Murray Trial - 30 September - Day 4 - Discussion

[Autumn II]

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.

Not really getting the logic here, because I think NOBODY is "risking" basing anything on "what he said" to prove negligence! And certainly not the prosecution. Thus far, negligence has been strongly indicated by:

1. obvious delay in calling 911.

2. withholding information from EMTs and ER doctor about medications given.

3. Time of death strongly indicated to be MUCH earlier than Murray indicated (corroborated by EMTs, Amir, and Security)

4. Strong suggestion of guilty conscience, i.e. instructing Alavarez to put medications in a bag. (confirmed by only the one bag seen on the IV pole by EMTs, and in other ways.)

5. What has been strongly indicated by witness statements as ineffective CPR.

and more. So far, I think major points for prosecution, and little or none for defense.

 

[Ramona122003]

I love u more


the importance of Murray's LIES comes from the believe 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.




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 !!!

.

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 ?

I think there has been a slight misinterpretation. I know you don't believe Murray. What I was saying was that Murray can't defend his 25mg story because he never wrote down the information. If the DA try to claim Murray only gave so-so, the DA can come back and say that Murray can't be trusted on his word based on all the lies he had told. How can a man who can seem to remember if he was in the room or not when Michael's heart stopped beating or couldn't call 911 because the room supposedly had bad reception, but the bodyguard got through, be trusted to remember exactly what he gave. He even changed the time he supposedly found Michael by I think 45 minutes. Can the jury honestly believe such a man will remember the exact amount and time he gave drugs?

Also Sound, in the opening statement the DA clearly said that Murray 'allegedly' told them this happened at such and such time, showing they clearly didn't believe him. By the way they are poky holes in his first timeline, how can the defense say that this didn't happened when Murray told the police the timeline on tape. He either lied then or he's lying now. In a case where it is more of Murray's word against science, you can see where this is heading.

 

[Ashtanga]

I have asked myself tirelessly during these days: Murray is really a doctor? :blink: What he did is surreal. :bugeyed

 

[Popescu]

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.

Wait, what? So there was a propfol IV bag! I remember debating this quite some time ago and my gut instinct told me he did in fact use a drip after induction. Can't wait to hear expert's view!

Also, I happen to agree with not playing devil's advocate. Both defense and prosecution strike me as... how should I put it as not to offend very much the prosecution, negligent (the woman from pros almost forgot to ask the propofol question when she was interrogating the 1st EMT). So, although I wouldn't use the word "dumb", I sure as h*ell wouldn't give the defense leads.

In all fairness, there is much futility to this trial. Four years in jail is nothing. And Propofol should not be given outside a hospital, thus showing wreckless conduct which lead to the death of a man. End.

 

[ivy]

Wait, what? So there was a propfol IV bag! I remember debating this quite some time ago and my gut instinct told me he did in fact use a drip after induction. Can't wait to hear expert's view!

more like a IV bag that had a propofol bottle inside. see below

 

[OnirMJ]

I have few questions.. Did they really found propofol in Michael's stomach and if they did how much?

 

[Popescu]

ivy, thank you so much!
I also found someone who is on the same page with me, but much more knowledgeable http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2011/01/dr-conrad-murray-prelim-quick-links.html

 

[OnirMJ]

Is that propofol bottle 100 mg or 1000 mg?

 

[smoothlugar]

^^ 0,13 mg

 

[Popescu]

Is that propofol bottle 100 mg or 1000 mg?

100cc or ml, see my link above.

 

[OnirMJ]

^^ 0,13 mg

I don't understand. Are you saying that one bottle has 0,13 mg of propofol and Murray gave him 25 or more mg??

 

[OnirMJ]

100cc or ml, see my link above.

Ok, now I understand. I watched opening statement from prosecution again. Big bottle is 100 mL = 1000 mg of propofol. and little bottle is 20 mL = 200 mg of propofol. So my opinion is that if Conrad Murray had planned to administer only 25 mg he would use that little bottle.

