Murray Trial - Day 14 - October 20 - Discussion

[Popescu]

On a side note, all the papers in my country mention Shafer's testimony
There was already one comment on the online edition, the article was titled "The doctor could have saved Michael", and I braced myself for a negative one.
It said: "Michael was saved from this nasty world..."

 

[wendy2004]

He has a right to. Shafer basically made him out to be no better than a first year student - with a few phrases he flushed his entire career down the drain. Anyone would take it personally.

Well, he set himself up for that. I said from the very beginning...any expert the defense uses to try and bolster their case would be putting their reputation and credibility on the line. There is NOTHING Murray did here that is excusable or commendable in any way. Any doctor trying to justify or back up Murray's actions would be asking for trouble credibility-wise. HOW they got White on board, I have no idea. If he got paid, that may be a factor. If he isn't getting paid, then he's a fool. To risk his rep. for no good reason is just insane. No expert will ever say Murray was proper in leaving the room (that's his story and he's stuck to it, now, whether he left or not) and that will include White. If he so much as hints that it would be proper in the slightest way to give propofol in the home in the way Murray did, he can hang it up. He will be done right along with Murray. The anesthesiology community would never support him after that.

 

[Autumn II]

I do think that at some point, we should support MICHAEL, no holds barred? Shafer was BRILLIANT, and he obviously cares. At some point, "devil's advocacy" has no place on a Michael Jackson board? I mean, seriously? Shafer was the ultimate expert, and I, for one, believe him. There was NO way that Michael could have survived what Murray did. To me, the only question that remains, was this the ultimate in stupidity, or was it intentional? I.M. was a ridiculously light charge, IMHO, but that is what we are stuck with.

 

[Milka]

I think that if tolerance is developed, the doctor can adjust the dose. Not that high to be clear, the patient should always be refferred to a rehab center or whatever, but the human body can take it.



L.e.: I'm not sure that the dosage is equivalent to the amount you spoke of in pills, but the theory still stands. It is possible to develop resistance to any benzodiazepine, they are highly addictive and this is a common side effect.

Doesn't matter if the human body can take it or not. 40 mg is insane and no doctor would ever do this. There are no meds in the world that you have to take 20 - 40 of per day.

There are 0.5 mg pills, 1 mg pills and 2 mg pills. The ones he had prescribed were 2 mg. So yes, that makes either 40 1 mg pills or 20 2 mg pills. No doctor would ever give you that much, and if you need that much because you developed a dependency - to end up with needing 40 mg the dependency must have been there for months and years with increasing the dose every couple of weeks. No doctor would ignore that. Let's say you go see a new doctor and tell him, hey, I need 20 pills of Lorazepam per day, the doctor would never give that to you (the Lorazepam pill bottles that they found at the Carolwood house were 30 pills each of 2 mg Lorazepam pills, that would mean one bottle wouldn't even last 2 days). He'd probably call 911 immediately and get you to a hospital - and ask you what kind of doctor let you develop this kind of dependency.

Like I said before, according to the label of Lorazepam that I found online, the usual daily dose for anxiety and insomnia caused by it is 0.5 mg - 2.5 mg. Ending up with 40 is nuts.

 

[Ramona122003]

Well, he set himself up for that. I said from the very beginning...any expert the defense uses to try and bolster their case would be putting their reputation and credibility on the line. There is NOTHING Murray did here that is excusable or commendable in any way. Any doctor trying to justify or back up Murray's actions would be asking for trouble credibility-wise. HOW they got White on board, I have no idea. If he got paid, that may be a factor. If he isn't getting paid, then he's a fool. To risk his rep. for no good reason is just insane. No expert will ever say Murray was proper in leaving the room (that's his story and he's stuck to it, now, whether he left or not) and that will include White. If he so much as hints that it would be proper in the slightest way to give propofol in the home in the way Murray did, he can hang it up. He will be done right along with Murray. The anesthesiology community would never support him after that.

