Theories : What do you think happened based on testimony

[Autumn II]

thanks again for the link....however they used the words " Sources say". People aume these sources are legit....usually they are just trying to drag Michael thru the mud. We all remember the big headlines from way back when...."Michael Jackson sleep in Oxygen chamber"...again they were full of ish....This Dr, Ratner never said he gave Michael propofol at anytime.....and if it could be proven that he did..you better believe that the defene would of had him on that stand. No doubt in my mind at all.

Right. That's just tabloid reporting, i.e. "sources say." There was an incredible amount of that crap going around during the trial, with everything from "Michael practiced voodoo," to that kid they found in Tokyo and reported on, saying that the kid had accused Michael of molestation. The kid was by then an adult, and went on a talk show and said HE NEVER SAID THAT! It was hideous.

The defense will no doubt use the theory that Michael had a long history with propofol, will plant tabloid stories to that effect, and so on. We're smarter than that, though, and should only take reliable and NAMED sources seriously. Otherwise, it's "voodoo time" all over again. I really think sticking to testimony is best.

If Ratner is called to testify and says he gave Michael propofol, then it just is what it is, and that will mean points for Murray's side. But we're not there yet, and Ratner, himself, has said NOTHING.

 

[ivy]

guys let not get too wide in our theories and please no conspiracy. Remember this is a forum about "State of California vs Conrad Murray" - all other people and their involvement (if any) needs to be discussed in other threads and other sections of the board.

 

[sophie]

there is an old tabloid article from feb 2000 which brings up that ratner allegedly gave propofol to mj. the article was posted in relationship to the federal trial of lauersen where ratner was a witness.

from google archives, 2000:

http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/nypost/...***+DRUG+STUNNER+IN+'GYNO'+TRIAL&pqatl=google

JACK* DRUG STUNNER IN 'GYNO' TRIAL

New York Post - New York, N.Y.

Author: DEVLIN BARRETT
Date: Feb 9, 2000

Abstract (Document Summary)

[Neil Ratner] is a key prosecution witness at the federal trial of Dr. Niels Lauersen, a celebrity gynecologist dubbed the "Dyno Gyno," who's charged with defrauding health-insurance companies for fertility treatments.

Seconds later, in a heated sidebar conversation with Judge William Pawley, [Ted Wells] accused Ratner of being [Michael Jackson]'s personal drug pusher.

Sources said Ratner once told people in Lauersen's office that Jackson collapsed after a show because Ratner had given him too much of a general anesthetic called propofol.

i found the full nyp article posted on mjj2005.com: http://www.mjj2005.com/kopboard/lofiversion/index.php/t43481.html
(scroll to: Old article from the NY Post)

this article can probably not be taken verbatim, it's tabloid, but since it was published long before mj's death the claim that ratner gave mj propofol during a tour is probably true. seems too much of a coincidence otherwise.

 

[Soundmind]

That's the article I was referring to Sophie thank you.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Sources said Ratner once told people in Lauersen's office that Jackson collapsed after a show because Ratner had given him too much of a general anesthetic called propofol.

the quote from the witness during the trial was very different to that quote. it was the quote about ratner telling someone that he took mj down and brought him back.

 

[Soundmind]

it was the quote about ratner telling someone that he took mj down and brought him back.

that what CNN said, the article Sophie posted was from 2000 not 2009

 

[elusive moonwalker]

that what CNN said, the article Sophie posted was from 2000 not 2009

it was defo an article from 2001 approx. its been posted on kop board alot from midas.id never seen the one b4 with the direct quotes about diprivan

