Status hearings discussion thread / all threads merged

  • Thread starter elusive moonwalker
  • Start date
Re: August 25th hearing

Major update at the bottom of the article.cant copy as im on my phonepros want to stop steve roble from testifying (god help us) and any reference to 03-05 and they want testimony from other drs banned and some other witnesses equalling 26 as its irrelevent.can we get these motions and whens the next hearinghttp://m.apnews.mobi/ap/db_6718/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=7TmtnWjK
 
Last edited:
Re: August 25th hearing

prosecutors want Judge Michael Pastor to bar Steve Robel -- a key Santa Barbara County Sheriff's investigator in the 2005 MJ molestation trial -- from testifying in Murray's defense. Robel is on the defense witness list.

Judge Pastor has not ruled on the motion.

Court update: Jurors will be brought in in 3 separate panels Sept 8th, 9th and 12th. Each day they will be given a hardship letter, after those with hardships are weeded out the remaining potential jurors will be given a lengthy questionnaire, during that time lawyers will read over questionnaires and will not return to court until Sept. 23, Judge will seat jury in one day. Opening day Sept. 27th, will last about 25 days, over early Nov.

https://twitter.com/#!/justice_4mj
 
Re: August 25th hearing

I guess he will testify to the drugs in mjs house.not that there was any to support addict claims just medical stuff and even sneddon didnt go there.thats all i can think of. Considering the way this judge has ruled theres no way he will allow it......but
 
Re: August 25th hearing

I don't know, maybe something to do with items found during a search... Maybe?
 
Re: August 25th hearing

I believe it's part of the "Michael was a long term addict" strategy. It's ridiculous. I hope Pastor will agree with the pros. He said he wanted this to be only abt june 25th, right?
 
elusive moonwalker;3467316 said:
Major update at the bottom of the article.cant copy as im on my phonepros want to stop steve roble from testifying (god help us) and any reference to 03-05 and they want testimony from other drs banned and some other witnesses equalling 26 as its irrelevent.can we get these motions and whens the next hearing

Thanks for the info.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...ughter-trial/2011/08/25/gIQAguz0dJ_story.html
In another development, prosecutors filed a motion seeking to exclude or limit the testimony of 26 witnesses including Jackson’s many health care providers and a police detective who participated in Jackson’s 2003 child molestation investigation in Santa Maria. Jackson was acquitted in a high profile 2005 trial and prosecutors said in their motion that such testimony “is irrelevant and highly inflammatory.”
“The current case should focus on the events surrounding the medical care provided to Michael Jackson by Conrad Murray,” said the motion. “The case should not be allowed to deteriorate into an unfair, unwarranted and irrelevant attack on the deceased victim.”
They asked the court to bar any reference to the molestation case.
 
Re: August 25th hearing

Yeah he did many a time.theres no way he should allow this if hes true to form.the fact the defence are even going there shows how sick and desperate they are
 
Re: August 25th hearing

In the previous drs ruling over kliens medical records did the judge only allow the defence to get the records for a certain time frame? Im sure he did.so going by that the dr ruling should only cover the same time frame
 
Re: August 25th hearing

are they foreal?! I really hope the judge does the right thing here, and doesn't allow robel to testify. Another thing I don't care if I go to hell for saying and feeling this way, but I want Murray to have the most cruel death on earth. I want his to have his cruel ending asap.
 
Re: August 25th hearing

What the ****, excuse my language, but I'm HOT under the collar, does the 2005 trial, in which MJ was acquitted, have to do with Murray's actions and inactions on June 25, 2009!? Absolutely NOTHING! Furthermore, what other doctors did or didn't do have NOTHING to do with what Murray ALLOWED himself to do...he's a grown ass man, who had free-will, and could've said NO to MJ, other's DID, so he can spare me his poor me, pity party!

Question to Conrad Murray: How big was that gun MJ was holding to your head?

ANSWER: There wasn't one...

EXACTLY!
 
Re: August 25th hearing

Had CM been dealing with an addict, and if anyone could be addicted to propofol, which remains the cause of death if I'm not in the twilight zone, it would only be an aggravating circumstance. It would mean as a doctor, he agreed to buy boxes of anesthetic, and inject his patient? What was he, an enabler? Not to mention, everything he did afterwards.

Michael could have been addicted to M&Ms, it doesnt matter. M&Ms didnt kill him. The doctor he trusted did.
 
