Latest on MJJC

Murray Trial - 4 October - Day 6 - Discussion

8701girl said:
God i hope he hasnt made any more audio phone recordings of mj
Click to expand...

Did Murray ever EXPLAIN *why* he made/kept that recording of MJ? Sorry, I don't know much about it. Was it a voicemail that MJ had left for him? What were the reported circumstances around that recording? How did that recording even come out? Did Murray bring it forward to law enforcement?
 
lemon662 said:
Did Murray ever EXPLAIN *why* he made/kept that recording of MJ? Sorry, I don't know much about it. Was it a voicemail that MJ had left for him? What were the reported circumstances around that recording? How did that recording even come out? Did Murray bring it forward to law enforcement?
Click to expand...

My understanding is that it was not a voicemail, Murray was with Michael, and recorded that. What we heard during the opening statement is just a part of it , Walgren said we would hear the whole recording and they will talk about it. From what Walgren said, it was found on Murray's I phone. Walgren used it to show that Murray was aware of what he was doing to Michael, and yet, 2 days after that recording he ordered loads of propofol.

We were all shocked by this recording, I think that most of us didn't even suspect it existed.

Edit : I susppose they will play it again and talk about it when the LAPD computer tech testifies. That could be today if ABC's witness list is correct.
 
Last edited:
marebear said:
Is it true that Michael's fingerprints are not on any of the propofol bottles? That's a good thing?
Click to expand...

We don't know yet if that's true. I definitely hope so.
I would think it is true, because that came right after the defense gave an interview, and it would explain the defense's latest theory : Michael swallowed 8 pills of lorazepam and didn't tell Murray.

Yes it would be a good thing, at least for the general public, since the "he drank propofol" story was publicized so much after the prelim.

For the general outcome of the trial, I'm not sure , it's good of course, but I don't see how saying that Michael swallowed lorazepam or propofol helps Murray. For me, it's just the opposite. They should not have been within Michael's (or the children's) reach. That's another reckless thing Murray did. And if Murray did that, his only reason would be that he didn't think that Michael would take things behind his back. So Michael did not behave like the addict the defense is trying to paint. They are contradicting themselves IMO.

It's involuntary manslaughter, based on lack of proper care. Leaving those meds around is just another example of lack of proper care... Murray really has no defense.
 
this extreme kind of lack of care surely deserves more than 4 years !!!
 
lemon662 said:
Did Murray ever EXPLAIN *why* he made/kept that recording of MJ? Sorry, I don't know much about it. Was it a voicemail that MJ had left for him? What were the reported circumstances around that recording? How did that recording even come out? Did Murray bring it forward to law enforcement?
Click to expand...

I remember reading somewhere that Murray did this because he wanted to show Michael how he was under drugs. But Im not 100% sure if its true.
 
I presume the defence were aware of scott smiths testimony?. what does it mean when the defence say they werent ready. just werent ready yesterday or what? Cause they knew about the interview tapes. hoping the defence have been caught off guard but not sure how

and we maybe seeing that second pic of mj today. i hope we get a warning before hand. thats one pic i dont wanna see.
 
elusive moonwalker said:
I presume the defence were aware of scott smiths testimony?. what does it mean when the defence say they werent ready. just werent ready yesterday or what? Cause they knew about the interview tapes. hoping the defence have been caught off guard but not sure how

and we maybe seeing that second pic of mj today. i hope we get a warning before hand. thats one pic i dont wanna see.
Click to expand...

I'm sure we will get a warning : I suppose they will ask questions related to it before showing it, and ask to dim out the light....Today's going to be difficult
 
Misayko said:
I remember reading somewhere that Murray did this because he wanted to show Michael how he was under drugs. But Im not 100% sure if its true.
Click to expand...
yes one of the defence lawyers said this in an interview before the gag order happened. said murray did it to shiw mj the state he was getting in and to make mj stop. but as we can see from all the orders murray placed for more benzos after and around that date. the above agrument doesnt stand up at all
 
bouee said:
I'm sure we will get a warning : I suppose they will ask questions related to it before showing it, and ask to dim out the light....Today's going to be difficult
Click to expand...
yeah im sure we will be able to tell
 