belows the article. yeah its the same one. thought it was something diff

ew York Post
February 9, 2000

***** DRUG STUNNER IN 'GYNO' TRIAL

A one-time dope-addict doctor was accused yesterday of pumping Michael
Jackson full of drugs while on tour with the bizarre megastar. The
bombshell accusation came in Manhattan federal court, where Dr. Neil
Ratner was testifying against another doctor in an insurance-fraud
case. Sources said Ratner told colleagues he once gave the Gloved One
so much of a relaxant that Jackson collapsed during a world tour.
Ratner is a key prosecution witness at the federal trial of Dr. Niels
Lauersen, a celebrity gynecologist dubbed the "Dyno Gyno," who's
charged with defrauding health-insurance companies for fertility
treatments. Ratner said that in the past few years he worked as a "tour
physician" for Jackson, but refused on the stand to answer questions
about Jackson and drugs. "Would you give Michael Jackson drugs?" asked
Lauersen's lawyer, Ted Wells, referring to the singer's 1996-97
tour. "I'm not going to discuss a patient's personal medical
condition," answered Ratner. Seconds later, in a heated sidebar
conversation with Judge William Pawley, Wells accused Ratner of being
Jackson's personal drug pusher. Wells told the judge Ratner gave
Jackson drugs while the King of Pop was touring in Europe. "I think
what he is doing is illegal," insisted Wells, who has spent days
grilling Ratner on the witness stand, trying to paint him as a liar and
a thief. The judge ruled that Ratner did not have to talk about his
treatment of Jackson. Asked again about his work on the tour, Ratner
answered: "I administered medical treatment occasionally." Sources said
Ratner once told people in Lauersen's office that Jackson collapsed
after a show because Ratner had given him too much of a general
anesthetic called propofol. Propofol is often used to relieve anxiety
or pain, but larger doses cause unconsciousness. When told of the lurid
drug accusations that surfaced at the trial, Jackson lawyer Brian Wolf
said the Gloved One's medical history was confidential. Ratner has said
he was an out-of-control drug-using doctor in the late '80s before
getting sober. He has denied ever illegally prescribing drugs to
anyone, including Jackson, in the '90s.

had given him too much of a general
anesthetic called propofol. Propofol is often used to relieve anxiety
or pain, but larger doses cause unconsciousnes

gotta love the BS reporting on what diprivan is

 

[cinzia]

I guess my central point here is, that IF Michael was using propofol for sleep on tours, why did we NEVER see any marks? An I.V. leaves a puncture wound, and also can cause significant bruising. I think the most common placement for an I.V. is the back-of-the hand? I've had several I.V.s, and that's always been where they were. (The bruises were TERRIBLE, after.) I've seen a lot of footage from the Bad tour, the Dangerous tour, and the HIStory tour, and have never seen those sorts of marks. Not once. Michael did mention getting I.V.s sometimes when on tour, but I've always assumed those were not nightly, and were for dehydration after a concert. No mention of propofol, though.

Good places for IVs: back of hand, forearm, antecubital, anyplace there's a good vein. but eventually you will run out of sites in the upper extremities and then where do you go...Legs. I can't believe Michael would risk his legs. But the IV was in his leg. My gosh, the risk!

You had a pretty bad experience with IVs! Normally a well placed IV won't leave a bruise unless the vein is penetrated on insertion or not enough pressure applied when it is withdrawn. And anesthesiologists are generally the best at starting them ...

"Murray tells the detectives for a little over 2 months he has been treating MJ, assisting him to sleep six nights a week."
So that works out to about 48 nights of 'assisting'. That's a lot of IV sites. Unless he was leaving the needle in for more than one day. Which might work if it was in his arm, but can't believe he would risk his legs!

...
... Telling Ortega that he wants the Victoria waterfall on the scene... Do you remember about this, guys??

Absolutely and it's one of the things I have also wondered about.

They just might try to get him on the stand. The trial hasn't started yet. I do believe Ratner gave MJ propofol. Michael told Cherilyn Lee he had it on the History Tour, so what other doctor besides Ratner gave it to him? Ratner was an anesthesiologist and it's obvious that he is a quack because he was drugging himself up while treating patients. To what he did he had to be shady just as Murray was. They both took advantage of MJ who was obviously in need of help from a real professional on sleep disorders. They did it for the money and didn't care what they were doing to MJ. They both knew that giving MJ anesthesia was no cure for insomnia. Their goal was to keep him drugged and dependent so that they could continually rob him blind.

At least while Ratner was caring for Michael, he kept him alive. Which goes right back to that question of HOW on earth Michael thought murray would be qualified.
As for theories, I'm editing the the prosecution: "According to Murray’s own timeline, he let MJ lie there for over an hour not breathing. AND he is lying about his timeline, and Murray is not being truthful about his timeline. AND Dr. Murray is so utterly so incompetent and reckless, that he has no idea what he gave him or when."

 

[ivy]

This is the Testimony in the insurance fraud trial. Again Ratner never answered any question regarding to Michael.

http://www.nydailynews.com/archives/news/2000/02/09/2000-02-09_crocked_doc_won_t_say_if_he_.html


Dr. Neil Ratner, testifying yesterday in the insurance fraud trial of high-profile infertility expert Dr. Niels Lauersen, was evasive when asked if he had administered drugs to the Gloved One.

"Would you give Michael Jackson drugs?" Lauersen's demanded attorney, Theodore Wells.