Re: August 25th hearing

Exactly. Murray took an oath and failed to live up to it. He didn't look after his patients well being and now he is dead through inadequate, negligent behaviour and care. Fact. It doesn't have anything to do with any previous doctors or behaviours on mjs side, and it certainly doesn't have anything to do with the 03 trial.
 
Prosecution Wants to Exclude Molestation Evidence in Manslaughter Trial

Prosecution Wants to Exclude Molestation Evidence in Manslaughter Trial

Prosecutors in the Dr. Conrad Murray manslaughter case want to block all testimony related to allegations that Michael Jackson molested children.

According to court docs obtained by TMZ ... prosecutors want Judge Michael Pastor to bar Steve Robel -- a key Santa Barbara County Sheriff's investigator in the 2005 MJ molestation trial -- from testifying in Murray's defense. Robel is on the defense witness list.

In fact, prosecutors want all references to alleged molestation barred from Murray's trial, on grounds it has nothing to do with MJ's death and would merely inflame the jury.

And, prosecutors have also asked the judge to block the testimony of a number of doctors who treated Michael Jackson but were not involved in caring for MJ on the day of his death.

This is a huge motion that could have a profound impact on the case. As TMZ first reported, the defense will argue that dozens of doctors had addicted MJ to prescription meds -- including Propofol -- and they are largely responsible for the condition Michael was in the day he died.

Judge Pastor has not ruled on the motions.

http://www.tmz.com/2011/08/25/michael-j ... nts-anchor
 
Re: August 25th hearing

what on earth does the investigator in 05 case have to do with this? just wow

I guess he will testify to the drugs in mjs house.not that there was any to support addict claims just medical stuff and even sneddon didnt go there.thats all i can think of. Considering the way this judge has ruled theres no way he will allow it......but

during the search at neverland they had found some drugs and it was left off as it wasn't related to the trial/case at hand at that time. It seems like the defense is trying to bring him to bring an addict portrait.
 
Re: August 25th hearing

Well whatever. If I learned nothing else from the Anna Nicole Smith trial is that what you say is an addict and what the law says are two different things so whatever
 
I don't understand. I just don't … even if MJ was addicted at the time it still doesn't matter. Murray gave him all of the drugs found in his system
 
Re: August 25th hearing

Thank you judge. I thought this would be the outcome since the judge had already commented on this before. I like this judge and I am keeping myself positive about the trial outcome.

The way this judge has been ruling he is not going to allow irrelevant information in. Remember he said this is not a case about lifestyle (paraphrase). Nothing in 05 killed Michael in 09, unless Muarry wants to take credit for killing a man slowly over a number of years. Notice the judge feels the case will last for a shorter number of days. This tells me that he intends to throw out a lot of irrelevant trash and cut the number of crazy witnesses that the defense think they can present. The defense hope to gather any person that show Michael in a negative way to give evidence about non-related non-facts. The judge is not going to have it. I feel the judge will let justice rule here.

The defense, as we know will focus on destroying the character of Michael, because they do not have evidence to show Murray did not kill Michael.
 
Last edited:
Re: Prosecution Wants to Exclude Molestation Evidence in Manslaughter Trial

I thought we were talking about this in the 8/25 hearing?
 
Re: Prosecution Wants to Exclude Molestation Evidence in Manslaughter Trial

^^ Me too. I wish they would remember Michael is the victim here.
 
Re: August 25th hearing

I hope the 2005 trial is not brought up. Michael was acquitted and it has nothing to do with this case. It's like Michael is being tried all over again.
 
Re: Prosecution Wants to Exclude Molestation Evidence in Manslaughter Trial

I really hope the 2005 trial is not brought up. It has nothing to do with this at all. Michael was innocent.
 
IMO Steve Robel is not on that witness list to talk about the accusations of molestation. Michael was on trial for that and was acquitted, there's no use to bring it up again. But in that house search there were some things found regarding Michael's use of prescription drugs and I think this is what Murray's team wants Robel to talk about.

Here is an exchange of motions between the Prosecution and the Defense in the 2005 trial:

Prosecution:

Item 14 is another pair of underwear containing traces of cocaine and evidence of Defendant’s own DNA, in a blood-spot also containing traces of Demerol. Plaintiff respectfully submits that the relevance of the evidence extracted from that undergarment, when considered together with the other evidence of Defendant’s apparent addiction to Demerol, is patently relevant. The particular significance of Item 14 is that it tends to identify Defendant as the custodian of the label-less vial containing identifiable traces of Demerol, seized from the Arcade building. The traces of cocaine on that garment didn’t get there by themselves.