One question though re prints. is is mjs on the syringes. wasnt there a repor on this ages ago in one of the tabs? cant remember what it saif but i think it might have been yes. does anyone else remember. the syringe prints would be more important imo.of course they could be explained but intems of shock value it wouldnt help
 
elusive moonwalker said:
One question though re prints. is is mjs on the syringes. wasnt there a repor on this ages ago in one of the tabs? cant remember what it saif but i think it might have been yes. does anyone else remember. the syringe prints would be more important imo.of course they could be explained but intems of shock value it wouldnt help
Click to expand...
I don't remember that, but I don't read tabloids. I remember they talked about prints in the status hearings, I think, but I'm not sure, it was the defense asking for re checking the prints or something like that. Did Chernoff say in his opening statement that MJ self injected ? If he did say "injected" that would be an indication. If he just said "administered" then it's unclear if the defense is still going to say he drank it.

But even if his prints are on the syringe, it would depend on where on the syringe, and it still goes against the coroner's report, who ruled out self injection based on where the catheter was, if I remember correctly.
 
respect77 said:
Same question: what picture are they gonna show today?
Click to expand...
The judge authorised 2 pictures of Michael to be shown. We already saw the first one, and it's possible we see the second one today, though it's not sure.
 
bouee said:
I don't remember that, but I don't read tabloids. I remember they talked about prints in the status hearings, I think, but I'm not sure, it was the defense asking for re checking the prints or something like that. Did Chernoff say in his opening statement that MJ self injected ? If he did say "injected" that would be an indication. If he just said "administered" then it's unclear if the defense is still going to say he drank it. But even if his prints are on the syringe, it would depend on where on the syringe, and it still goes against the coroner's report, who ruled out self injection based on where the catheter was, if I remember correctly.
Click to expand...
i didnt listen to the opening speech. can someone advise
 
Even if and it's a big 'if' IMO Michael's prints are on a syringe, just what does that prove? Only that he touched it at some point. What was in the syringe? Where exactly were the print(s) on the syringe? I understand it is not easy to get prints from a plastic syringe, I don't know.

And as for the voice recording and murray's story about it, why should we believe it? Has he told the truth about ANYTHING so far? For all we know, Michael was under because of murray's kind administrations.
 
nooo, guys there was ONE fingerprints on the "broken" syringe that was ruled by the lab as "unidentified". Flanagan said "well the one which was already injected into the short tubing was obvioulsy used by Dr.Murray but the broken syringe at the foot of the bed was used by Jackson "


That's why I said in the other thread it was really important for the prosecutors to ask the paramedics about that "broken" syringe which was given to them by Murray and they left it on the floor , so don't expect MJ's fingerprints to be on any of the syringes .
 
I presume the defence were aware of scott smiths testimony?. what does it mean when the defence say they werent ready. just werent ready yesterday or what? Cause they knew about the interview tapes. hoping the defence have been caught off guard but not sure how

and we maybe seeing that second pic of mj today. i hope we get a warning before hand. thats one pic i dont wanna see.
Click to expand...

I believe they were not ready yesterday
 
I just listened quickly to Chernoff opening statement again, he said "administered".
 
lemon662 said:
Did Murray ever EXPLAIN *why* he made/kept that recording of MJ? Sorry, I don't know much about it. Was it a voicemail that MJ had left for him? What were the reported circumstances around that recording? How did that recording even come out? Did Murray bring it forward to law enforcement?
Click to expand...

No i dont think hes explained why he taped it. I think it was a cell phone call between murray & mj and murray recorded it somehow.
 
IF it is true that Michael's prints were NOT found on any propofol bottles then: IF he self injected OR if he drank it from a juice glass, either way HE could not have prepared it. How would the defense explain Michael getting the propofol into a syringe or glass? If the defense says that a syringe was prepared ahead of time by murray, then how did Michael get it if he was sedated or hooked up to an IV and a condom catheter?

Also about the broken syringe...as I recall 'broken' would be an inaccurate term. Plastic syringes are virtually impossible to 'break' unlike glass syringes. I believe the syringe was separated from the needle, so not actually 'broken'. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here, please.
And I thought that Investigator Fleak found the syringe a second visit to the scene? If so, wouldn't that make any information from it potentially 'contaminated'?
 