I think it's hard to say what the anesthesiology community would do with White. From what I've seen they're a pretty close community who have personal or business ties to one another. I can't really believe they would reject their own over a different of opinion and we don't really know what White will say.

The only thing I think White will do is ofter an alt route on how Michael died and may even say that Michael holds some responsibility since it was his idea and he would had most likely picked someone else who wasn't Murray.

 

[Popescu]

Just to be clear, I'm not supporting White, the defense or CM in any way possible. I think I was just pointing out the obvious.
I also believe that the old man will put up a good fight, check out his credentials:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Frederick_White

It would be better if he got paid, and not doing this out of conviction. And I can't see a way that he would refute what dr. Shafer has said, not after endorsing the ingesting Propofol theory. His game might be off, no one in their right mind would go along with this. Not even a first year student

 

[Milka]

Oh, and I forgot to say ... developing a dependency where you need 40 mg instead of the usual daily dose of 0.5 to 2.5 mg in 2 months is impossible.

P. S. And on the Lorazepam pill bottles with the 30 pills of 2 mg pills each it said "take 1 at bedtime". 1, not 20.

 

[Ramona122003]

Oh, and I forgot to say ... developing a dependency where you need 40 mg instead of the usual daily dose of 0.5 to 2.5 mg in 2 months is impossible.

We don't know what Murray was or wasn't doing daily. The DA has purposely no brought up any other day so we don't know if Murray was given 40mg of Lopz daily. It could had been something he dreamed up on the 25 since Michael should had been dead weeks ago given the set up he had on that faithful day.

Unless the DA or the defense share the results of the hair samples what happened from April to June will remain a mystery.

 

[Popescu]

The only thing I think White will do is ofter an alt route on how Michael died and may even say that Michael holds some responsibility since it was his idea and he would had most likely picked someone else who wasn't Murray.

This is the same as a heroine dealer saying in court: "Your honor, there are lots of other dealers out there. If I didn't sell it on the streets, there would still be thousands of dealers who would. Therefore, I'm not guilty."

As for the alternate theory, after endorsing ingestion of propofol (which I'm sure Walgreen will bring up), his credibility is dubious. Even with the great credentials.

 

[Milka]

We don't know what Murray was or wasn't doing daily. The DA has purposely no brought up any other day so we don't know if Murray was given 40mg of Lopz daily. It could had been something he dreamed up on the 25 since Michael should had been dead weeks ago given the set up he had on that faithful day.

Unless the DA or the defense share the results of the hair samples what happened from April to June will remain a mystery.

No, we don't know, but that wasn't my point, see my post before that one, I was just adding something because of the thought that 40 would be ok or might be due to him developing a dependency. Murray was treating him for about 2 months, you can't develop a dependency where you need that much more than the usual dose within 2 months. And no doctor would ever let it come that far. They'd step in the moment you need to double that dose and give you something else.

 

[marebear]

Isn't that what White is going to do blame Michael and make it look like Murray didn't do anything wrong? I don't know how he as a doctor can be okay with what Murray did. All the doctors I have seen on tv etc are shocked this was done especially in someone's house.

I think starting tomorrow I will be reading everyone's posts. I can't watch the defense. They make me sick the way they talk and act. I know i sound weak but it's too much.

 

[abigaillovesmj]

Can the chage add charges? I remember in Michael's trial the judge added 4 charges right at the end before releasing the jury. can this happen here - can he add murder 2?

 

[Ramona122003]

No, we don't know, but that wasn't my point, see my post before that one, I was just adding something because of the thought that 40 would be ok or might be due to him developing a dependency. Murray was treating him for about 2 months, you can't develop a dependency where you need that much more than the usual dose within 2 months. And no doctor would ever let it come that far. They'd step in the moment you need to double that dose and give you something else.

