Latest on MJJC

Coroners Report released - GRAPHIC CONTENT (Threads merged)

Soundmind said:
from the anesthesiologist MJ would not have been able to inject himself "IF ONLY bolus injections via a syringe were used " but Murray said he gave it through an IV drip , they did not give their opinion on that one . I'm pretty sure he is going to say that MJ was the one who increased the drip while he left the room for two minutes . Now hopefully they tested the finger prints on the IV tube . They did say they did not trace any propofol in the long tube , but they need to prove MJ's finger prints were not on the part of the IV that increases the rate of drops .
Click to expand...

That would be very shaky, as Michael could have touched it for different reasons, plus once Murray was "cleaning" he could easily put Michael's fingers on that tube.

Michael, under influence already, laying on beads, not feeling them, not only begs for propofol, but also increases the drip by himself once Murray's gone and then dies.
nah...

Plus Murray would for sure be caught that he lied.
 
HeroR said:
What he did was more in line with manslaughter because there was no intent or malice behind it. Those two things are needed to make a strong second degree murder case. Without them, a jury may not convict Murray on that charge.
Click to expand...

Really? because from what I understood from the quote I posted, you don't need to prove motive or intent to kill in murder in the second degree. Here's that quote again and I would appreciate it if you could explain it to me, since I'm not from the U.S so am not familiar with the laws.

"Second-degree murder is ordinarily defined as 1) an intentional killing that is not premeditated or planned, nor committed in a reasonable "heat of passion" or 2) a killing caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's obvious lack of concern for human life. Second-degree murder may best be viewed as the middle ground between first degree murder and voluntary manslaughter.

So from what I understood it is either 1 or 2, either (1) with an intent to kill but not premeditated or (2) caused by dangerous conduct and the offender's lack of concern for human life.

And since Murry did act with lack of concern for Michael's life I thought that charge fits.
 
esther1972 said:
From the way i have understood it all it's because they couldn't link CM to the smoking gun yet. Even though all the other evidence points toward murder, without the smoking gun in murray's hands they will never be able to make the charges stick.

If i'm not mistaken CM had to give fingerprints and DNA so maybe if they can link that to the fatale propofol shot we will see the charges increase..

Let's say worst scenario is that they the fingerprints or DNA on the propofol injection don't match with the once they have found than we can be sure there are others involved.

In now way do i believe CM is not involved in this all, because imo he is...
Click to expand...

But didn't Murry admit to giving Michael propofol that night? Does anyone remember?
 
i haven't read through all this, but could someone explain what the beads prove. All I know is that he supposedly had them around his neck when he died..?
 
abigaillovesmj said:
But didn't Murry admit to giving Michael propofol that night? Does anyone remember?
Click to expand...
I already said in another post that murray admitted he give 25mg propofol...so him admitting isn't the problem...it's the dose Michael had in his body...Although many of you seem to take murray's admitting 25mg as admitting he give it all...I'm not saying i take murray's word for it not at all, cause i really believe he give way more...but they will also have to proof that Murray give more than he admitted...
 
esther1972 said:
I already said in another post that murray admitted he give 25mg propofol...so him admitting isn't the problem...it's the dose Michael had in his body...Although many of you seem to take murray's admitting 25mg as admitting he give it all...I'm not saying i take murray's word for it not at all, cause i really believe he give way more...but they will also have to proof that Murray give more than he admitted...
Click to expand...

sorry but this goes too far, I fell, will they really HAVE TO PROVE?

or Murray would have to prove that he didn't (I feel somehow it makes a difference).
 
If Murray had monitored him properly and had the proper equipment to monitor him, this would never had happened. Michael could have stopped breathing, Murray could have maintained his breathing until the dosage of propofol lowered, and he could have ressucitated him properly if things got worse.

Lozarepam was present , and made the risk worse.

Murray admitted to giving propofol, even if he didn't give everything. He should have monitored him. He admitedly went to the bathroom and left the room, MJ was, by Murray's admission alone. How could he monitor him from the bathroom ? How could he ressucitate him from the bathroom ?
Later the police found he was on the phone for 47mn. Same questions.
He didn't have the proper equipment, the few things he had were in his bag, in a closet, in a different room. How did they get there ?

Murray also admitted he gave lozarepam.

Murray never told the paramedics nor the UCLA he gave propofol. He must have felt it was not the right thing to say ?

The dose of propofol was not lethal, it corresponded to a general anaesthesia. How many people in good health die from a general anaesthesia when it's done properly ?
 
ForeverKOP said:
i haven't read through all this, but could someone explain what the beads prove. All I know is that he supposedly had them around his neck when he died..?
Click to expand...

