I'm waiting for yesterday's summaries, when will they be posted?
Me too....I thought they would be already posted when I woke up in the morning....
I'm waiting for yesterday's summaries, when will they be posted?
Me too....I thought they would be already posted when I woke up in the morning....
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Waiting for the English summaries ... please post at least a part of them soon.
Is next Monday a holiday in the US?
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.
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.
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.
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.
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"?
20.07.2007 = 24.04.2009Rest 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.
= It is not unusual, it is something that happens quite often. On a regular basis.