"I'm not going to discuss a patient's personal medical condition," Ratner replied.

In a telephone interview from Los Angeles, Jackson's attorney, Brian Wolf, said the singer "denies that Dr. Ratner ever prescribed any inappropriate medications or treatments."
Wolf insisted that any medical treatment is confidential and said Ratner was correct not to disclose it.

At Manhattan Federal Judge William Pauley's bench, Wells insisted that Ratner had, in fact, given Jackson unnamed drugs.

"I want to explore the implication, and I think what he is doing is illegal," Wells added.
But prosecutor Chung argued that the mention of Jackson was distracting jurors from the case at hand. Pauley warned Wells to avoid further references to the Gloved One.

 

[Soundmind]

Good places for IVs: back of hand, forearm, antecubital, anyplace there's a good vein. but eventually you will run out of sites in the upper extremities and then where do you go...Legs. I can't believe Michael would risk his legs. But the IV was in his leg. My gosh, the risk!

You had a pretty bad experience with IVs! Normally a well placed IV won't leave a bruise unless the vein is penetrated on insertion or not enough pressure applied when it is withdrawn. And anesthesiologists are generally the best at starting them ...

not only his leg, it was in his calf !!!

But Klien( I know he is a liar) said he never saw any needle marks on MJ's arms. MJ's physical trainer said MJ had no needle marks on his arms in May . Prince (according to another liar Latoya )also insisted MJ had no injections on his arms. And the paramedics did say they caused those marks on his arms.

but beside the IV in his calf and another mark in one of his ankles, there was nothing. in his legs.


and I'm reading testimonies, Alvarez said he was 5 to 6 days weekly there, Amir said he made sure Murray was there after every rehearsal.
I believe the hair toxicology would give an explanation for that.

And the prosecutors did not really say anything about what they believe happened, very smart of them.

At least while Ratner was caring for Michael, he kept him alive. Which goes right back to that question of HOW on earth Michael thought murray would be qualified.
As for theories, I'm editing the the prosecution: "According to Murray’s own timeline, he let MJ lie there for over an hour not breathing. AND he is lying about his timeline, and Murray is not being truthful about his timeline. AND Dr. Murray is so utterly so incompetent and reckless, that he has no idea what he gave him or when."

My understanding from testimonies at the hearing Murray was not approached to give propofol, he was asked to work under his own speciality as a cardiologist and Adams was the one who would give propofol. Adams did not join the team and Murray did it himself . I believe a two doctors- team like in 1996.<!-- / message -->

 

[StacyJ]

And the prosecutors did not really say anything about what they believe happened, very smart of them


I noticed that too soundmind. I am pretty certain during opening statements they will lay their case out and pretty much tell us what they believe happened. Anyway it goes the defense is going to have to admit Mike was left alone under general anesthesia. That can't be good. I also hope the prosecutor stresses that propofol is not a treatment or a cure for insomnia, so what exactly was Murray doing? That question needs to be asked. Because a cardiologist agreeing to give someone anesthesia as a sleep aid as a serious judgement problem.

 

[xthunderx2]

not only his leg, it was in his calf !!!

But Klien( I know he is a liar) said he never saw any needle marks on MJ's arms. MJ's physical trainer said MJ had no needle marks on his arms in May . Prince (according to another liar Latoya )also insisted MJ had no injections on his arms. And the paramedics did say they caused those marks on his arms.

but beside the IV in his calf and another mark in one of his ankles, there was nothing. in his legs.


and I'm reading testimonies, Alvarez said he was 5 to 6 days weekly there, Amir said he made sure Murray was there after every rehearsal.
I believe the hair toxicology would give an explanation for that.

And the prosecutors did not really say anything about what they believe happened, very smart of them.



My understanding from testimonies at the hearing Murray was not approached to give propofol, he was asked to work under his own speciality as a cardiologist and Adams was the one who would give propofol. Adams did not join the team and Murray did it himself . I believe a two doctors- team like in 1996.

I have read testimony over and over again....and still I cannot find were it states that Murray was not to give propofol ...Adams was. I would appreciate it if you could post that testimony. Thank you.

 

[Autumn II]

[/B]
I have read testimony over and over again....and still I cannot find were it states that Murray was not to give propofol ...Adams was. I would appreciate it if you could post that testimony. Thank you.

I've not found it, either.