Didn't the report alude to the fact that the beads must have been beneath him when he was lying in bed - did it not say somewhere in the report that there were indentations in his back from these? Or did I imagine that?
 
Dianelesley said:
Didn't the report alude to the fact that the beads must have been beneath him when he was lying in bed - did it not say somewhere in the report that there were indentations in his back from these? Or did I imagine that?
Click to expand...

Yes, you're right. He was laying on them which caused the indentations.
 
bouee said:
Murray never told the paramedics nor the UCLA he gave propofol. He must have felt it was not the right thing to say ?

The dose of propofol was not lethal, it corresponded to a general anaesthesia. How many people in good health die from a general anaesthesia when it's done properly ?
Click to expand...

Yeap, propofol is widely used, because it does not paralyse the muscles, like most anesthetics do, and does not require intubation and artificial ventilation.

"There are several forms of anesthesia. The following forms refer to states achieved by anesthetics working on the brain:

* General anesthesia: "Drug-induced loss of consciousness during which patients are not arousable, even by painful stimulation." Patients undergoing general anesthesia can often neither maintain their own airway nor breathe on their own. While usually administered with inhalational agents, general anesthesia can be achieved with intravenous agents, such as propofol.[3]

* Deep sedation/analgesia: "Drug-induced depression of consciousness during which patients cannot be easily aroused but respond purposefully following repeated or painful stimulation." Patients may sometimes be unable to maintain their airway and breathe on their own.[3]

* Moderate sedation/analgesia or conscious sedation: "Drug-induced depression of consciousness during which patients respond purposefully to verbal commands, either alone or accompanied by light tactile stimulation." In this state, patients can breathe on their own and need no help maintaining an airway."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anesthesia

This next article is reffering to the use of Propofol for conscious sedation, and it still states that MONITORING is vital.

"Propofol usage has grown rapidly in the past few years and is now one of the most commonly-used intravenous drugs employed to cause conscious sedation. Propofol’s popularity is due to several factors, including several that contribute to improved patient satisfaction. These characteristics include:

* a pleasant mental state
* rapid onset and short duration of action that allows titration of effect with an propofol infusion
* quick recovery from sedation with minimal drowsiness that facilitates early discharge and neurological examination for patients sedated in the ICU
* diminished need for other sedatives (such as opioid narcotics or benzodiazepines) that may result in side effects (such nausea and vomiting)
* reduced recovery times for the patient following the procedure to allow more rapid throughput in a busy sedation suite

For these reasons, propofol is the “go to” drug for many short duration medical procedures (such as colonoscopy) that require conscious sedation. However, there are potential safety issues surrounding the use of propofol. The drug can be unpredictable in untrained hands, as dosing and titration is variable and is based on the patient’s response and tolerance to the drug, which may vary widely. For example, respiration can change dramatically in a very short time deteriorating to full respiratory arrest, even when propofol is administered in low doses."
http://www.xhale.com/anesthesia/index.asp

So it can be used for general anaesthesia, as well as for conscious sedation. I think it all depends on the dosage:

"When used for IV sedation, a single dose of propofol typically wears off within minutes. Propofol is versatile; the drug can be given for short or prolonged sedation as well as for general anesthesia. Its use is not associated with nausea as is often seen with opioid medications. These characteristics of rapid onset and recovery along with its amnestic effects[14] have led to its widespread use for sedation and anesthesia."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propofol

I know that even when it is used for general anesthesia, it does not require intubation, or ventilation. The patients breathe on their own. But they have to be carefully monitored.
 
abigaillovesmj said:
But didn't Murry admit to giving Michael propofol that night? Does anyone remember?
Click to expand...
Yes he did but giving propofol isn't illegal and he insists he gave nothign to michael that SHOULD have killed him and he's correct. What murray is trying to get around is the fact that he abused the use of propofol and he was very negligent. It it suprising michael lasted as long as he claims in his care.
 
i'd like to know how much propofol mj received during that night and whether its true what murray claimed he only gave him propofol in the morning. a bottle of urine was found on the scene which contained a small amount of propofol, similar to the amount found in the bladder. this seems to indicate mj was given propofol earlier that night, not just the dose that killed him.

from what i understand the amount of propofol can be estimated from the amount of propofol metabolites found in the urine. a propofol overdose case study was posted here some time ago where this was discussed:

Results
...Analytical results of propofol determination in blood, urine, and various organs are summarised in Table 1. Propofol was mainly metabolized by two pathways: either direct glucuronide conjugation or p-hydroxylation with subsequent glucuronidation (or sulphation). Only very small amounts were eliminated without metabolization. Acidic urine hydrolysis increased the propofol concentration from 5.4μg/ml to 8900μg/ml. Because the urine bladder contained 250ml urine the eliminated propofol amounted to 2225mg even without the other hydroxy metabolites for which the quantification was made impossible by the lack of standards. Therefore more than 11 ampoules of 20ml propofol emulsion must have been administered during the last hours before death.

