Murray Trial - 30 September - Day 4 - Discussion

[TheChosenOne]

Yes, but Walgren is not saying that Murray DID give Michael that amount. He is just saying that with the amount found that that was what was possible.

And how do we know that the prosecution does not plan to present a theory once when we get to the part with the autopsy? Perhaps there is someone on the witness list who will give an alternative explanation based on the scientific findings.

Why are we second guessing the prosecution here? They are professionals and have shown themselves to be professional (especially in comparison to the defense team), so let the professionals do their job!

ETA: this is response to Soundmind's post above about the prosecution. Should have quoted it. Sorry.

 

[Milka]

I did not talk to anyone lol

Well, then I think that you think that you know too much.

 

[MIST]

Murray dropped the phone at 11.55.
He must have been in the room with Michael then, if he was watching Michael dying how did Michael get the injection that killed him?
Didn´t they say it took only a few minutes to die from it?
Maybe that girlfriend said she heard someone cough but is she telling the truth or not.Maybe she just imagined she heard something.

I think Michael died earlier and Murray realised Michael was dead and that´s why he got such a panic.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

The urine on the side/cathater shows murray gave more than he claimed ontop of all the benzos. if murray gave the small amount he claimed mj would have been back awake before he left the room which would have been around 10.50 .he was making calls before then if i believe correct

 

[Bonnie Blue]

the prosecutors do have a very strong case but as I said before they r taking huge risk when they don't present a theory of their own that explains everything and counter Murray's version of what took place in the last months of MJ's life.

when White take the stand and testifies 50 mg did not need monitoring , How walgren will respond?

When Dr.Rogers take the stand and testifies that the effect of 25mg of propofol vanish within five minutes ten minutes OK half an hour and the doctor could leave after that , how Walgren will address these facts?

But they're not facts (the claim murray only gave mj a 25mg doseage), they are just part of murray's statement to the detectives which i'm sure the prosecution can pick any number of holes in. The main one being if murray only gave 25 mg of propofol to mj, how come he died with x mg in him which then leads into the difficulties of self-administration. But murray also has to explain why the paramedic found 3 empty lidocaine bottles on floor on the 25th (suggests more doctor-administered propofol), and why mj was hooked up with a condom cathatar with a jug of urine in the room (suggests mj was meant to be 'under' that night/morning).

I just don't see how the propofol is meant to work as a sleep aid if it wasn't going to be used in large quantities through a continuous drip via iv. AA's testimony of seeing an iv bag with millky substance in it will prob be key for the prosecution theory of what happened that morning. I really don't see what murray was pretending to achieve with putting mj to sleep for 10mins (or whatever) with 25 mg of propofol - mj would be out very quickly but then would come to reasonably quickly and they would be back at square 1 - an awake mj getting irritated at not getting any rest.

 

[smoothlugar]

Have to say that I was upset by the discrepancy between AA and the paramedics regarding where Michael was found/placed.
AA seemed so sure of his details. But then the EMTs seemed sure also.
It seems to me, that if I were an EMT having to testify about such an event, the first thing I would have done would have been to review the run sheet. Sure 2 years have gone by but only one Michael Jackson. Surely had they read their own record of what happened, at a minimum they would have remembered Michael being on the floor as they wrote down. So why now is it different? I really don't understand this at all. Concerns me that many little inconsistencies will be used by the def. to try and create doubt and since that is all they can do as a defense they will attack like a pit bull...

Sorry, I missed the bolded part.

At the preliminary audience Senneff first said that when he entered into the room he saw Murray moving the body. Asked if he was being helped by a bodyguard he said he did not remember. He was then reminded that he had said that to the police and that it was recorded and then said it was then like that and that there was a lot of confusion.

Now at the trial he has mentioned there was a bodyguard helping Murray to move Michael to the floor.

AA also in the preliminary said they had put him on the floor on the far side of the bed and that when paramedics came he was removed to the feet of the bed for more space. (summaries from transcripts teammichael)

This explains Faheen testimony (before paramedics arrive): he sees only the feet. And explains paramedics testimony (also with some differencies in details as well: half body on bed, full body -the second paramedic).

 

[Soundmind]

Murray dropped the phone at 11.55.
He must have been in the room with Michael then, if he was watching Michael dying how did Michael get the injection that killed him?

MJ did not get anything ,did not inject anything.

Didn´t they say it took only a few minutes to die from it?

one of the experts who took the stand agreed with the defence that MJ's heart stopped within one minute of the propofol dose , that's why Blount's testimony yesterday was so important because the time window to save MJ was really small but he did manage to do the things -that if Murray had done could have very likely saved MJ's life- within one minute which refutes Chernoff claims that nothing could have saved MJ not the 911 call, not disclosing what medication he gave .....etc .

