October 17 & 18 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

ivy

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16,074
Points
0
Location
USA
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

Trial of Michael Jackson's doctor postponed
By Martin Kasindorf, Special for USA TODAY

Defense Attorney J. Michael Flanagan will have more time to find the team's own expert opinions to support cross-examination of Steven Shafer, the next witness to be called by the prosecution. The manslaughter trial of Conrad Murray will resume on Wednesday.

Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor said he was putting off trial testimony for two reasons: giving Steven Shafer of New York, the witness, more time to handle family matters, and allowing defendant Conrad Murray's lawyers to obtain experts' response to a new toxicology test the coroner's office performed for the prosecution.

At a sometimes ill-tempered hearing with Murray and the jury absent Monday, defense lawyers Ed Chernoff and J. Michael Flanagan objected to prosecution plans to present the new test on Jackson's stomach contents when they resume questioning Shafer, an anesthesiologist.

Pastor gave the defense more time to find its own expert opinions to support cross-examination of Shafer. The judge scheduled another hearing for Tuesday afternoon to discuss the status of the defense's preparation.

Murray, 58, is accused of negligently causing Jackson's death in 2009 through an overdose of the surgical anesthetic propofol, which, according to the coroner's autopsy report, combined with the sedative lorazepam to stop Jackson's breathing. Murray, a cardiologist, has pleaded not guilty to a charge of involuntary manslaughter. His lawyers say Jackson ingested lethal doses of drugs himself when the doctor was out of the room.

Prosecutor David Walgren said Monday that his office had requested that Jackson's stomach contents be retested for lorazepam. This, he said, was in response to a defense-commissioned toxicology report on lorazepam that Flanagan presented to the jury last week during cross-examination of the coroner's toxicologist, Dan Anderson.

The defense's lab report enabled Flanagan to say there was enough lorazepam in the singer's stomach to prove that he had swallowed eight 2-milligram tablets of lorazepam, "enough to put six people to sleep."

By contrast, the new report that Walgren ordered says there was much less lorazepam than the defense claims.

In addition to questioning Shafer on the coroner's latest test, Walgren will recall Anderson to testify to his office's new report, he said.

The hearing grew tense after defense lawyers accused the prosecution of violating a September 2010 court order forbidding new tests on medical evidence without specific permission from the judge. Walgren said the order related only to syringes and other medical supplies, not to "biological evidence" such as stomach contents.

The defense ultimately agreed and apologized. "We're sorry, David," Chernoff said in a tone of sarcasm. "You did not violate a court order."

The judge interrupted. "His name is not David," Pastor said, implying that Chernoff should have addressed his opponent more formally.

Pastor ended the spat by saying, "There was an allegation the facts do not support, and there's an apology by the defense."

Chernoff said that having until Wednesday to study Anderson's new report "may rectify the problem." He had suggested not allowing Walgren to offer the report until the prosecution's rebuttal case, which will follow the presentation of the defense's expected 15 witnesses. Pastor said he would prefer that the lorazepam evidence be introduced this week during the prosecution's main case.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2011-10-17/michael-jackson-doctor-trial/50805114/1
 

marebear

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
5,594
Points
0
Location
Canada
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

So the prosecutors will be allowed to bring this up before the defense have their turn?
 
E

elusive moonwalker

Guest
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

Why are the defence upset about the new test. maybe im reading it wrong but the test was done just to reconfirm the pros first findings the 1/40th?. so it offers no new evidence for the decence to have to challenge?
 

bouee

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
2,369
Points
0
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

Why are the defence upset about the new test. maybe im reading it wrong but the test was done just to reconfirm the pros first findings the 1/40th?. so it offers no new evidence for the decence to have to challenge?

that's what is not clear for me. The prosecution had a test done, and for some reason the results are different, it shows a lower amount of lorazepam in the stomach content than the defense test. But we don't know what's different between the 2 tests.

Edit : I guess we"ll know, I read here that Anderson is going to restify again, so that'll be explained then
 
Last edited:

marebear

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
5,594
Points
0
Location
Canada
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

Didn't the defense test say something different about that he had enough to have taken 8 pills? So this test shows they were wrong?
 