I don't know. Anderson pretty much say the Lopz levels in Michael's blood wasn't a major concern because it was high therapeutic range. So even with the infusions it didn't show a pattern of addiction or dependency. Even the witness today didn't seem overly concern about the 40mg amount and no one on the DA call it unethical or even strange. It only really showed that Murray lied about only given 4mg.


Also Popescu, that is an actually defense for drug dealers, which is why drug dealers are not usually charge with murder even when the drugs can be track back to them in an OD. Simply put, most people don't blame drug dealers when a person OD themselves because people often see it that it was the person's fault for taking drugs to begin with. With Anna Nicole Smith very few people blame the doctors or the boyfriend for supporting her drug addiction because they see it she would had gotten drugs regardless if they helped or not. Why do you think the DA is making it a point that Murray is still responsibility even if Michael self-injected or lied about his drug history. The DA wouldn't make this a major point if everyone though like you.

We shouldn't call the defense dead until they put on their case. As even T-Mez said many times in his interviews, the DA should look good at this point otherwise they had no business taking the case to trial to begin with.

 

[wendy2004]

I think it's hard to say what the anesthesiology community would do with White. From what I've seen they're a pretty close community who have personal or business ties to one another. I can't really believe they would reject their own over a different of opinion and we don't really know what White will say.

The only thing I think White will do is ofter an alt route on how Michael died and may even say that Michael holds some responsibility since it was his idea and he would had most likely picked someone else who wasn't Murray.

I don't believe there would be no repurcussions for White if he says Murray leaving the room was proper. Can't believe he would say Murray put his patient first as a doctor. Shafer testified to how this case has made ppl fearful of anesthesia. They have an interest to protect and if that means calling out one of their own to protect it, I can see them doing it. If someone like him supports Murray in a way that's damaging to anesthesiologists everywhere, I don't see him getting a lifetime achievement award any time soon.

LIke you mentioned, maybe he will offer an alternate way that shifts blame to MJ, but his options at this point have become extremely limited and virtually nil. Oral ingestion is out the window now and that seems to be something White initially supported. Why would a smart guy like him support that? Self injection was shown to be unlikely based on the scientific evidence. Perhaps he has another interpretation of that evidence. I will wait to see what he has to say and I'm guessing we will get a taste of what the defense's position may be when Chernoff does cross exam tomorrow. But for now, it just doesn't make sense what he's doing. If he were some random anesthesiologist looking for his 15 minutes, I could see it. But a seasoned pro like him...I dunno. think the anesthesiology community would definitely take note if he says anything that puts their rep, as a whole, in jeopardy. People are scared of the drug that killed Michael Jackson...a drug they use daily.

 

[Popescu]

your source on this board for the 200mg is talking about drip being used and attacked me repeatedly for insisting MJ did not receive any thing exceeding that amount (200mg) that day, so I don't know maybe you should re ask her/him whether they indeed heard that figure on TV .

Schafer has not completed his testimony; Walgren did not give any estimation in his opening statement. Chernoff did admit thought they did not know what the prosecutors’ experts would say. Their expert is saying 125 mg, that's what he said. He claimed the issue would be eventually who gave the extra 100mg.

So yes I believe there will be a debate over how much propofol was found.

After watching how to withdraw propofol from a vial , how could anyone claim MJ withdraw propofol from a vial using a syringe that had NO NEEDLE? That would be impossible to do!!!!

and taking 25 mg out of that cause thats what murray said. so mj would have to refil the syringe?. he couldnt give 175mg in one shot??

no he couldn't , the max would be 100mg of propofol and less if it was used with lidocaine.

Quoted from this topic
http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...17-amp-18-New-stomach-contents-testing/page18

I think I just realized what White will say. At least I think I do.
The damn figures add up. Murray says he gave 25. A syringe can only hold 100. They have "an expert" (White), who will testify that the amount given was 125. It is my belief that he will also testify that self injection was possible, with a single dose of 100 mg of Propofol.

