Latest on MJJC

Preliminary Hearing 11/1/11. Day Six. Discussion Thread

its the most ridiculous theory of the lot. well maybe not quite as bad as the nation of islam killed him!
 
Did I hear that right on UStream? That Rogers said even if Michael took it himself, it would still be homicide?
 
Yes, that's what Sprocket also noted.

http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2011/01/dr-conrad-murray-prelim-day-6-part-i.html

And if this is the hypothetical, of ingestion of propofol by the decedent, and ingestion of lydocaine, by the decdeent, this would not be a homicide?

I would think it would still be a homicide. Based on the qualit y of the medical of care, I would still consider it a homicide even if the Dr. did not give the propofol,

Just the fact that there was propofol there in the first place. This is not the accepted setting to administer propofol in the first place.

He was not prepared for any adverse effects.
 
bowen9999 said:
Yes, that's what Sprocket also noted.

http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2011/01/dr-conrad-murray-prelim-day-6-part-i.html

And if this is the hypothetical, of ingestion of propofol by the decedent, and ingestion of lydocaine, by the decdeent, this would not be a homicide?

I would think it would still be a homicide. Based on the qualit y of the medical of care, I would still consider it a homicide even if the Dr. did not give the propofol,

Just the fact that there was propofol there in the first place. This is not the accepted setting to administer propofol in the first place.

He was not prepared for any adverse effects.
Click to expand...

which is what we have said all along. good to hear him say it. next excuse murray
 
bowen9999 said:
Yes, that's what Sprocket also noted.

http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2011/01/dr-conrad-murray-prelim-day-6-part-i.html

And if this is the hypothetical, of ingestion of propofol by the decedent, and ingestion of lydocaine, by the decdeent, this would not be a homicide?

I would think it would still be a homicide. Based on the qualit y of the medical of care, I would still consider it a homicide even if the Dr. did not give the propofol,

Just the fact that there was propofol there in the first place. This is not the accepted setting to administer propofol in the first place.

He was not prepared for any adverse effects.
Click to expand...

Murray is done!!!!!!
 
ivy;3186798 said:
Here's your answer. Rogers says it's possible to ingest propofol but doesn't think that's the case here.


From Trials and Tribulations draft update


Q= Why can’t you take propofol orally?

A= Well, from my understanding you need to take it via IV.

Q= But in the event that propofol were taken orally, that’s one way it could appear in the stomach?

A= Yes, that’s a way it could appear in the stomach.

Q= But, if propofol was taken orally, it would have caused pain in the esophogus or stomach?

A= I don’t know.

Q= Is it your info, propofol in it’s redistribution could go into that dark liquid in the stomach?

A= It’s a possibility.

Q= Also possibility, if propofol is taken orally, and lidocaine taken on top of it, is that also a possiblity?

A= It is a possiblility , although in this case the amount in the stomach is so small, they would have taken a small amount of propofal orally.

Q= Questions about injesting lidocaine, you would expect that to appear in the stomach?

A= (Yes?)

Q= So there’s basically is two possibilities of self administration. is IV and orally.

A= Yes.

Q =The gastric contents tends to support the oral assumption.

A = No, I don’t think the gastric contents support that. (He mentions the small amount in the stomach.)
Click to expand...

Oops for the defense with that last question. Isn't the rule to make sure that you know the answer to your questions and that the answers help your client?

If they are having to fish like this for a defense, it just should make people wonder.
 
yes but the defense can say but he did it himself and then its up to a jury right? no mather what this briljant man says.. :S

Wel i think its a difficult one today i did not understand much and trials and trib also said its very confusing and alot.. he missed alot too..

so the transcripts would be briljant, or a testimony with more explaining.. he also said that he is no toxiologist so he can not say something about the levels orso

did i understand that last right?
 
From TMZ:

A doctor for the L.A. County Coroner's Office just testified ... even if Michael Jackson injected himself with the fatal dose of Propofol, Dr. Murray is still guilty of homicide.

Dr. Christopher Rogers testified he believes Dr. Murray had no business administering Propofol outside a hospital setting, particularly without the appropriate medical equipment. Rogers said given MIchael's dependence on Propofol and the fact that Murray left him alone in the room with access to the drug constitutes a homicide.

(for some reason I can't find a direct link to that, computer illiterate today)

I've been saying this for days and was waiting for the experts to testify. I said that they would say that. And they did. Good. That's a relief.
 
elusive moonwalker said:
so he doesnt agree
as i thought the defence asking vague questions in a general context. why didnt the coroner talk about the damages cause to the stomach by the CPR that would the story straight to bed
Click to expand...

The prosecution could just be trying to put on just enough without tipping everything. Or they may get the witness to bring it out through more questions.

I know one thing. The prosecution was already aware of their possible strategies and after this, even if the defense doesn't put on a case, then the prosecution is still going to know more about where to tighten the case against the defense's attempts.
 
Deborah French made a point on Twitter saying that if it was ingested then surely there would be burn residue in his mouth or at least traces of propofol in the mouth.
 
Trials and Tribulations unedited draft updates

Christpher Rogers

- LA coroner. Employed since 1988 as a forensic pathologist

- He performed the autopsy on MJ.

- Findings : MJ's overall health was excellent.

- MJ had prostate issue; vitillago, polop of the colon, inflammation and scaring of his lungs, and also had some arthritis of the spine.

- MJ was 5’ 9” and 136 pounds. His BMI (body mass index) 20.1. It falls to the thin side of normal weight.

- MJ did not have any abnormalities of the heart and he did not have any atherosclerosis. He did not have any cardiac disease.