One thing that concerns me terribly is that the strategy used by the defense will most likely be to drag Michael through the mud, AGAIN. His children would have to live with that. So, I'd expect what they are going to try to do is to show that big, bad, Michael bullied Murray. That Murray was duped, and didn't realize what he was getting into. They will probably attempt to do this by:

1. Creating the story that Michael was "doctor shopping" and had some sort of fetish for propofol.

2. That he was an ADDICT. They will attempt to prove that he was somehow addicted to propofol. This tactic will be exceedingly ugly.

3. And that Murray felt SO bullied that he over-rode his "good judgment" and gave in to what Michael demanded.

4. Oh, and that he made a mistake.

I do not want to see this tactic happen. Michael suffered enough, and his children would eventually be aware of the assassination of their father's character?

Therefore, if there is no PROOF about Ratner and the propofol, and no PROOF about Adams, is it really a good thing to promote those theories strongly on here? On a public board? And add to the dirt that will be thrown on Michael? If it is ok. . . . . why?

I truly wish we could stick to genuine testimony, legal documents, and transcripts here. And NOT "sources say" tabloidesque reporting.

My theory, condensed version? Murray was desperate to go to London. He may well have angry with Michael. His desperation and anger made him push a massive bolus of propofol. When he'd realized what he'd done, it was already too late and he spent the rest of that time trying to cover his tracks.

 

[Soundmind]

“ Detective Martinez <?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com

In a search warrant affidavit, Murray claims between March and April, he arranged for Adams to treat Jackson with Propofol, and was there to witness the procedure. <o></o>
"My client wasn't in California in June, May, April, or even March," Agwara said. “Murray called him and asked for a meeting." <o></o>
The attorney would not go into detail about what happened at that meeting in March or even where it was at, but he said that was the one and only time the two doctors have met. <o></o>
"Why Dr. Murray has chosen to drag my client's name into this, we don't know," Agwara said. <o></o>
Agwara admitted Adams had given Jackson Propofol before -- on three or four occasions in 2008 -- all for dental procedures. “
[/QUOTE]

<o></o>

“Dr. M said, he did not sign up for this. Isn’t that what Dr. M told you.<o></o>
<o></o>
I’m just answering the question.s Well, now you’re answering mine. (EC)<o></o>
<o></o>
You do recall Dr. M was worried aobut MJ use of this propofol. yes.<o></o>
And you do recall Dr. M saying he needed to find a way to get him off of this. ? Yes.<o></o>
<o></o>
he said that he first started to give MJ propofol, becuase he was worried about this tour and he could sleep and that MJ convinced Dr. M to give him this propofol.<o></o>
<o></o>
I don’t remember the word convinced” <o></o>

<o></o>
Murray “declined” according to his interview with investigators although the evidence suggests the opposite .

<o></o>

Martinze,<o></o>

Mr. chernoff asked about this incident in March 2009, relayed about Dr. Mark burg via Dr. Adams, supposedly MJ was given propofol,<o></o>
<o></o>
In whos office was MJ was given propofol? Dr. Murray’s.<o></o>
<o></o>
And that’s because in his office he had a crash cart. and oxygen there at his office? (Other iem.. puls oxyometer? ) at the office? Yes.”<o></o>

<o>

<o>When we spoke with Dr. Metzger on July 5, he told us "I have not treated him [Jackson] for ages." At the time he told us he last spoke with Jackson by phone in April and talked about the tour, his children, nutrition and hydration. We specifically asked Dr. Metzger if he talked to Jackson about Propofol and he said he had not.

But now Dr. Metzger's lawyer, Harland Braun, says Dr. Metzger actually went to Jackson's house in April and the singer specifically asked about using Propofol at home, and the doctor advised against it. Braun told us he believed Jackson was asking Dr. Metzger to provide the drug to Jackson but the doctor declined.

Braun says Metzger wrote notes about the meeting in his medical charts, despite what Dr. Metzger told us -- that he hadn't been Jackson's doctor "for ages." Braun didn't know when Dr. Metzger wrote his notes.
</o>

Did Metzeger's lawyer lie about that also? he is another Lee? </o>

 

[xthunderx2]

I am really confused about this copy pasted quotes you have given ...You didnt give any links....you just copy and pasted a bunch of stuff ...some of that stuff is not even accurate testimony. Please provide links with testimony..I looked at sprockets notes..I did not come up with the same stuff you did....thank you

 

[Autumn II]

Thanks. This helps. It IS the defense strategy. The question is asked if Michael asked Murray to call David Adams about giving him propofol. It is asked by the DEFENSE, and he is admonished by the judge. The question is not answered, and there is no confirmation.