Also about the broken syringe...as I recall 'broken' would be an inaccurate term. Plastic syringes are virtually impossible to 'break' unlike glass syringes. I believe the syringe was separated from the needle, so not actually 'broken'. Someone correct me if I'm wrong here, please.
And I thought that Investigator Fleak found the syringe a second visit to the scene? If so, wouldn't that make any information from it potentially 'contaminated'?
Click to expand...

yes it was not broken the plastic part was separated from the needle but I believe someone wrote "broken" to describe it and Fleak explained what they meant by broken .

as for when they sized the evidence. In the autopry report there was one syringe collected on June 26 and the IV system which was on the IV stand was collected on June 29 . That what they stated .

So I don't know whether that's correct or not but I'm having a hard time believing the IV system was not collected the same day MJ died and was left there for three days.


I believe Smith, Martinez and Fleak will testify today so we will see.
 
a question: ephedrine was not brought up during lopez' testimony or did i miss it?


re flumazenil:

accordign to what i read flumazenil should normally not be used if a patient had a high lorazepam dose unless it’s an emergency, because flumazenil can cause seizures.

there is another problem with flumazenil, it has a different half-life than lorazepam and if a patient had a high lorazepam dose there is the risk of resedation: the patient wakes up, but gets sleepy again!


i believe this could be the reason why mj was (probably?) still unconscious at shortly before noon.

I think murray had to wait until mj showed signs to get out of the lorazepam sedation on his own before he gave him the flumazenil to wake him fully up: this reduced both the risk of a seizure and the risk of resedation.

in addition, murray gave mj ephedrine to make him more alert to counter remaining resedation effects.


I think murray could have used flumazenil as a "quick detox" agent under anesthesia, and he used propofol as the anesthetic.

this website explains how a quick detox works, and they say they DO NOT do it for lorazepam:
http://www.rapiddrugdetox.com/detox-facts--drugs/benzodiazepine-addiction.html


to me, one of the key questions is whether or not mj was conscious at the time of death, when he received the fatal propofol bolus (or drip if you are ready to believe murray was able to give propofol by drip WITHOUT AN IV PUMP).

i can see two scenarios of what happened at time of death:

scenario 1
at the time murray called sade anding, mj was finally coming out of his lorazepem sleep. murray noticed this too late, mj was already moving, maybe trying to get up and murray had to be quick to give the propofol bolus (before administering flumazenil), and he gave the propofol too fast.

scenario 2
mj did not wake up at all, murray realized something was wrong (low oxygen levels?) at the time he called anding. he droped the call and rushed to mj’s side. He gave the flumazenil FIRST (before the propofol bolus) and waited until mj was coming out of the lorazepam sedation. mj came out of sedation fast, it was a rough awakening and murray THEN gave him the propofol bolus - he hadn’t yet prepared the scene and needed more time (+ propofol has amnesic potential, murray possibly hoped mj would not remember the incident afterwards?).
mj was moving (was he possibly going into a seizure??) and murray messed up the propofol bolus, he gave the bolus too fast.

^can the medics here please comment on this, what do you think? thanks


--

below some links with information about flumazenil and some other helpful info:

here are some studies on flumazenil and benzos:
http://www.druglib.com/druginfo/romazicon/abstracts/ (index)
http://www.druglib.com/abstract/mi/mintzer-mz_psychopharmacology-berl_20050300.html
http://www.druglib.com/abstract/gi/girdler-nm_anaesthesia_20020900.html
http://www.druglib.com/abstract/co/coulthard-p_br-dent-j_20000325.html
http://www.druglib.com/abstract/sa/saxon-l_psychopharmacology-berl_19970500.html

^note what the studies say about psycho motoric effects

flumazenil info:
http://www.drugs.com/sfx/flumazenil-side-effects.html
http://www.drugs.com/pro/romazicon.html

antidote info:
http://www.inchem.org/documents/antidote/antidote/ant01.htm#PartNumber:3

^note that this guide says flumazenil can be detected in blood (or that’s what i understand). during prelim the coroner(?) said they (at their labs i guess) cannot test for it in blood. defense was paying close attention to this to my recollection


mj had a high amount of lorazepam in his blood at tod. question is, was he conscious?

s. here for sedation scores, lorazepam is on p6:
http://www.mc.vanderbilt.edu/surgery/trauma/Protocols/SedationAnalgesiaGuidelines.pdf