- There was no trauma or any natural disease that caused his death.

- They decided it was homicide based on the info they have and substandard care given to MJ.

- Cross-examination : Rogers say that situation doesn’t support self administration of self treatment of propofol and there were no factors inconsistent with his conclusions.

- Cross-examination : Rogers is asked hypothetically if MJ ingested propofol and lydocaine himself would it still be considered homicide. Rogers answer is that it would still be homicide based on the medical care - the fact that there was propofol in a house setting and there was no preparation for adverse effects.

- Question about self administration : The IV catheter was in the left leg a little bit above the knee. Rogers mentions it's hard to reach and in order of MJ to inject himself it would require the doctor to stop medication, leave the room, MJ wake up and gain the necessary awareness to press /push propofol.

- Cross - examination : Oral digestion. Rogers say it's possible to orally digest propofol but doesn't think that's the case here as the amount in the stomach is so small.
 
Coroner says drug dose amounted to 'homicide'

The medical examiner who ruled Michael Jackson’s death a homicide testified Tuesday he would stand by the classification even if it turned out the pop star gave himself the fatal dose of anesthetic.

Dr. Christopher Rogers made the statement as a lawyer for Jackson’s personal physician questioned him about the possibility the singer administered the anesthetic propofol when Dr. Conrad Murray wasn’t looking.

“Based on the quality of the medical care, I would still call this a homicide even if the doctor did not administer the propofol to Mr. Jackson,” said Rogers, chief of forensic medication at the Los Angeles County Coroner’s office.

He said Murray had endangered Jackson by using the drug in a home setting without proper monitoring, regardless of who gave the final dose. The testimony was a blow to the defense.

Over the course of the six-day hearing to determine whether there is enough evidence to try Murray for involuntary manslaughter, his lawyers have hinted they may argue for acquittal at trial by blaming Jackson for the fatal dose.

Rogers testified the pop star was in “excellent” health for a middle-aged man and died because of “substandard” medical care. The pathologist said Murray violated treatment norms with his use of propofol.
The drug, he said, is not indicated for insomnia and requires constant patient monitoring, which Murray did not provide.

“The information we received indicates that the doctor left Mr. Jackson while he was anesthetized and this is something you would not do,” Roger said.

Despite testimony from a paramedic that the singer was so underweight as to resemble a hospice patient, Rogers said Jackson was “normal weight” at 5 feet 9 and 136 pounds.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lan...says-drug-dose-amounted-to-homicide.html#more
 
bowen9999 said:
Just the fact that there was propofol there in the first place.
Click to expand...

I don't know how many times I said ... and thought "even if". Because it shouldn't have been there in the first place. And if it's there, which is wrong in the first place, it should be locked away, so that it can't fall into the hands of the patient. It's not that at a hospital it's just sitting on every patient's nightstand. It's not candy, it's a dangerous drug.
 
bowen9999 said:
Yes, that's what Sprocket also noted.

http://sprocket-trials.blogspot.com/2011/01/dr-conrad-murray-prelim-day-6-part-i.html

And if this is the hypothetical, of ingestion of propofol by the decedent, and ingestion of lydocaine, by the decdeent, this would not be a homicide?

I would think it would still be a homicide. Based on the qualit y of the medical of care, I would still consider it a homicide even if the Dr. did not give the propofol,

Just the fact that there was propofol there in the first place. This is not the accepted setting to administer propofol in the first place.

He was not prepared for any adverse effects.
Click to expand...

I love this answer. He is right. Nothing could have happened that night with propofol if not for Murray having it there because Michael could not have gotten it himself. Again, he had the medical degree and supposed ethics.

I think that the defense is going to see that these medical witnesses aren't going to give them an inch because there really is no justification in terms of the care provided, in my opinion.
 
Thanks Ivy,

So in other words Murray's killer ass is basically nailed.

Rogers testified the pop star was in “excellent” health for a middle-aged man
Click to expand...
THIS is what I've been saying since the day I read the autopsy report.
 
xthunderx2 said:
If he did ingest it...Murray put it in that drinkbox..not Michael.
Click to expand...

and it would likely make you cough.... ( a. because your'e just coming out from anaesthetic and b. because it'd probably be a bit rough on the throat)
 
Ingelief said:
yes but the defense can say but he did it himself and then its up to a jury right? no mather what this briljant man says.. :S

. . .
Click to expand...

I think that would be depending on the judge's instructions to the jury. If they are instructed to decided if Murray contributed in any way to the death of Michael Jackson, then this expert's statement would not be good for Murray at all.
 
Coroner's testimony might be the best one.
 
I thought it was estblished in the autopsy report that the apperance of Propofol in the stomach is due to the resuscitation attempts.. and not MJ drinking that.. enough with that crap.. so when will the coronoer bring that up?? I really wanna see Murrays face then!
 
today ,is really good day for prosecution .i feel relived but at same time i am feeling worse because Michael was in great shape and this incompetent fool killed him .
 
"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."

That's beginning to make even more sense now after Roger's testimony.
 
blankyluvdoodoo said:
today ,is really good day for prosecution .i feel relived but at same time i am feeling worse because Michael was in great shape and this incompetent fool killed him .
Click to expand...

This is what kills me too. MJ had gone through so much crap his entire life.. and this is how it ended? It just so unfair and surreal :(
 
twinklEE said:
I hope the ears of certain middle aged men and women were listening carefully, especially the ears of a bald headed man, and a short haired woman.
Click to expand...

am with u on this one .
i guess janet was that horse who was lead to water by randy and surprise she drank that water.:doh:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top