Second quote comes from Murray's statements. Adams' attorney says, "Why do you have to drag my client's name into this this." The question was by the defense, but there was no confirmation.

Where does the Metzger material come from? A search warrant? Court testimony? Is there a link? Would be appreciated. Who is the "we" in the statement "we spoke with Dr. Metzger." (I haven't said ANYBODY was lying, except Murray. We just need to know the sources for information, to evaluate.)

For the first two quotes, those were QUESTIONS by Chernoff, not testimony. To be expected. Don't know where the Metzger material comes from. Can you provide that?

(quotes below, for reference)

Now talking about the offering a job on the THIS IS IT tour.
Do you recall that Dr. Murray told you about a period of time and that MJ called Dr. M in order to obtain a Doctor that would provide MJ with propofol, Dr. David Adams? That other doctor was David Adams.
Offered both the job???? Dr. Adams had given propofol?
You have implied in front of the job, Dr. M was hired to give propofol.
Objection!
JP tone it down please.
-----------------------------------
In a search warrant affidavit, Murray claims between March and April, he arranged for Adams to treat Jackson with Propofol, and was there to witness the procedure.
"My client wasn't in California in June, May, April, or even March," Agwara said. &#8220;Murray called him and asked for a meeting."
The attorney would not go into detail about what happened at that meeting in March or even where it was at, but he said that was the one and only time the two doctors have met.
"Why Dr. Murray has chosen to drag my client's name into this, we don't know," Agwara said.
Agwara admitted Adams had given Jackson Propofol before -- on three or four occasions in 2008 -- all for dental procedures. &#8220;
------------------------------
When we spoke with Dr. Metzger on July 5, he told us "I have not treated him [Jackson] for ages." At the time he told us he last spoke with Jackson by phone in April and talked about the tour, his children, nutrition and hydration. We specifically asked Dr. Metzger if he talked to Jackson about Propofol and he said he had not.

But now Dr. Metzger's lawyer, Harland Braun, says Dr. Metzger actually went to Jackson's house in April and the singer specifically asked about using Propofol at home, and the doctor advised against it. Braun told us he believed Jackson was asking Dr. Metzger to provide the drug to Jackson but the doctor declined.
------------------------------------------------------
Braun says Metzger wrote notes about the meeting in his medical charts, despite what Dr. Metzger told us -- that he hadn't been Jackson's doctor "for ages." Braun didn't know when Dr. Metzger wrote his notes.
-------------------------------

 

[Soundmind]

OK, what about MJ and Murray visiting Adams in his office in March, what that was for? social event? Adams did say MJ and Murray asked to meet him and they did show up at some point in March, ask Justthefacts, she had posted an article with quotes from Adams before.

TMZ talked about Metzeger. It came from TMZ.

 

[Tipareth]

I am really confused about this copy pasted quotes you have given ...You didnt give any links....you just copy and pasted a bunch of stuff ...some of that stuff is not even accurate testimony. Please provide links with testimony..I looked at sprockets notes..I did not come up with the same stuff you did....thank you

you are right.

Even testimonies, some are lies. Remember Mike trial and how Gavin lied on stand. People do lie under oath... it's sad but true....

But in this cases - all the 'Mike wanted badly Propofol, asked for it and begged for it' comes from hearsay, third parties or unreliable folks.

And I think is important, I think that in a better world this would go investigated deeply and maybe other things would come out.
But into this world police is kinda lazy, justice the same, and they want to not spend money. At least when it comes to Mike, and him not being the accused one but the victim... :smilerolleyes:

 

[Autumn II]

you are right.

Even testimonies, some are lies. Remember Mike trial and how Gavin lied on stand. People do lie under oath... it's sad but true....

But in this cases - all the 'Mike wanted badly Propofol, asked for it and begged for it' comes from hearsay, third parties or unreliable folks.

And I think is important, I think that in a better world this would go investigated deeply and maybe other things would come out.
But into this world police is kinda lazy, justice the same, and they want to not spend money. At least when it comes to Mike, and him not being the accused one but the victim... :smilerolleyes:

Exactly, and I hope we can move on from this list of doctors (who did NOT testify to giving Michael propofol) now and develop some theories based on what we DO know. This is exactly the tactic the defense will use, and I'm dreading it -- that Michael's name will be dragged through the mud, yet again. That will affect his children. In the end, what MATTERS is what Murray did to Michael, as his doctor.