Prosecution will have to call Shafer once again to explain why this is impossible.

 

[Naturelle]

I do think that at some point, we should support MICHAEL, no holds barred? Shafer was BRILLIANT, and he obviously cares. At some point, "devil's advocacy" has no place on a Michael Jackson board? I mean, seriously? Shafer was the ultimate expert, and I, for one, believe him. There was NO way that Michael could have survived what Murray did. To me, the only question that remains, was this the ultimate in stupidity, or was it intentional? I.M. was a ridiculously light charge, IMHO, but that is what we are stuck with.

At this point, is there anyway to raise the charges?

 

[Milka]

I don't know. Anderson pretty much say the Lopz levels in Michael's blood wasn't a major concern because it was high therapeutic range. So even with the infusions it didn't show a pattern of addiction or dependency. Even the witness today didn't seem overly concern about the 40mg amount and no one on the DA call it unethical or even strange. It only really showed that Murray lied about only given 4mg.

I know a little bit about benzos and how you usually don't even get them from doctors in the usual dose, and if you ask for more, they tell you why they can't do that and they don't give it to you. And I know that 40 mg is insanely high when the usual dose is somewhere around 1 - 2 mg per day. And during the trial they didn't always point out the obvious, it's up to the jury to draw their own conclusions from what they heard.

 

[Ashtanga]

Shafer was fabulous. :clapping: The defense is lost and has nowhere to go.

 

[Ramona122003]

I don't believe there would be no repurcussions for White if he says Murray leaving the room was proper. Can't believe he would say Murray put his patient first as a doctor. Shafer testified to how this case has made ppl fearful of anesthesia. They have an interest to protect and if that means calling out one of their own to protect it, I can see them doing it. If someone like him supports Murray in a way that's damaging to anesthesiologists everywhere, I don't see him getting a lifetime achievement award any time soon.

LIke you mentioned, maybe he will offer an alternate way that shifts blame to MJ, but his options at this point have become extremely limited and virtually nil. Oral ingestion is out the window now and that seems to be something White initially supported. Why would a smart guy like him support that? Self injection was shown to be unlikely based on the scientific evidence. Perhaps he has another interpretation of that evidence. I will wait to see what he has to say and I'm guessing we will get a taste of what the defense's position may be when Chernoff does cross exam tomorrow. But for now, it just doesn't make sense what he's doing. If he were some random anesthesiologist looking for his 15 minutes, I could see it. But a seasoned pro like him...I dunno. think the anesthesiology community would definitely take note if he says anything that puts their rep, as a whole, in jeopardy. People are scared of the drug that killed Michael Jackson...a drug they use daily.

Maybe it's just me, but I can't see him really caring about getting a lifetime achievement award. lol

What I mean is we don't know how he will argue the science. White could had very well put the drink theory out there as as a red-herring to throw off the DA and forced them to waste resources and time. I just think it's too early to call it because White didn't get to where he is by being a fool and I don't think he would waste his reputation on a whim. Especially since he doesn't even personally know Murray.

Also, the anesthesiology community seemed kind of split on this issue. They seem split on whether or not propofol should be a control substance and how did someone like Michael, who is no doctor, even learn to use this drug like this. What he has done has remained mostly an anesthesiology problem. We also get into the area about who are to blame for the person taking drugs, which I mentioned on my other post. Some may blame the doctor, but others to blame the patient for putting doctors in this position. Like before, look at Anna Nicole Smith's case.

 

[wendy2004]

Quoted from this topic
http://www.mjjcommunity.com/forum/t...17-amp-18-New-stomach-contents-testing/page18

I think I just realized what White will say. At least I think I do.
The damn figures add up. Murray says he gave 25. A syringe can only hold 100. They have "an expert" (White), who will testify that the amount given was 125. It is my belief that he will also testify that self injection was possible, with a single dose of 100 mg of Propofol.