Maybe that girlfriend said she heard someone cough but is she telling the truth or not.Maybe she just imagined she heard something.

I think Michael died earlier and Murray realised Michael was dead and that´s why he got such a panic.

perimorten abraisons caused by the beeds = moved at the time of death , how do you explain that?

 

[Soundmind]

The urine on the side/cathater shows murray gave more than he claimed ontop of all the benzos. if murray gave the small amount he claimed mj would have been back awake before he left the room which would have been around 10.50 .he was making calls before then if i believe correct

the calls were after between 11:27 and 12:03

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Calls were made after 10.30 one of those was the 2 calls on 2 phones at the exact same time the continuas calls started around 11.15. So from the time murray gave the dose at 10.40 he was on the phone pretty much non stop before during and after that.

i have the full call list on my comp.if anyone wants to post

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Murrays claims are just that.what evidence does he have to support them. he doesnt its his words.the pros have physical evidence to support their claims sorry but playing devils advocate is very annoying sometimes

 

[Erikmjfan]

When U discuss the doses that murray says he gave its important we dont start treating them as absolute facts, remember its only his words and its not like he is one of the most credibole guys out there given all his lies that has been revealed in court.

 

[Autumn II]

Yes, but Walgren is not saying that Murray DID give Michael that amount. He is just saying that with the amount found that that was what was possible.

And how do we know that the prosecution does not plan to present a theory once when we get to the part with the autopsy? Perhaps there is someone on the witness list who will give an alternative explanation based on the scientific findings.

Why are we second guessing the prosecution here? They are professionals and have shown themselves to be professional (especially in comparison to the defense team), so let the professionals do their job!

ETA: this is response to Soundmind's post above about the prosecution. Should have quoted it. Sorry.

Absolutely. The quantity of propofol given has NOT been confirmed, at all. (and we have not heard medical testimony yet, either.) Obviously, as per common sense, ANY amount of propofol given, anywhere, must be monitored closely. It's never been, "with this amount you don't have to worry, but with that amount, you must keep and eye on the CHEAPEST pulse-oxymeter on the market."

The prosecution has to prove that extreme negligence happened, NOT construct a step-by-step scenario of what, exactly, transpired that day. Murray knows, but he's not saying!

And Soundmind? You are giving specifics as to medications, amounts, time Murray spent on the phone, and so on, that have NOT been presented in court. The trial has just begun! The testimony already given is more than sufficient for discussion, based on those facts and observations? My impression based on those four days of testimony already, is that the prosecution has already produced STRONG witnesses, and compelling evidence for Murray's extreme negligence. EMT testimony, Personal Assistant testimony, Security testimony, and ER doctor's testimony, ALL corroborate that Michael was clinically dead and beyond saving, by the time 911 was called. And THAT delay in calling, is gross negligence. IMHO.

 

[Bonnie Blue]

As everybody else is saying, we only have murray's word that he gave a 25mg dose at 10.40. this was an interview made on 27th? june. He couldn't avoid the propofol issue as he knew he had left the propofol bottles in the room, i think he was surprised that the police hadn't found them. So he admitted to a small dose that could not kill. This statement was made before the autopsy results showing the large amounts of propofol that were found. As propofol is so quick acting and disappears so quickly from the body, Murray was maybe hoping that the larger amounts he had been giving mj that night (i think by iv) would have disappeared, meaning that murray didn't have a clue when mj stopped breathing and died and therefore stopped processing the propofol. He was too busy on the phone to do the coninuous monitoring and prob only realised something was wrong during his last phone call at 11.55ish.

 

[loveforever]

IMO so far Alberto Alvarez's testimony is the most accurate one because of the physical evidences, the 911 record, the paramedics work sheet, the blue bag...hiding the drug is before the 911 call, during the 911 call, when the operater asked them to move the patient on the floor, it seemed they did so during the call, and after the 911 call, the bodyguard started to do cpr, murry did mouth to mouth and told him this is the first time he did mouth to mouth...blah... until the paramedics arrived. there is no time to hide the drugs after 911. probably Alberto's testimony was more damage to Murray so his defense team tried to discredit him. I hope the prosecution will clear the doubts in the future.