Item 14. Underwear and Cocaine

One pair of underpants recovered from Jackson’s residence had a blood stain. The stain contained cocaine and Demerol. The DNA profile from that stain is in fact defendant’s. It is believed that Jackson has been a Demerol addict for many years and a significant amount of evidence supports that belief. That evidence includes a near-empty vial found on this property with the label torn off containing Demerol; a letter from a Fr. Farschian in Miami promising defendant help in curing him of his “D” addiction; a doctor who acknowledged having delivered him Demerol to this house and numerous witnesses who speak of his addiction. In addition defendant has publicly acknowledged in the past that he had become addicted to prescription medications, and that he required medical intervention for that addiction.

“We will also seek to introduce evidence of the presence of cocaine in his underpants. Cocaine was found on two locations on that garment; in the fabric sample contain(ing) the blood stain and on another sample of the fabric taken and examined as a reference sample. The most likely reason the cocaine was detected on both samples is that defendant excreted it in both his blood and his urine”.

“How stoned was he when he crawled into bed with those two boys behind multiple locked doors?” may be a very relevant question. Should defendant testify, his chronic use of Schedule III drugs will be relevant on the issue of how well he recalls events and his state of awareness during those events”.

Defense:

Item 14.Underwear and Cocaine.

This is a child molestation and conspiracy case*. [*The prosecution apparently plans to argue the contradictory theories that Mr. Jackson is a drug addict, who is unable to control his behavior due to drug use, while at the same time, is a criminal mastermind who was micro-managing a conspiracy to falsely imprison, extort and abduct the Doe family].

The evidence seized by the prosecution is irrelevant to either of those charges. However, the prosecution is seeking to introduce evidence of drug use for the purpose of prejudicing the jury against Mr. Jackson. The blood evidence seized in November of 2003, eight months after the alleged events in question, is irrelevant. Whether or not Mr. Jackson was using prescribed Demerol at any point in his life has nothing to do with the allegations in February or March of 2003.

….The prosecution’s forensic evidence does not support the argument they wish to present to the jury. The prosecution claims that “the most likely reason the cocaine was detected on both samples is that defendant excreted it in both his blood and his urine”. This explanation, however, is scientifically impossible.

The evidence, according to the prosecution’s forensic reports, is that actual cocaine was found on the fabric of the underwear and on the blood on the underwear, not that evidence of cocaine use (i.e. metabolites) were found on Mr. Jackson’s blood. This evidence does not demonstrate the use of cocaine by Mr. Jackson and is irrelevant even under the prosecution’s absurd theory.

It should be noted that the prosecution does not support their theory with a declaration or any legitimate scientific information. In fact, it would be impossible to lay the foundation that they boldly assert. We have not been provided with any forensic reports that support their theory.”

It has to be emphasized that unlike the Demerol, the cocaine wasn't found in Michael's blood, but on it - ie. it wasn't metabolized in his blood - so it got there later. This stuff was found in a laundry bag in the arcades with lots of various laundry from lots of various people. So the cocaine could get there from anywhere, I'm sure it wasn't Michael using it, and it wasn't metabolized in his blood. The Demerol was, he was using it, but of course it had nothing to do with the allegations so the judge didn't allow the prosecution to use this. But I think this is what Murray's team wants to bring up now.

Again, I don't know how it would help them. There was NO Demerol found in Michael's blood when he died. He died from Murray's Propofol, period. Michael admitted he had a problem with Demerol at one time, but he wanted to get rid of it, see the letter from Farschian and I think he did.
 
Re: August 25th hearing

IMO I could understand it a Tad bit better if the drugs found in 03 were in his system in 09 but it was not. If Michael was taking pain killers in 03 and had a reason for taken them that is not addiction. We know Michael had arthritis I know people with arthritis who have to take pain killers to get out of bed are they addicts too? My point is if he had medical reasons for taking them....
 
Re: August 25th hearing

Grasping at straws. AkAlso remember that mj hadnt been living at the ranch fo a certain amount of time before the raid.cant remember if it was something like 3 weeks or 3 months. Omar and i believe some cousins were living there at the time.so that underwear was sat there along time. So take a guess about who was using crap in mjs house?!or whether it was planted by sneddon
 
Back
Top