 

[indranee]

Umm... maybe it's a good idea to password-protect this subforum?

 

[Milka]

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 .

What? We should base it on what *you* believe? Strong statement ...

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 !!!

Do you work in the medical field?

 

[Autumn II]

more like a IV bag that had a propofol bottle inside. see below

Right. Bag with slit in it, propofol bottle inside. Which brings up the question, was there NO I.V. bag with saline and a line running into Michael, at all? That is critical for both keeping blood-pressure at a safe level, and for quick delivery of rescue meds.

 

[Popescu]

Right. Bag with slit in it, propofol bottle inside. Which brings up the question, was there NO I.V. bag with saline and a line running into Michael, at all? That is critical for both keeping blood-pressure at a safe level, and for quick delivery of rescue meds.

Please read this site when you have the time http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2011/02/dr-conrad-murrays-death-drip-explained.html
It gives a very detailed and thorough explanation on what could have happened. Also, if I'm not mistaken there was an IV hung up when the EMT arrived (I might be confusing this with the bodyguard's testimony though). That also would explain the y connector.

(...) he piggybacked the whole "arts and crafts" project into the Y site nearest MJ's left leg (saphenous vein, below the knee) insertion site, which is why the Y-site had propofol (and lidocaine, from his syringe doses) in it, and the tubing upstream to the NS IV bag, did not. That there was LIDOCAINE in the Y site lends support to the possibility that it was not a drip ALONE that produced the respiratory arrest. He may, indeed, have bolused him from a syringe, on top of the drip, if he was not adding lidocaine to the 100cc vials. OR he could have been injecting some lidocaine into each bottle before spiking it.

 

[Popescu]

Ok, now I understand. I watched opening statement from prosecution again. Big bottle is 100 mL = 1000 mg of propofol. and little bottle is 20 mL = 200 mg of propofol. So my opinion is that if Conrad Murray had planned to administer only 25 mg he would use that little bottle.

Again, from the site I keep mentioning (sorry, I'm browsing and absorbing information in amazement of the degree of clarity of the explanations there - re the statements Soundmind made, this goes to show how opinions can be completely different. I happen to agree with this one, without being a medical professional. It makes more sense to me and it it supported by professional knowledge, unlike mine).

Let's do a bit of math: that is 15,500cc of propofol in about 8 weeks or so. That is more than 15 liters of propofol. Nearly 4 GALLONS of propofol. A mere 12 unopened vials (unknown sizes) were found in the mansion, and there were 2 weeks left in CM's ordering cycle of 4 weeks. So, is that a lot of propofol? Enough to drop an elephant, several times over.

Let's look at a comparison, to understand just HOW much propofol CM was ordering for ONE patient. Our small hospital does about 35 cases a week in the O.R. using varying amounts of propofol per patient. We use less than a liter (1000cc) a week for ALL 35 patients combined.

Let me also say that it is highly unlikely that CM was ordering all of these vials just to line them up on the shelves of the walk-in closet. He ORDERED that much because he was USING that much, plain and simple. The particular sizes of vials he chose to order is HIGHLY significant, also, and relevant to the Death Drip technique. Knowing that propofol must be discarded after 6 hours to prevent blood infections in patients, once a vial is opened, it has to be used or discarded. So if he planned to give small amounts, CM would have ordered all small vials (the 20cc size), to minimize wastage.

Also notice the amount of 100cc vials ordered: 40 per order beginning April 28th. Simple math says that CM's administration to MJ was averaging about 1 to 2 100cc vials/ bottles every night. (Plus a boatload of other meds.) This is NOT the usage pattern of a patient who is weaning off of anything. CM's final order June 10th doubled the small vials from 25 to 50 ordered.

http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2011/01/dr-murrays-death-drip-explained-part-2.html

 

[Soundmind]

Let me also say that it is highly unlikely that CM was ordering all of these vials just to line them up on the shelves of the walk-in closet. He ORDERED that much because he was USING that much, plain and simple.

this is insane , you know that don't you? it's INSANE TO EVEN ASSUME MJ RECEIEVED THAT MUCH PROPOFOL AND SURVIVED INSANE. Makes me question everything else this medical "professional" said.