 

[Autumn II]

I think that the MJJC coverage of the Murray trial is exemplary! I do wish, though, that in these daily discussions of what transpired in court, that we could stick to the facts of what actually DID transpire in court? That would add a lot of clarity and focus to the threads? And also, whatever Murray told police should not be considered to be FACT, as to timeline, amounts of medications given, and all the rest of it? He already has been revealed as a LIAR, i.e. telling EMTs that he gave no other medications than lorazepam (and that is just one instance of his lack of truthfulness revealed already in testimony). We will have extensive testimony by medical experts, and that will more more than enough material as to amounts of medication, medical apparatus, and so on?

 

[Bonnie Blue]

^^ Take your point autumn, i was just getting ahead of myself and was interested in the theories in the case and getting really puzzled as to what on earth the defence's position is going to be. Best to stick to the days' testimony.

 

[Autumn II]

Murrays claims are just that.what evidence does he have to support them. he doesnt its his words.the pros have physical evidence to support their claims sorry but playing devils advocate is very annoying sometimes

"Devil's advocate" types of posts are really not a good idea, are they? (I don't think "the devil" really SHOULD have an "advocate," anyway?)

Murray has made certain claims, when interviewed by police. As of now, they have not been substantiated. Either the defense witnesses can support those claims, or not? But, we're not THERE yet, so as of now, that's all they are. "Claims." Not facts.

 

[Naturelle]

I agree wih you Milka...lol you do have that same thought as you.

 

[Ramona122003]

I think that the MJJC coverage of the Murray trial is exemplary! I do wish, though, that in these daily discussions of what transpired in court, that we could stick to the facts of what actually DID transpire in court? That would add a lot of clarity and focus to the threads? And also, whatever Murray told police should not be considered to be FACT, as to timeline, amounts of medications given, and all the rest of it? He already has been revealed as a LIAR, i.e. telling EMTs that he gave no other medications than lorazepam (and that is just one instance of his lack of truthfulness revealed already in testimony). We will have extensive testimony by medical experts, and that will more more than enough material as to amounts of medication, medical apparatus, and so on?

You actually bring up a good point. Namely, the 25mg came from Murray. Because Murray never kept any charts of how much of any drug he was given, something that the DA got all over him about, none of what he said can be confirm or deny. So, we only have Murray's word, which means crap at this point.

His defense can give any excuse they want for why Murray didn't tell the MTs and the hospital staff about all the drugs he gave, but the fact is this shows that he is a lair or at the very least someone who tells half truths. The same when he gave his first interview, he never once mentioned anything about those phone calls. It wasn't until the polices showed him his phone records that he corrected his timeline. He also flip flopped about Michael being in good shape and now he's trying to say Michael was an out of control addict. Murray had told so many lies why would anyone on that jury take him at his word. He can't even produce charts to back up what he's saying.

The only way that 25mg story will fly if the jury believe Murray and the DA has given good reason why Murray shouldn't be trusted and I doubt the defense can somehow correct this.

 

[Soundmind]

I get what you r saying guys, just when the experts take the stand the pro and def experts agree that MJ received between 150 and 200 mg that day in total you know where you read that first , some of you act like the already published toxicology report is not accurate and we will hear different numbers and concentrations !!

 

[Ramona122003]

I get what you r saying guys, just when the experts take the stand the pro and def experts agree that MJ received between 150 and 200 mg that day in total you know where you read that first , some of you act like the already published toxicology report is not accurate and we will hear different numbers and concentrations !!

Sound, we love you and we respect everything you have done to explain all these complicated things.

I think all we're saying is that you think Murray's word carries some weight because he worded everything to cover his butt. We know the defense doesn't have to prove anything and just need to create doubt, but the problem is saying Murray only gave 25mg and Michael had to have given the rest himself stands firmly on Murray's words alone. There is no scientific or physical for Murray to back up his word. All the DA has to do to cut the legs off this number is to point out that Murray never even took charts of what he gave or what time he gave it like any responsible doctor would do, adding to his negligence.

Without any charts, how does Murray knows exactly what time or the amount he gave Michael drugs? He could had given too much at one time and simply thought he pushed in so-so amount and he can't say anything to defend himself because he didn't even bother to write it down.

 

[ivy]

I can't quite recall, but wasn't there supposed to be omission of sensitive evidence/material from the televised coverage? Surely if there were going to be distressing photos shown further in the trial that those would be omitted from view except for inside the courtroom. Although, then again, if that were the case the first photograph that caused us all so much pain wouldn't have been shown either. Does anyone know?

Only thing the judge said was that he wouldn't show the jurors. We assumed that he wouldn't show "autopsy pictures" either on live stream. But now I'm assuming that they will be shown as the photos aren't really autopsy photos. Judge allowed 2 pictures - one of which has already been shown. The other one is a pre-autopsy picture of MJ naked with his genitals covered.

