doctors at UCLA.
 
Valerie77 said:
Sorry. But I don't find in any of the languages??, the details of the testimonies yesterday. Only a very brief summary of what was said by doctors at UCLA.
Click to expand...

The translations are always posted later, because we need time to tanslate the summaries. Except in French, because Ben is summerizing immediately the case into French when she has time.
 
Waiting for the English summaries ... please post at least a part of them soon.

Is next Monday a holiday in the US?
 
Milka said:
Waiting for the English summaries ... please post at least a part of them soon.

Is next Monday a holiday in the US?
Click to expand...

Here's my personal summary of the summary:

Flanagan the Muppet got destroyed by the witness Dr. Thao Nguyen. The Muppet got lost in the show.
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
Here's my personal summary of the summary:

Flanagan the Muppet got destroyed by the witness Dr. Thao Nguyen. The Muppet got lost in the show.
Click to expand...

True. And wouldn't it be great if that was it, who needs a longer summary. ;)

But yeah, I think we'll fall behind now, I can't do what I did last week, that was too much, can't keep that up for weeks. And with the summaries being posted later than we expected, that makes it even harder to keep up. I think I have to start and try to make summaries of the summaries. But I think that takes longer than just translating. But I'd have to type less, my shoulders hurt so much last week (which gave me a headache that I had for days) from typing too much.
 
Milka said:
True. And wouldn't it be great if that was it, who needs a longer summary. ;)

But yeah, I think we'll fall behind now, I can't do what I did last week, that was too much, can't keep that up for weeks. And with the summaries being posted later than we expected, that makes it even harder to keep up. I think I have to start and try to make summaries of the summaries. But I think that takes longer than just translating. But I'd have to type less, my shoulders hurt so much last week (which gave me a headache that I had for days) from typing too much.
Click to expand...

I have another problem, as I already work as a translator I barely have time to translate long summaries, although they are very interesting. And I can't do summaries directly as I come home late from work.

So I guess that all we can do is our best.
 
posted today's in full. (actually had posted the afternoon but had to get help with the morning testimony). today's summaries should be up earlier.

once again we are expecting a delay in translation so don't kill yourselves. (and yes even the summaries can be delayed) and yes I realize the summaries are long and PLEASE shorten them to a manageable length.
 
ivy said:
posted today's in full. (actually had posted the afternoon but had to get help with the morning testimony). today's summaries should be up earlier.

once again we are expecting a delay in translation so don't kill yourselves. (and yes even the summaries can be delayed) and yes I realize the summaries are long and PLEASE shorten them to a manageable length.
Click to expand...

Would it be poossible for you to limit your summaries to max 500 words (= one page) or exceptionally to 1000 words (= two pages)?

So far the summaries contain more than 3000 words, which in other words is a full time job (+/-8 hours of work) for any translator if done properly.
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
Would it be poossible for you to limit your summaries to max 500 words (= one page) or exceptionally to 1000 words (= two pages)?

So far the summaries contain more than 3000 words, which in other words is a full time job (+/-8 hours of work) for any translator if done properly.
Click to expand...

I don't know how many words the summaries have, but it is a full time job. If the translation is not too hard (not too many very long complicated sentences or technical terms), 1 screen page takes me about 25, 30 minutes. Have to try and count the words. And the translation is usually longer, the words in German are longer and/or you have to add things here and there, because it's less clear in German.
 
Ok, some random screen page that I just copied into this one program (don't even know the name) had 1.819 words. About 30 minutes is not bad, I guess. But 16 to 20 pages still means 8 - 10 hours. And you have to do at least a light version of proof reading, so add another hour.

P.S. I just noticed that I copied the wrong number into the post by mistake, the characters. Now I did the same with some other random screen page, 379 words.
 
Last edited:
Translating Hirschberg is a nightmare ... there are some things in there that I can't translate, because they are a bit unclear and I can google them forever and nothing makes sense. So I just copied the English terms and noted, that I'm unclear about what that is to a couple of things.

In her cross it says:

"SH states that it is not unusual for Murray's practice to order lidocaine or infusion pump sets, but often." Is that supposed to mean "but not often"?
 
Rest of that paragraph in her cross:

"SH states that her records go back to July, 2007. SH states that 7/20/07, a horizon pump set was ordered, and it was the same set that was ordered in April 24, 2009. SH states that on October 5, 2007 a horizon pump set, the same set that was ordered on 6/24/08. SH states that just by looking at certain items, she is able to identify them, others she cannot."

Wondering if the dates are correct? ... So how many pump sets did he order? That's another logic puzzle.
 
Milka said:
Translating Hirschberg is a nightmare ... there are some things in there that I can't translate, because they are a bit unclear and I can google them forever and nothing makes sense. So I just copied the English terms and noted, that I'm unclear about what that is to a couple of things.

In her cross it says:

"SH states that it is not unusual for Murray's practice to order lidocaine or infusion pump sets, but often." Is that supposed to mean "but not often"?
Click to expand...

= It is not unusual, it is something that happens quite often. On a regular basis.
 
Milka said:
Rest of that paragraph in her cross:

"SH states that her records go back to July, 2007. SH states that 7/20/07, a horizon pump set was ordered, and it was the same set that was ordered in April 24, 2009. SH states that on October 5, 2007 a horizon pump set, the same set that was ordered on 6/24/08. SH states that just by looking at certain items, she is able to identify them, others she cannot."

Wondering if the dates are correct? ... So how many pump sets did he order? That's another logic puzzle.
Click to expand...
20.07.2007 = 24.04.2009
05.10.2007 = 24.06.2008

According to those dates and the info you provided 4 (identified) sets were ordered.
 
BUMPER SNIPPET said:
= It is not unusual, it is something that happens quite often. On a regular basis.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know, but the sentence doesn't make sense. Not unusual, but not often, that would make more sense. As in ... he ordered it occasionally over the years, so it was not unusual when he ordered it in 2009, but he hadn't ordered it often up to that point. That's how it would make sense. I'd have to watch this on youtube, but I don't have time, so I was wondering if whoever made the summary, could clarify. I translated it as "not often" for now, because it makes more sense to me.

And the thing with the 4 sets that were ordered, it's a bit confusing, it would make more sense for them to refer to one date when saying on date so-and-so and on date so-and-so the same was ordered as on date so-and-so. The two 24's made me think that there might be a typo in the year and month, but maybe you are right and they referred to those 2 different dates.

God, I'm so confused.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top