E

elusive moonwalker

Guest
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

The pros findings always contridicted the 8 tablets. so the pros re tested just to make sure and got the same results and realised the defence got their figure by adding two numbers together
 

bouee

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
2,369
Points
0
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

Didn't the defense test say something different about that he had enough to have taken 8 pills? So this test shows they were wrong?
yes, apparetly the test says that oral consumption in not possible, so it says that Michael didn't swallow 8 pills of lorazepam.
If that's so then that's great news, and another Murray lie is exposed : he probably gave more lorazepam than he said. We'll have to wait...
 

sophie

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
172
Points
0
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

The prosecution had a new test done

they have not tested for lorazepam in stomach before. in the tox report there are no urine, liver, stomach values for lorazepam.

the defence tested on their own and claimed lorazepam concentration in stomach is much higher than in blood. the absolute amount in stomach is still very small, about 1/40 of a tablet. defence argued mj had taken pills 2 hours before his death, that's why only a small amount was left in the stomach.

anderson agued the lorazepam amount in stomach is due to ion trapping but couldnt outrule the possibility it could have been taken orally.

now, the prosecution has eventually done their own test and apparently found out levels weren't as high as defence claims.
 

smoothlugar

Proud Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
484
Points
0
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

Thank you, Sophie for the correction of the typo I made on previous page. I already corrected it.:flowers:
 
E

elusive moonwalker

Guest
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

Ah right. thanks sophie. i get it now. had forgotten they hadnt tested certain areas
 

Sophielo

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Messages
7,285
Points
0
Location
London, England
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

The re-test needs to be done to find out what really happened. The prosecution have had to wait numerous times for the defence, they can wait this once.
 

bouee

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2009
Messages
2,369
Points
0
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

thanks Sophie, I edited my post, it was not clear enough
 
E

elusive moonwalker

Guest
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

I guess the defence will just change the time and amount of tabs taken to suit a new theory they will create
 

ivy

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16,074
Points
0
Location
USA
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

So the prosecutors will be allowed to bring this up before the defense have their turn?

yes

they have not tested for lorazepam in stomach before. in the tox report there are no urine, liver, stomach values for lorazepam.

the defence tested on their own and claimed lorazepam concentration in stomach is much higher than in blood. the absolute amount in stomach is still very small, about 1/40 of a tablet. defence argued mj had taken pills 2 hours before his death, that's why only a small amount was left in the stomach.

anderson agued the lorazepam amount in stomach is due to ion trapping but couldnt outrule the possibility it could have been taken orally.

now, the prosecution has eventually done their own test and apparently found out levels weren't as high as defence claims.

exactly.
 

daisy

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
640
Points
0
Location
Poland
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

So the test is only on quantity, and not on the elements of the lorazepam pills.
And I guess it is now important what the gap between these two tests are. I guess there a certain threshold I guess when the relation between stomach and blood concentration is critical to rule out oral consumption and Anderson could explain that perhaps.
 

Soundmind

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
3,667
Points
0
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

they have not tested for lorazepam in stomach before. in the tox report there are no urine, liver, stomach values for lorazepam.

the defence tested on their own and claimed lorazepam concentration in stomach is much higher than in blood. the absolute amount in stomach is still very small, about 1/40 of a tablet. defence argued mj had taken pills 2 hours before his death, that's why only a small amount was left in the stomach.

anderson agued the lorazepam amount in stomach is due to ion trapping but couldnt outrule the possibility it could have been taken orally.

now, the prosecution has eventually done their own test and apparently found out levels weren't as high as defence claims.

right, something else Anderson made that figure 1/43 based on the defense test and the numbers they provided, Flanagan even asked him why did you do that? did Walgren ask you to do that? . Now the prosecutors r saying the numbers the defense provided were not accurate , the amount of lorazepam was even SAMLLER . At least that's how I understand it, but I'm sure Anderson did the calculation based on the numbers provided by the defense.
 

maral

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Messages
840
Points
18
Location
Stockholm, Sweden, Sweden
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

what i am wondering is why Walgren waited until midway into the trial to make these tests?
 

xthunderx2

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
9,883
Points
0
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

hahah,,,thanks for posting this The defense CANNOT refute THIS kind of medical .."scientific" evidence, They can try,,,but again they will fail, Science and numbers do NOT lie. We knew that Michael did not take those pills. I am curious to see HOW the defense will try and dispute the prosecutions latest findings. I am SSOOO glad that they decided to test the stomach contests...that is the ONLY way to shut the defense down
 

twinklEE

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
7,862
Points
0
Location
LONDON
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

what i am wondering is why Walgren waited until midway into the trial to make these tests?
maybe they (the prosecution) thought it wasn't necessary or that they could use the defense's results (assuming the defense provided accurate numbers), but since it appears that the defense lied again by adding up two numbers, he probably thought he needs to go ahead and do his own. But I agree, I don't like the fact that they hadn't done the tests themselves, especially considering how much time they've had.
 

xthunderx2

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
9,883
Points
0
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

I think so . someone messaged me on twitter and said Michael's blood levels for Lorazepam is higher than a 4mg dose murray claimed to give. So if Michael didn't take pills orally, I'm wondering if now the theory becomes Murray gave Michael more Lorazepam (more that 4 mg) via IV.