Prosecution will have to call Shafer once again to explain why this is impossible.

THe problem with that number, tho, is if you use the entire syringe for propofol you leave no room for lidocaine. Injecting straight propofol, a whole syringe full, would likely cause extreme pain, right? Why or how could Michael tolerate that if, per Murray, MJ had to have the "antiburn".

 

[cinzia]

It looked like that propofol was really going fast with the bottle in the bag. Good point about the tubing fitting the pocket. This whole demonstration was very good.

The speed of the infusion is controlled by the size of the tubing / drip chamber, the size of the IV needle (catheter), the height of the bag (higher the bag-faster the rate) or by the setting of the IV pump if one is used. The propofol was pouring in because I believe Dr. S. changed the size of the iv catheter or tubing to a larger gauge but I missed exactly that part of his explanation. There are different types of IV sets, some give 20 drops per ml, some give 15 . for example. These would be able to run fluid in much faster than a drip chamber delivering say 60 drops/ml.

Okay, but if he wanted to hide the propofol then why did he put the bottle in the saline bag for everyone to see it? He could have get rid of the bottle too somehow,

and why even a propofol bottle in a saline bag? whats the reason?

Thanks... one question.. might sound dumb as heck but whatever lol... so is there a difference, meaning more dangerous, to put the bottle in the saline bag rather hanging it? Or it really doesnt matter?

I can't understand since cm was using these prop. bottles for months he didn't notice the tab to hang the bottle. I can't believe that. Unless since he was using just one IV pole by placing the propofol inside the saline bag it would hang at a level to where the drip chamber would be at almost the same level as the primary iv drip chamber. Therefore it would not tend to run as fast as if it were hung by its own hanger, which (since the bottle is so much smaller than the 1 liter bag) would be hanging much higher and tend to run faster. Maybe this was some way murray thought he could restrict the speed of the propofol in addition to the roller clamp as an added 'safety measure' (snort)

 

[Autumn II]

At this point, there is no way possible to raise the charges?

Sadly, there is NOT. The low charges were due to Cooley, the D.A. at the time. (he was running for re-election, and LOST.)

Logically, what we have here, is do we believe Shafer, or do we not? We have EVERY reason to believe him. His credentials are impeccable. And then? There are two options. One is, that Murray is the MOST stupid doctor who ever lived, and kept pushing the drugs, even AFTER Michael had obviously died. He did that through extreme stupidity. OR, he did it intentionally.

At this point, those are the options?

I have NO idea what the defense will possibly say now? I now see people presuming to say that they know BETTER than Shafer, the world-expert on propofol? I have NO idea why you are even doing that, anymore? This really IS about Michael, and expert testimony?

 

[Ramona122003]

I know a little bit about benzos and how you usually don't even get them from doctors in the usual dose, and if you ask for more, they tell you why they can't do that and they don't give it to you. And I know that 40 mg is insanely high when the usual dose is somewhere around 1 - 2 mg per day. And during the trial they didn't always point out the obvious, it's up to the jury to draw their own conclusions from what they heard.

The point remains that all the experts put Michael in the high therapeutic range. Given how propofol is given, 40mg of Lopz maybe normal. Which would explain why Shafer wasn't overly concern about the amount and the DA didn't make a big deal of it. If it was really unethical or even uncommon, wouldn't the DA bring it up to show further how careless Murray was given such high amounts. Maybe Shafer will talk about it more in his cross, but no one seemed that concern about the amount.

 

[Autumn II]

The point remains that all the experts put Michael in the high therapeutic range. Given how propofol is given, 40mg of Lopz maybe normal. Which would explain why Shafer wasn't overly concern about the amount and the DA didn't make a big deal of it. If it was really unethical or even uncommon, wouldn't the DA bring it up to show further how careless Murray was given such high amounts. Maybe Shafer will talk about it more in his cross, but no one seemed that concern about the amount.