 

[Autumn II]

this is insane , you know that don't you? it's INSANE TO EVEN ASSUME MJ RECEIEVED THAT MUCH PROPOFOL AND SURVIVED INSANE. Makes me question everything else this medical "professional" said.

Murray himself said he'd been "treating him for two months." Uhm, he DIDN'T survive. The "insane" part, I certainly do agree with.

 

[Ashtanga]

Murray himself said he'd been "treating him for two months." Uhm, he DIDN'T survive. The "insane" part, I certainly do agree with.

Murray was so much time with Michael, since 2006... He could have killed Michael in the past, but it did not. How could this be possible after we see all this negligence? :blink: Murray was running a risk all the time.

That is correct, he get this material (evidence) without gloves?

 

[Popescu]

this is insane , you know that don't you? it's INSANE TO EVEN ASSUME MJ RECEIEVED THAT MUCH PROPOFOL AND SURVIVED INSANE. Makes me question everything else this medical "professional" said.

You know what opinions are like. We all have one. You have one. I have one. We simply must agree to disagree.
Because what I don't understand is why your assumptions must be right and others aren't.

And yes, Autumn makes a great point. The patient did NOT survive.

 

[Autumn II]

Please read this site when you have the time http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2011/02/dr-conrad-murrays-death-drip-explained.html
It gives a very detailed and thorough explanation on what could have happened. Also, if I'm not mistaken there was an IV hung up when the EMT arrived (I might be confusing this with the bodyguard's testimony though). That also would explain the y connector.

That is the part that wasn't clear to me from testimony. It appeared that EMTs noted an I.V. bag hanging from the pole (just the one). What was NOT clear, was if it had saline still in it, or was it empty. Not sure that question was asked? It makes a DIFFERENCE, not just that the bag was there. When Michael crashed, it would make a difference in survival if he was having his blood-pressure supported with fluids. So, it's important if the bag was empty, or partially full, or whatever. (the "Y" connector? . . haven't gotten to that one yet. Just, was there saline being administered? and if not, there SHOULD have been.)

My POINT is, administration of I.V. fluids is part of a rescue attempt when there has been cardiac arrest. Clearly, if the bag had a SLIT in it, no fluids were being administered from that. But if full or partially full of saline, with an open line, that's another thing.

 

[Popescu]

They found a saline bag, I'm pretty sure - from the report of the scene. I'll look it up.

 

[Popescu]

There you go. God I hate that autopsy report.

 

[Soundmind]

What? We should base it on what *you* believe? Strong statement ...

I meant the prosecution , I was expressing my opinion on what I believe the approach they chose in this case based on their opening statement, I'm free to express my opinion right?

Do you work in the medical field?

Nope, still I educated myself on propofol and unlike some of the medical "professionals" we see on tv Pinsky, Gupta...etc) and read about on the internet (great example would be the nurse commenting on this case which other member quoted )I did not embaress myself and claim mj was receiving thousands of mgs of propofol daily and he actually survived that long!!!! Do you really have to be a medical expert to know that was impossible ? being a medical professional makes it even worse .

You are not paying attention to the toxicology report , read the toxicology report . It's not my problem that you are not paying attention to the results of the toxicology report NOT MY PROBLEM , you are free to believe he gave him 1000mg of propofol but don't attack me when I say that's IMPOSSIBLE BASED ON THE TOXICOLOGY REPORT . I'm telling you this is not only an opinion this is a fact , stop harresing me. if you don't agree , wait for the experts' testimonies you'll hear it this week probably in the courtroom that's how much I'm sure of what I'm saying I'M NOT SPECULATING on this issue . Clear ? Stop telling me I think I know too much this issue is not about me it's about the undisputaed facts of the case that you r ignoring.