Table 1: Results of toxicological analysis
...
Blood 5.3
Urine 5.4
Urine hydrol. 8900

link to preview: http://www.springerlink.com/content/4leaa3ah8q75pndc/
Click to expand...

in the case study they were able to estimate from the urine hydrolysis how much propofol was injected.

i couldnt find anything in the autopsy report about the amount of propofol metabolites in the urine. i also couldnt find anything about the amount of propofol found in the hair and brain. did i miss it or is it not in the report?
 
sophie said:
i'd like to know how much propofol mj received during that night and whether its true what murray claimed he only gave him propofol in the morning. a bottle of urine was found on the scene which contained a small amount of propofol, similar to the amount found in the bladder. this seems to indicate mj was given propofol earlier that night, not just the dose that killed him.

from what i understand the amount of propofol can be estimated from the amount of propofol metabolites found in the urine. a propofol overdose case study was posted here some time ago where this was discussed:



in the case study they were able to estimate from the urine hydrolysis how much propofol was injected.

i couldnt find anything in the autopsy report about the amount of propofol metabolites in the urine. i also couldnt find anything about the amount of propofol found in the hair and brain. did i miss it or is it not in the report?
Click to expand...

The hair analysis has been left out of the report.

Urine 0.15 ug/ml

Urine from Bedside Bottle
 
MarielovesMJ said:
http://books.google.com/books?id=tL...BA&cd=6#v=onepage&q="michael jackson"&f=false

I really don't know which thread this belongs to, but here is something. I found about a lung thing from Jet mag in 1977.
Click to expand...


Great find MarielovesMJ.

This reminded me of this interview of Quincy Jones, originally in Details:
(Someone also recently reposted in IU)

http://www.usmagazine.com/celebrity...michael-jackson-didnt-want-to-be-black-200927

jackson-jones-b.jpg
Michael Jackson 1994 Grammy awards with Quincy Jones.
Credit: Chris Walter/WireImage.com

Quincy Jones: Michael Jackson "Didn't Want to Be Black"


In a new interview with Details, Quincy Jones -- who helped launched Michael Jackson's career -- opens up about the sad and strange evolution in the late singer's appearance over the years.
Jones - who first worked with Jackson on 1979's Off the Wall - tells Details they'd talk "all the time" about how Jackson was changing.
"But he'd come up with, 'Man, I promise you I have this disease,' and so forth, and 'I have a blister on my lungs,' and all that kind of b.s.," he says. "It's hard, because Michael's a Virgo, man -- he's very set in his ways. You can't talk him out of it. Chemical peels and all that stuff."
See how Michael Jackson's face has changed over the years
"I've been around junkies and stuff all my life. I've heard every excuse," he says. "It's like smokers -- 'I only smoke when I drink' and all that stuff. But it's bulls**t. You're justifying something that's destructive to your existence. It's crazy."
Revisit Michael Jackson's most unforgettable moments
Jones says Jackson's obsession with his appearances got to be "ridiculous."
"Chemical peels and all of it. And I don't understand it," he says. "But he obviously didn't want to be black." Asked if that is the reason Jackson had undergone so much plastic surgery, Jones says, "Well, what do you think? You see his kids?"
See photos of Michael Jackson and his kids through the years
Jones isn't sure why Jackson had such a deep-seated issue with the way he looked. (In a 1993 interview with Oprah Winfrey, The King of Pop said he used to wash his face in the dark because he had pimples. "I wouldn't want to look in the mirror... and my father teased me," Jackson said. "He would tell me I was ugly.")
"I'm just a musician and a record producer. I'm not a psychiatrist," Jones says. "I don't understand all that stuff. We all got problems. But there's a great book out called Too Soon Old, Too Late Smart. Did you see that? That book says the statute of limitations has expired on all childhood traumas. Get your stuff together and get on with your life, man. Stop whinin' about what's wrong, because everybody's had a rough time, in one way or another."
Look back at Michael Jackson's life
So what does he think killed Jackson (who died June 25 at age 50 after suffering cardiac arrest)?
"I would think that the pressure of the concerts and the debt and everything else..." he says. "...If you sit there and just stay hung up on one negative thought, you will become that thought. I know that Lisa Marie Presley said that she always thought he was going to die like Elvis. You sit and think about that stuff, it'll happen to you. If you start thinking about darkness instead of light, or fear instead of love, you'll get in trouble. I really believe that."