^can a medic please comment on this. to me it looks like mj must either have been tolerant to lorazepam (very high tolerance?!), or he must still have been sedated.


murray gave valium in the days before mj died.

s. here how valium is used to treat benzo withdrawal symptoms:
http://www.benzo.org.uk/manual/bzsched.htm

^note how murray prescribed valium: he did not say use once at bedtime, but take every 6 hours


here is a document on the controversy about propofol by bolus (mac sedation) used for endoscopy:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1614218/
The Great Debate On Nurse-Administered Propofol Sedation (NAPS)


someone on this board recently posted a study (it was conducted last year) how efficient propofol is to treat insomnia, the outcome of the study was positive:

http://www.springerlink.com/content/q1383124j665v845/

note, that these patients received propofol under safe conditions!
 
Last edited:
As usual sophie great observations and findings. I believe the only person who could know whether it was flumazenil then propofol or propofol then flumazenil is Murray .


I don't think they could determine which drug was injected first. You asked very hard questions , do the experts have explanations? don't really know.
 
Soundmind said:
nooo, guys there was ONE fingerprints on the "broken" syringe that was ruled by the lab as "unidentified". Flanagan said "well the one which was already injected into the short tubing was obvioulsy used by Dr.Murray but the broken syringe at the foot of the bed was used by Jackson " That's why I said in the other thread it was really important for the prosecutors to ask the paramedics about that "broken" syringe which was given to them by Murray and they left it on the floor , so don't expect MJ's fingerprints to be on any of the syringes .
Click to expand...
thanks i remember now
 
I think you already found answers to much of the questions.

Defense said "administered" - gave no details of how. Only thing we know that they would claim Michael took 8 lorazepam pills by mouth. Propofol administration is a mystery.

Michael's fingerprints being on needles , bottles etc could be argued by defense - that he used them/ self administered and by prosecution that he might have touched them at some other time. So it wouldn't be determined either way and jury would have to weight that information.

If Michael's fingerprints are on nothing - that would mean that - as you said - he couldn't have prepared and /or administered the drugs. It would then put the guilt on Murray at least in the regards of having medications laying around at the reach of the patient.

and we discussed this previously on the topic of negligence and during prelim. for example there's a huge difference of having a gun and keeping it locked in a drawer versus leaving it on the street.
 
ivy said:
I think you already found answers to much of the questions.

Defense said "administered" - gave no details of how. Only thing we know that they would claim Michael took 8 lorazepam pills by mouth. Propofol administration is a mystery.

Michael's fingerprints being on needles , bottles etc could be argued by defense - that he used them/ self administered and by prosecution that he might have touched them at some other time. So it wouldn't be determined either way and jury would have to weight that information.

If Michael's fingerprints are on nothing - that would mean that - as you said - he couldn't have prepared and /or administered the drugs. It would then put the guilt on Murray at least in the regards of having medications laying around at the reach of the patient.

and we discussed this previously on the topic of negligence and during prelim. for example there's a huge difference of having a gun and keeping it locked in a drawer versus leaving it on the street.
Click to expand...

(see bolded) The story that Michael's fingerprints were not on the bottles is now circulating on major news channels (not just on Radar Online). For example, ABC is now carrying the story. Not verified yet, but if true, that would be VERY important, given that opening statements by the defense used the tactic of "Michael did it do himself." It would not be possible for him to prepare the propofol (with lidocaine?) or load a syringe, or two, without touching anything.

I've noticed a switch from the defense tactic of "Michael self-injected," to, "he took pills" (which hopefully would be refuted by the Autopsy Report). I'd say that the reason for the change of defense tactic could be knowledge that his fingerprints weren't found on the propofol-related apparatus? And so? Were Michael's prints on the pill bottles, or not? And if not, the defense will say, "Murray left a pile of pills conveniently on the night-stand?"
 
All the PILL bottles were found on the nightstand EXCEPT lorazepam it was found in the bathroom, will Murray claim MJ went to the bathroom with the condom catheter on to get the pills? lol




Ivy , can we have a thread to discuss the defence strategy ? I just want to be able to state why I believe the "10:40 am" was fabricated by Murray's defence and why I believe they did not really change the timeline without certain members attacking me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top