Bingo,,,THAT is EXACTLY what it is the pros is saying.. They are saying there is NO WAY Michael took loraz orally...that Murray shot him up with it, That damn defense needs to stop being dishonest..everything that they have said from the beginning has been a lie. The lawyers are just as shady as Murray
 

Popescu

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
618
Points
0
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

what i am wondering is why Walgren waited until midway into the trial to make these tests?

I think it's because the defense came later with "he-swallowed-8-lorazepam-pills" theory after the trial started. They thought they could speculate the fact that there was a little concentration of lorazepam in the stomach, and Murray knew for sure that he only gave IV that day.

Ffs, didn't AR state that there were hemorrhages of the mucous in the stomach?
 

twinklEE

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
7,862
Points
0
Location
LONDON
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

I agree the defense attorney's are just as shady as Murray, can't they be warned or fined for being dishonest? Even dishonesty has a a limit.
 

maral

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Messages
840
Points
18
Location
Stockholm, Sweden, Sweden
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

I think it's because the defense came later with "he-swallowed-8-lorazepam-pills" theory after the trial started. They thought they could speculate the fact that there was a little concentration of lorazepam in the stomach, and Murray knew for sure that he only gave IV that day.

Ffs, didn't AR state that there were hemorrhages of the mucous in the stomach?
oh i see so up until now it was irrelevant. frankly the lorazepam theory made no sense to me
 

suzynyc

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2009
Messages
3,857
Points
0
Location
Brooklyn/Manhattan, NY
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

The defense ultimately agreed and apologized. "We're sorry, David," Chernoff said in a tone of sarcasm. "You did not violate a court order."

The judge interrupted. "His name is not David," Pastor said, implying that Chernoff should have addressed his opponent more formally.

Pastor ended the spat by saying, "There was an allegation the facts do not support, and there's an apology by the defense."

To me Chernoff has sounded sarcastic throughout this trial in his cross examinations. Now he's disrespectful towards his opponent and colleague. He's so annoying.
 

xthunderx2

Proud Member
Joined
Feb 28, 2009
Messages
9,883
Points
0
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

It was a VERY WISE decision for the pros to go back and test this on their own...the defense was using their numbers as just that,,,"a defense" and it was probably confusing the jurors as to this numbers and HOW the defense was saying that Michael ate the loraz..BUT the pros was saying that the dose was found only equaled 1/43 of a pill. So the jury could of been trying to analyze HOW could that of been taken orally like the defense says? All they had to do was plant reasonable doubt on that theory..."Michael ate the 8 pills". BUT with this NEW information.....IMO.....I think that the pros will succeed in clarifying to the jurors that Murray infact gave Michael the loraz via iv. ....and that in NO WAY did Michael ingest them himself.


edited to add....the level of the loraz may not be as important to the pros as them SHOWING that Michael was NOT this die hard drug feen that the defense is trying to portray him as..meaning,,,,Michael didn't wake up and run for the pills when Murray was out of the room...also meaning that Michael DID NOT inject himself with the final dose of propofol...like the defense is claiming. From what I am getting from the pros actions right now,,,doing this test was BRILLIANT and in the jurors eyes.,...could finish shutting the defenses case down to nothing.
 
Last edited:

maral

Proud Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Messages
840
Points
18
Location
Stockholm, Sweden, Sweden
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

Bingo,,,THAT is EXACTLY what it is the pros is saying.. They are saying there is NO WAY Michael took loraz orally...that Murray shot him up with it, That damn defense needs to stop being dishonest..everything that they have said from the beginning has been a lie. The lawyers are just as shady as Murray

and THAT will change the whole direction of this case IMO. by the defenses own statement as i remember, mixing propofol and loraz is NOT the wises thing do.
 