 
Meh Quincey's a collosal knob who I doubt will apologise for his comments now the autopsy proves Michael was telling the truth about his lungs and vitligo all along. LaToya mentions in her book that Michael has had problems with his lungs since OTW, leading to a few periods of hospitalization because of breathing attacks, and Michael himself said in his book that he's had problems with his lungs. Screw Quincey.
 
sloride said:
Meh Quincey's a collosal knob who I doubt will apologise for his comments now the autopsy proves Michael was telling the truth about his lungs and vitligo all along. LaToya mentions in her book that Michael has had problems with his lungs since OTW, leading to a few periods of hospitalization because of breathing attacks, and Michael himself said in his book that he's had problems with his lungs. Screw Quincey.
Click to expand...


Couldn't agree more.
 
I cant understand why quincy is saying this BS,at the end of the day Michael knew his race and was proud of it.So whatever is said for now on (because its easy to now) means totally nothing.As ive learnt of been a mj fan for over 20 years dont believe it till you hear it from the person that matters!!!!!
 
daisy said:
sorry but this goes too far, I fell, will they really HAVE TO PROVE?

or Murray would have to prove that he didn't (I feel somehow it makes a difference).
Click to expand...

The prosecution has to prove everything , the defense does not have to prove anything , all they have to do is throw wild accusations and wild theories to raise doubt in the jurors minds .

MJ's case was the only case I heard of where a defence was required to prove their case and was asking everyone to look at the facts and the DETAILS of the case , while the prosecution was asking everyone to ignor the facts and the details and focus on MJ's words on Living with Michael Jackson.
 
It's really a trip how Quincy goes around telling the other recording artists to check their egos at the door all while he does the total opposite of that.

Someone should send him the sections of the autopsy report that will show him that MJ was not lying to him and had no reason to lie to him.

Also, the more that we hear about the various things that MJ endured, the more we should be amazed with him. He really overcame a lot of obstacles and many of them were very, very painful. He dealt with a lot of emotional pain and physical pain all while continuing to give the world the best of what he had to offer.

If anyone can teach people about not giving up on themselves and reaching for better things in life no matter what may come your way, Michael Jackson can, and he has. He taught by example.
:yes:
 
Last edited:
Soundmind said:
The prosecution has to prove everything , the defense does not have to prove anything , all they have to do is throw wild accusations and wild theories to raise doubt in the jurors minds .

MJ's case was the only case I heard of where a defence was required to prove their case and was asking everyone to look at the facts and the DETAILS of the case , while the prosecution was asking everyone to ignor the facts and the details and focus on MJ's words on Living with Michael Jackson.
Click to expand...

I know. That's from the legal point of view and procedures.

But you're also right about Michael's case - I think we are ALL making our comparisons in small things. Many of us, also, make statements basing on Michael's case.
 
The case against MJ that Sneddon put together was bogus and it was built on Evan's lie that started branching out in many different directions.

Thank God that MJ was able to live long enough to hear the words "Not Guilty." Thank God that MJ had a chance to go back to doing what he loved and had fun doing it before he took his last breath.

MJ started turning his life back around starting in 2002 beginning with fighting with Tommy Mottola. From there, he fought anyone that got in his way. He became very serious about taking back his life of hard work. It took him seven years to get his life back on track, but with perseverance he succeeded just in the nick of time.

If MJ had not gathered the strength to do what he did between 2002 and 2009, there would be nothing for the executors to build on right now. What is coming forth right now, is due to MJ not giving up on himself.

Gotta love him. He was a very strong and determined man.
 
Last edited:
AllForMJ said:
The case against MJ that Sneddon put together was bogus and it was built on Evan's lie that started branching out in many different directions.
Click to expand...

Yep, Evan pretty much said in the tape conversation he had with David Schwartz (the step father) that their were people lined up and ready & all he had to do was make a phone call and how it was gonna be bigger then anyone!
 
AllForMJ said:
The case against MJ that Sneddon put together was bogus and it was built on Evan's lie that started branching out in many different directions.

Thank God that MJ was able to live long enough to hear the words "Not Guilty." Thank God that MJ had a chance to go back to doing what he loved and had fun doing it before he took his last breath.
Click to expand...


yeah , I can only imagine MJ's face when he knew he sold 800.000 tickets in less than four hours with no promotion , with nothing , he only gave a press conference four days prior to that and BAM . He knew he was still LOVED AND APPRECIATED and people were willing to say THANK YOU MICHAEL .:)
 
bluetopez said:
Yep, Evan pretty much said in the tape conversation he had with David Schwartz (the step father) that their were people lined up and ready & all he had to do was make a phone call and how it was gonna be bigger then anyone!
Click to expand...
Yep, it was big, out of control, and it had to come to an end. Michael put a stop to it. He did one big final push to make it stop.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top