Maybe we didn't hear the same testimony? Shafer was INCREDIBLY concerned about that amount! WTF?

 

[Popescu]

THe problem with that number, tho, is if you use the entire syringe for propofol you leave no room for lidocaine. Injecting straight propofol, a whole syringe full, would likely cause extreme pain, right? Why or how could Michael tolerate that if, per Murray, MJ had to have the "antiburn".

Yes, this was covered in Shafer's testimony as well.
I think it will be pretty easy for Shafer to debunk defense's theory, based on numbers and facts, since pharmacokinetics is one of his specialties.

 

[Justthefacts]

THe problem with that number, tho, is if you use the entire syringe for propofol you leave no room for lidocaine. Injecting straight propofol, a whole syringe full, would likely cause extreme pain, right? Why or how could Michael tolerate that if, per Murray, MJ had to have the "antiburn".

And two more problems Michael had tiny veins if Murray had to go to use a vein behind his leg because he had hard time finding one how do you expect Michael to find one. And how could he inject that much Propofol without passing out?

 

[cinzia]

Some may blame the doctor, but others to blame the patient for putting doctors in this position. Like before, look at Anna Nicole Smith's case.

But ANS didn't have a doctor sitting in her room feeding her the pills. And for some to blame the patient for putting a doctor in such a position is a rather juvenile approach. A doctor is not a kid going out into the world with blinders on, innocent in the ways of humanity. No, a doctor has been through all kinds of testing and experiences throughout his/her training. A doctor has to take responsibility for his actions. Blaming the patient is never the right answer. Doctor, why did you prescribe this unusually high number of sleeping pills, tranquilizers, narcotics...? What's that you say? OH... The patient made you do it? ROFLOL

 

[Milka]

Given how propofol is given, 40mg of Lopz maybe normal.

That's definitely not normal. It's like when you go see your doctor and ask him for Valium for insomnia and he gives it to you saying "take 1 at bedtime", and then you take 20 - 40. You also can't compare Propofol and how it is given with benzos like Lorazepam, totally different drugs and work in totally different ways, Propofol is not a benzo, it's an anesthetic. Totally different half-life, that's why you have to drip Propofol continuously during surgery, because it only stays in the body for a couple of minutes. While Lorazepam stays in the body about 9 - 16 hours, so there is no need for a drip.

 

[cinzia]

And two more problems Michael had tiny veins if Murray had to go to use a vein behind his leg because he had hard time finding one how do you expect Michael to find one. And how could he inject that much Propofol without passing out?

It bothered me that the tiny veins were talked about. Michael had an iv in place. He wouldn't need to find a vein. granted I missed parts of the testimony but did Shaffer ever address a scenario of an already in place prop. syringe that just had to be injected?

 

[wendy2004]

The point remains that all the experts put Michael in the high therapeutic range. Given how propofol is given, 40mg of Lopz maybe normal. Which would explain why Shafer wasn't overly concern about the amount and the DA didn't make a big deal of it. If it was really unethical or even uncommon, wouldn't the DA bring it up to show further how careless Murray was given such high amounts. Maybe Shafer will talk about it more in his cross, but no one seemed that concern about the amount.

Maybe we didn't hear the same testimony? Shafer was INCREDIBLY concerned about that amount! WTF?

I think Walgren just set the stage on the lorazepam today. He and Shafer explained what it is, how it works and travels in the body, etc. I think he's leaving the rest for the defense to bring out on cross as we know they will have plenty to ask LORAZEPAM (Flanagan's fave word). The main thing the DA seemed to want to get on record today was how loraz. got into the stomach and to confirm that the amount was not as high in the stomach as the defense portrayed. Defense amount was inflated and misleading. He also gave a scenario for how much he believes may have been given based on coroner's samples. No doubt we're going to hear more about loraz. tomorrow on cross. And Walgren can clarify whatever he needs to on redirect...so...let's all hang tight and not fight.