Soundmind

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
3,667
Points
0
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

I blame no one but the prosecutors for this fiasco. Everyone knew when the toxicology report was made public the concentration of lorazepam was not consisten with what Murray claimed he gave MJ. Chernoff if other members here remember commented on the results by saying : yes the drugs Murray gave were the only drugs found in his body but what about the quantities?

It was so obvious they were going to blame MJ for the extra lorazepam and propofol.

I can't believe Walgren did not anticipate MJ would be blamed for the extra lorazepam !!!! Based on the defense fabricated numbers the amount was 1/43 of a 2mg pill , now the prosecutors r saying it's even much smaller than that !!! LOL

The urine concentration according to Flanagan the lorazepam in MJ's urine was the iv lorazepam given by Murray that morning and the one found in his blood came from the 8 pills he took. oral lorazepam ruled out then lorazepam in urine and blood came from Murray , very good !!
 

marebear

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
5,594
Points
0
Location
Canada
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

I just felt that Michael didn't take all those pills. Something felt wrong when the defense trying to push this. It was confusing. Everyone is so quick to push it all on Michael (general public). It was Murray who gave Michael everything in his system.
 

ivy

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16,074
Points
0
Location
USA
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

what i am wondering is why Walgren waited until midway into the trial to make these tests?

maybe they (the prosecution) thought it wasn't necessary or that they could use the defense's results (assuming the defense provided accurate numbers), but since it appears that the defense lied again by adding up two numbers, he probably thought he needs to go ahead and do his own. But I agree, I don't like the fact that they hadn't done the tests themselves, especially considering how much time they've had.

I think it's because the defense came later with "he-swallowed-8-lorazepam-pills" theory after the trial started. They thought they could speculate the fact that there was a little concentration of lorazepam in the stomach, and Murray knew for sure that he only gave IV that day.

Ffs, didn't AR state that there were hemorrhages of the mucous in the stomach?

oh i see so up until now it was irrelevant. frankly the lorazepam theory made no sense to me

I blame no one but the prosecutors for this fiasco. Everyone knew when the toxicology report was made public the concentration of lorazepam was not consisten with what Murray claimed he gave MJ. Chernoff if other members here remember commented on the results by saying : yes the drugs Murray gave were the only drugs found in his body but what about the quantities?

It was so obvious they were going to blame MJ for the extra lorazepam and propofol.

I can't believe Walgren did not anticipate MJ would be blamed for the extra lorazepam !!!! Based on the defense fabricated numbers the amount was 1/43 of a 2mg pill , now the prosecutors r saying it's even much smaller than that !!! LOL

The urine concentration according to Flanagan the lorazepam in MJ's urine was the iv lorazepam given by Murray that morning and the one found in his blood came from the 8 pills he took. oral lorazepam ruled out then lorazepam in urine and blood came from Murray , very good !!

First of all I think that 8 pills of Lorazepam was new as it was only mentioned in the opening statement. Later during Anderson testimony they brought the concept of Lorazepam concentration was 4 times higher in the stomach.

And I think it's normal that the prosecution did not expect Lorazepam theory because if you followed all the hearings it was always about either Propofol swallowing or injecting (they wanted to test the syringes) or it was about Klein and Demerol (remember the hearing about the medical records in which Weitzman was shocked). And I think this was defense tactic they wanted to catch prosecution unprepared. They had come with the drinking theory, prosecution went all the trouble with the piglet and Chilean students to find out that they had dropped that theory in May. And now they pulled Lorazepam theory and luckily it seems like Prosecutors was able to respond very quickly.
 

Soundmind

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2011
Messages
3,667
Points
0
Re: October 17 hearing / No court on October 17 & 18/ New stomach contents testing

@ivy

If you were a prosecutor and the defendant told you I gave only 4 mg of lorazepam and you found later the amount in the victims body was probably double and even triple that number , as a prosecutor or let's say an investigator would not u try to determine how the extra lorazepam was given ? did the victim swallow it on his own or the defendant lied and actually gave more ?

You should assume as a prosecutor that would become an issue during the trial what the defendant admitted to and what the evidence suggests , I mean the coroner said one of the reasons he ruled the death homicide was the assumption lorazepam was not administered by MJ. So ruling out the oral lorazepam theory should have been part of the coroner work before he even sent his report to LAPD and the DA's office.

Yes they responded quickly but it's yet another indication their work was far from completein this case.
 
Top