You know what opinions are like. We all have one. You have one. I have one. We simply must agree to disagree.
Because what I don't understand is why your assumptions must be right and others aren't.

And yes, Autumn makes a great point. The patient did NOT survive.

fair enough , but when your opinion contradict medical FACTS I have the right to point that out , right?

Urine concentration was 0.15ug/ml , that's the ONLY way to determine how much propofol was given in the last hours before death and that concentration does not reflect at all amounts even close to1000mg of propofol . It's much less ,less than 100mg infact GOT IT? did the nurse mention that in her assesment ? NO . Did she ever even talk about the urine concentration? No , don't bother and search for it I already read her comments . Do you need an expert to tell us that taking one shot of demerol justified medically every 6 days does not make you an addict? NO we know that already thanks to the internet , the same applies to propofol thanks to the MANY abstracts and studies on propofol we know urine is used to measure the amount of propofol someone received prior to death and 0.15ug/ml consistent with relatively very small dose !

 

[Popescu]

(the "Y" connector? . . haven't gotten to that one yet. Just, was there saline being administered? and if not, there SHOULD have been.)

The Y connector is a small plastic device shaped like a Y (doh, lol) which makes it possible to connect two IV bags to one insertion point. It has a needle goes into the vein and the other two sides can receive the longer tubes from the IV's. It's basically a splitter.

 

[Milka]

You are not paying attention to the toxicology report , read the toxicology report . It's not my problem that you are not paying attention to the results of the toxicology report NOT MY PROBLEM , you are free to believe he gave him 1000mg of propofol but don't attack me when I say that's IMPOSSIBLE BASED ON THE TOXICOLOGY REPORT . I'm telling you this is not only an opinion this is a fact , stop harresing me.

What? Now I'm harassing you? Funny. You are stating your opinion as fact. Not for the first time.

 

[Soundmind]

there were two saline bags hung on an IV stand , one that was empty , inside it was the 1000mg vial and it was not attached to any tubing that's the one Murray asked Alvares to hide . The other one was left,was not empty (Fleak's testimony) attached to long tubing , connected to a port in a catheter in MJ's leg , that same catheter had a second port attached to a 13cm tubing used to inject meds.


The SECOND saline bag, the long tubing did not have any traces of drugs. The short 13cm tubing had traces of propofol lidocaine and flomazenil. two syringes with traces of BOTH LIDOCAINE AND PROPOFOL means what? bolus injections

 

[Popescu]

Soundmind:

It is my personal opinion that Conrad Murray used IV free dripping (see site that I keep mentioning) in all the nights he spent at Michael's bedside. It's my personal opinion that he did this the way anesthesiologists do - bolus injection for induction, followed by regulated drips (this was not the case here).
It is my personal opinion that he gave a standard bolus injection (consistent to the abdominal surgery blood levels), that he hung the drip afterwards and went on to do his private business, instead of tending to his patient who was dying.

Also, I always enjoy a good debate although I really hate the subject. And I always cite my sources - no one is going to believe anyone on faith, the matter is too important.

For example, why should I believe this: "Urine concentration (...) that's the ONLY way to determine how much propofol was given in the last hours before death". Because you said so? I researched the Internet for one hour and didn't find a single evidence of this statement. And believe me, I'm good at searching the Internet. So no, I don't think so. If you want to be credible, please back up your statements.

 

[ivy]

Right. Bag with slit in it, propofol bottle inside. Which brings up the question, was there NO I.V. bag with saline and a line running into Michael, at all? That is critical for both keeping blood-pressure at a safe level, and for quick delivery of rescue meds.

There was a saline bag which was actually left on the IV stand. Paramedics have all testified to seeing an IV stand and saline bag

My understanding is this IV stand had 2 bag on left side an IV bag with propofol bottle in it and on the right side a saline bag. CM only told Alvarez to take the bad with the bottle in it and left the saline bag.

That is correct, he get this material (evidence) without gloves?

It's been already processed and fingerprinted.