For witnesses I think it´s common that they tell different stories even if they are there at the same time.
You see different things and remember different things.
Sometimes your memory isn´t right and you can get the details wrong.

Blount said when they arrived MJ was completely on the bed and was repeatedly asked and insisted he was still on the bed. Faheem said before the paramedics arrived MJ was already on the floor and he could only see his feet . sneff said they were moving him and blount he was still on the bed. :wacko:

I have to admit, I'm worried now about the difference and contradictions between Seneff, AA, and Blount, regarding the people who took Michael of the bed, and when. If it casts a doubt on what AA told, it would be bad, I think. :/

There's a saying that goes if there are 100 witnesses you'll get hundred different statements. Everyone remembers something differently and it's all based on our attention and perception.

Michael being on the bed versus on the floor was all related to if the CPR is being done properly. With different testimonies (on the floor, on the bed, half on the bed - half on the floor) and Gourjian AHA guidelines of "as long as CPR done properly location doesn't matter" , CPR on bed became a weak argument.

But pay attention to this Alberto testified he was asked to remove the IV bag with propofol in it before calling the paramedics and both paramedics testified to only seeing saline bag on the IV stand. Therefore they have collaborated Alberto's story of the IV bag with propofol hidden before the paramedics arrived.

Actually, talking about myself, having to translate helps, I have to focus on something, a precise task. Doesnt let me think too much. It doesnt work 100%, but it helps.
I have to thank Ivy for bullying me into doing it.

I don't bully anyone

But I'll repeat the same thing I said after the preliminary hearing, the prosecution did not present any kind of theory on what took place or what they believe was taking place at the time , their strategy seems to focus on impeaching Murray's statement and if they repeat the same mistake during the trial they will be for a sad awakining when the defence present their case. Everything in that statement was said in order to defend Murray and Murray at the time had the upper hand and knew what happened thus every word he said was chosen carefully . You will understand what I'm trying to say when the defese present their case.

preliminary hearing is not about giving a theory. It's just about is there grounds for this trial? and the judge only need to come to the belief of "yes". How it happened, did he do it or not? is not the questions of preliminary hearing and I believe we'll see the theory of what happened this time.

and they could even use an inductive reasoning such as if they can focus on and prove that MJ couldn't have done it himself, they can simply turn to the jurors and say if it wasn't Michael it had to be Murray.

I do wonder how the defence plan to defndd murray recording mj without putting murray on the stand to explain why he did it. how do u cross a tape recording? is it a play by the pros to get murray to take the stand otherwise how else does murray get his reason fir doing it out there

for now it seems like they would depend on the medical testimony and reasonable doubt.

I did not talk to anyone lol you only need to read Murray's statement and watch Chernoff and Flanagan interviews to understand everything. Beside we have the autopsy report and the toxicology result if you read them correctly you would reach the same conclusions I reached on the time of death and manner of death. 1+ 1= 2 not 11 that's it and I'm telling you I'm not speculating I'm 100% sure Murray was with MJ when he died and saw him dying and he did not give him an IV drip and did not leave him and return after one hour like some here believe or two minutes like the defence claim .

so what do you thin happened? who gave what and why the death occurred? pm me if u want

and if people want we can start a theories thread.

 

[smoothlugar]

I think pros are doing well. As Walgren said in the opening statements there is a narrow passage between sedation and full anasthesia, there's need to be monitoring and appropriate monitoring and rescue equipments besides constant observing.

Walgren even remarked that the oxygen tank was empty. He also showed the pulsioximeter did not have visual or aural alarm so to be useful it needs constant watching.

Experts will make estimates on probable amounts given at the time of death according to the concentration levels detected... and will explain how Murray used the medical evidences collected as Walgren announced on the opening.

What still don't know is if they will bring the issue of the perimortem abrassions and if that could be of relevance or not.

But so far they are doing great work.

 

[smoothlugar]

There's a saying that goes if there are 100 witnesses you'll get hundred different statements. Everyone remembers something differently and it's all based on our attention and perception.

Michael being on the bed versus on the floor was all related to if the CPR is being done properly. With different testimonies (on the floor, on the bed, half on the bed - half on the floor) and Gourjian AHA guidelines of "as long as CPR done properly location doesn't matter" , CPR on bed became a weak argument.

But pay attention to this Alberto testified he was asked to remove the IV bag with propofol in it before calling the paramedics and both paramedics testified to only seeing saline bag on the IV stand. Therefore they have collaborated Alberto's story of the IV bag with propofol hidden before the paramedics arrived.
I don't bully anyone

:clap::clap::clap:

Maybe the contradiction about the moving issue is only apparent.
In the preliminary Alberto said they moved him to the ground to the far side of the bed and then when paramedics came he was moved to the feet of the bed. No contradiction among any of them (Faheem included).

