i think he's just about arrogant enough to think he could out smart the prosecutor. Seriously, this guy went to trial rather than say "yeah i f*cked up and i'm sorry". He must be a narcisist to actually think he did nothing wrong..he has sat there through all this evidence, he doesn't have a case at all, but still thinks he will be "vindicated". I mean really, you have to be a certain kind of person to sit through all of this evidence and think you didn't do anything wrong...i bet he really wants to testify....look at how he dug his own grave during the interview...and i doubt he will listen to his lawyers (who don't seem to have done a very good job but just look at the material they have to work with). I am sure his lawyers will do everything in their power to keep him off the stand, for his own good he should listen to them, but i hope he doesn't because i'd love to see walgren rip him apart....
what i find interesting (because nobody but murray knows what really happened and i'm still curious as to how murray made such a huge mistake in giving michael so much propofol).....is that white said that the tab that was missing/torn/cut from the iv tube was there to allow air flow, which speeds up the drip...murray had said in the police interview that after the initial injection of propofol he would release more slowly throw the iv, (although he denied doing that on the night mj died.)...perhaps when he left the room the iv was releasing propofol faster than he expected because of the damaged tab allowing air in. That could also be why, if he stashed the tube/iv in his pocket it didn't leak all over him, it was probably empty because it had all been pumped into michael.. surprised that i haven't seen anyone else talk about this....it kind of jumped out at me and thought you guys would be on to it. Maybe i got it all wrong but to me the guy said the tab, when working, was to let air in which speeds up the flow and if that was the one that was used on michael, it might have been what killed him.
It's my belief that the defense put their hopes in Dr. White being able sneak in a lot of Murray's explanations and fairytales for the record yesterday under cross examination. Thankfully, Walgren and Judge Pastor shut that mess down early. White was really starting to get on a roll when the judge put a stop to it. A more lax judge may have simply sustained Walgren's objections but Pastor got the jury out of the room and let the defense have it. He let them know it was not going to be tolerated without penalty. From that point on, I believe it was a game changer for Murray and the defense.
The thing with defendants making a decision to testify (with or without attorney approval) tends to be this: If the State hasn't proven its case or the case is weak, it's easier for the defendant to remain silent. His team can always relay any holes to the jury in closing argument. They can say the State didn't prove its case and therefore they have to render a verdict of not guilty. HOWEVER, when the State does a great job of presenting its case and meets the criteria of the charges (burden of proof) and jury instructions are written in a way that would allow a conviction despite any holes, missing evidence or whatnot (such as cases where there is no body but there's enuf evidence to conclude a person had died via homicide) the defense/defendant MAY take the opinion of well, the odds of being found guilty are very high...what do I have to lose? Taking the stand is a last resort move in an effort to TRY and save themselves. They can either go down silently or go down fighting. (Said more here but thought about it so I'll leave it at that)
Translation: Murray could very well still take the stand. It will be the only way he can tell that story he so desperately wanted White to release on his behalf. One thing is for certain, if he gets on the stand, considering his desperation, lies and arrogance, we will need to prepare ourselves for the mother of all BS during direct questioning.
The fingers prints and so on are stuff you say in your closing. It's not something you say to any witness.
On the animal study, White had a point, but he made a big error early in the trial that kind of kill his credibility in this area. He willingly accepted Fran's beagle study along with his colleague's study in rats without questioning if the same holds true in humans. He got on Shaffer for doing a human study, but when the DA ask if that study was the one that changed his mind, he tried to slide it.
So, why is the animal's study fine for disproving oral propfol theory accepted without a fuss, but he readily rejects animals study about propofol and pee? See the double standard?
Completely agree. I think the Prosecution has decided that certain information is already on the record, possibly unchallenged and that's good enough. If something is up for debate, then it will be up to the jury to decide which expert they find more credible. The jury is prolly showing stress with all the scientific back and forth and the trial going longer now than expected. He's probably erring on the side of caution of not annoying them. If you notice, each time the D.A. focuses on a particular point it seems the defense starts jumping thru hoops to find an expert or some bs test to come in and ATTEMPT to debunk it...creating additional bs. This case will never end if it continues to go on this way. Right now, we have another witness coming on becuz Walgren made an issue of White and the models...or rather White tried to distance himself from the models since they weren't created by him (though he relied on them to form his opinon). The fingerprints, blood in the stomach, flumazenil...those things have already been brought out in the trial and can be tied up nice and tidy in closing. If Walgren makes too much of an issue of them now with White, we may have the defense run out and perform some new tests that will have this trial running til Christmas. If they haven't challenged what's already on the record by now, then let sleeping dogs lie. Sometimes it becomes about strategy over repetition. How many times do we have it on record that what Murray did was wrong? Many many times. If the jury doesn't get it by now, they never will.
Actually, the DA did point out a big problem with this theory without challenging the science. The DA asked White when and how Michael had the time to take Lopz when Murray only left the room once and that was after her gave the propofol. White then said that Murray told him that Michael was walking around in the early hours and went between rooms and could had taken drugs then.
Problem, Murray didn't say that in his police interview. He clearly said he stood by Michael's side all night. Why did he suddenly remember that Michael was up and around only when talking to White, after he was charge most likely, and not the polices who just wanted to know what the heck happened. So, his statement can easily be seen as self-serving BS, especially when you consider the other lies in his interview with polices. You also have to get over the fact that White is saying that Michael walked around with an IV on wheels between rooms. If Michael wanted to sleep so badly, why was he walking around and why was Murray allowing it since he could had dislodge his IV? I also want to point out that I think AA and the ER doctor said the condom catheter was hanging and not strap to Michael like White said.
elusive, I know you're concern about the case like the rest of us, but it seems that in some of your posts you assume that the people in the jury are morons or just really slow and will assume things are true without thinking further.
And not once in Murray's interview does he mention having to tell Michael that he needed to stop walking around and to get in bed. The only movement he talks about is HAVING Michael stand up (by the bed) so he could empty the cathether bag and for Michael to relieve himself right there once more at 7:30am. He mentions Michael moving his legs and squirming in a bed a little bit in frustration at not being able to fall asleep but that's the ONLY movement Murray attributes to Michael. Per his inteview, Michael is in that bed the rest of the time trying to go to sleep, meditating and occasionally talking to him. That's it.
There are one or two criticisms I have about this case, no fault of Walgrens, but I won't talk about them until closing arguments are done. I'm certain we will hear about them in the defense's closing but it is what it is. The Prosecution has gotten practically everything they need on the record for the jurors to hang their hat on for a guilty verdict of IVM, imo. And I'm confident they will tie up any loose ends with Shafer during rebuttal.
Btw...I, too, thought it was interesting, how White pulled the tubing out of his pocket with no problem. HA!
And yes, Murray could have drained the tubing if it wasn't empty already (matches the empty bottle, no?). He had quite a time period up there by himself with Michael's body before he started calling people or running downstairs. We all wondered WTH was he doing up there all that time. It can't possibly take 15-20 minutes to assess a patient, and give brief/faulty CPR, shoot flumazenil and move legs up and down uselessly. He could have drained the tubing if it still had liquid in it and put it back into the wrapping it came out of (to prevent stray drips or wetness)...and THEN put it into his pocket. Speculation, of course, but more plausible than Michael self-administering, dying instantly but STILL in the same position Murray left him in. -_-