Does anybody remember if now at the trial Alberto specify the area where he and Murray put Michael?

 

[ivy]

:clap::clap::clap:

Maybe the contradiction about the moving issue is only apparent.
In the preliminary Alberto said they moved him to the ground to the far side of the bed and then when paramedics came he was moved to the feet of the bed. No contradiction among any of them (Faheem included).

Does anybody remember if now at the trial Alberto specify the area where he and Murray put Michael?

side of the bed.

 

[bluetopez]

Originally Posted by SoundmindI did not talk to anyone lol you only need to read Murray's statement and watch Chernoff and Flanagan interviews to understand everything. Beside we have the autopsy report and the toxicology result if you read them correctly you would reach the same conclusions I reached on the time of death and manner of death. 1+ 1= 2 not 11 that's it and I'm telling you I'm not speculating I'm 100% sure Murray was with MJ when he died and saw him dying and he did not give him an IV drip and did not leave him and return after one hour like some here believe or two minutes like the defence claim .

Even Worse! O_O Interesting that Dr. Cooper did testify that Murray said he saw MJ go into Arrest (saw him dieing).

 

[Autumn II]

The prosecution is building their case, witness-by-witness. Extremely credible, thus far. Theory is being developed out of this (as is usual courtroom procedure), that will be presented to the jury as a narrative. (the defense of course will do the same, with a DIFFERENT narrative.) And remember, eye-witness testimonies can be almost expected to vary somewhat, especially in recollections of high-stress situations.

For witnesses speaking about technical matters, i.e. autopsy report, toxicology report, there will be "experts" who favor the prosecution, and those who favor the defense. That is TYPICAL for trials. (some people actually make a good living as "expert witnesses" either for prosecution or defense). Therefore, while the tox report is of value, we will see that it is not ABSOLUTE, as pro and con witnesses testify. I expect that testimony will be highly technical as to procedures and protocols, and the jury will have to sort through this, as will we, here.

 

[Soundmind]

Sound, we love you and we respect everything you have done to explain all these complicated things..

I love u more

I think all we're saying is that you think Murray's word carries some weight because he worded everything to cover his butt.

the importance of Murray's LIES comes from the belief that he had a reason behind everyword , in other words , it was planned and assessed. For example , why did he throw Adams under the bus? for a reason, why did he specifically say he gave only 50 mg daily? for a reason, why did he take responsibility for only 25mg that day ? for a reason . Why did he specifically mention 10:40 am ? for a reason . I'm not saying he was telling the truth, because he was not . I'm saying it's risky to base the case around Murray's statement and prove negligence based on what HE SAID rather on what I believe took place . I read his statement to understand HOW is he planning to defend himself not because he's trustful.
I'm against the belief that his own statement incriminates him, I'm with the belief that he had the upper hand of knowing what exactly happened and he said what he said in that statement to explain , downplay what he knew he did . Am I clear or not?

We know the defense doesn't have to prove anything and just need to create doubt, but the problem is saying Murray only gave 25mg and Michael had to have given the rest himself stands firmly on Murray's words alone. There is no scientific or physical for Murray to back up his word. All the DA has to do to cut the legs off this number is to point out that Murray never even took charts of what he gave or what time he gave it like any responsible doctor would do, adding to his negligence.

darling where have I ever said I believe Murray gave only 25mg ? Never ever . The concentration in MJ's urine consistent with amount between 150 to 200 mg and no one but Murray could have injected it . My problem is when fans and the media hurry to draw conclusions that contradict what the medical and physical evidence stated ,things based on what has been made public we know r going to be proven irrelevant and r not as important or damaging as many seem to suggest ,for example the 1000mg propofol vial !!!

Without any charts, how does Murray knows exactly what time or the amount he gave Michael drugs? He could had given too much at one time and simply thought he pushed in so-so amount and he can't say anything to defend himself because he didn't even bother to write it down

.

very good point .

I know I might appear to some as aggressive and trying to play the devil advocate which is not true . But how can you make your case if you don't anticipate what will be the defence respond ?

 

[TheChosenOne]

^^^ And my point is that at this stage it is not our case to make and we do not know that the prosecution will not make the case.

 

[Ashtanga]

Judge allowed 2 pictures - one of which has already been shown. The other one is a pre-autopsy picture of MJ naked with his genitals covered.

Really? Where does this information?