Michael's trial was horrific! Very little of any of what was reported by media was accurate. There were many "confirmations" that were not confirmations at all. Names of children Michael had known were trotted out. But in the end, there was only Gavin Arvizo (and his mother) who testified about ALLEGED abuse, and the jury simply did not believe them.

We had hot-air balloons, planned abduction to Brazil, "witnesses" who were not witnesses at all, but disgruntled staff who'd been fired and sold their "stories." And on, and on, and on.

I hope in this thread we can go back and look at the data -- court transcripts, legal documents, Murray's statements (as shifting as they seem to be), and that sort of material. If we base theories on tabloid types of reporting, those are not viable theories at all.

Michael's medical treatment of the past (whatever that is) will be brought out at trial, or there will be attempts by the defense to do this. The goal there is to show that Murray didn't know what he was getting into; he found Michael to be demanding, and Murray crumbled and gave him what he wanted. Murray will be painted as a doctor in a long line of others who gave Michael propofol. This is a DEFENSE theory. In other words, Murray will be constructed, in words, as the victim. I'm NOT buying it, and I doubt a jury will, either. What MATTERS is what MURRAY did to Michael. Michael did not deserve to die.

We may never know what happened on that awful day. There are facts that swirl around it, but I doubt Murray will ever tell the truth. My theory has shifted somewhat, and now I'm thinking this may have been a more deliberate act by Murray, done in a fit of anger. There was that horrible meeting at Michael's house (Ortega's testimony), where among other things that happened, Murray was ANGRY at Ortega for sending Michael home. Should not Murray's first concern be for Michael's health? There was the unsigned contract on the seat of Murray's car. His trip to London was far from certain. I think his propofol "treatments" had done physical damage to Michael (the day Ortega sent him home -- those symptoms can be attributed to side-effects of anesthesia). There is Murray's past history, that includes physical violence (he was once arrested for spousal abuse.) So now I'm thinking along the lines of "Murray snapped" and pushed a fatal dose in the heat-of-the-moment.

I hope Murray will someday tell the truth. But I doubt it.

 

[elusive moonwalker]

How rude.:angry:
So just because I didnt join this board years ago means I am less of a fan, means I didnt do my own research on 03-05, means I didnt support Michael then, before then or since? Sorry I didnt realise that to love Michael meant being a member of a forum
I dont think I have posted anything on this board that your comment can be directed towards me but nontheless I find it insulting. Maybe you think this board is an exclusive club that no one else can join? Well if thats the officoal line make it clear and Ill gladly go elsewhere.

woah. when did i name you? and im sorry if u didnt get what i ment but back in 03-05 there were posters who joined this board with the sole intention of supporting sneddon.they acted as trolls. these ppl mainly came from the court tv boards are were very easy to spot. in the end we had fun taking the piss out of them. thats what im talking about. :doh: some fans need to stop being so dam touchy even more so when they cant spot the trolls themself and think ppls comments are being directed at them :doh:

 

[mjsdot]

woah. when did i name you? and im sorry if u didnt get what i ment but back in 03-05 there were posters who joined this board with the sole intention of supporting sneddon.they acted as trolls. these ppl mainly came from the court tv boards are were very easy to spot. in the end we had fun taking the piss out of them. thats what im talking about. :doh: some fans need to stop being so dam touchy even more so when they cant spot the trolls themself and think ppls comments are being directed at them :doh:

OK thanks for the explanation but if youd made that clear in your first post I wouldnt have jumped to the wrong conclusion, it wouldnt make sense to anyone who wasnt a member then.
Sorry for jumping down your throat and being touchy but emotions a bit raw after past couple of weeks:blush:

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Is it confirmed that there was no preparation in terms of legal paperwork, packing, etc. for Murray to go or are people just assuming since nothing along those lines had been reported.

i think its just assuming based on an unsigned contract.i had a look on the UK immigration site and obviously its only a rough guide but it gives u the chance to put you details in inregards to whether u would need a work permit or not. and there is a chance depending on how long exactly murray was gonna stay in london ie whether mj was gonna go back to the usa for xmas or if murray was when the shows were on the xmas break that murray might not have needed one because of where he was born. but considering the pros dont seem to be going in this direction we may never know whether he had all his papers sorted (if he needed them)

 

[Autumn II]

i think its just assuming based on an unsigned contract.i had a look on the UK immigration site and obviously its only a rough guide but it gives u the chance to put you details in inregards to whether u would need a work permit or not. and there is a chance depending on how long exactly murray was gonna stay in london ie whether mj was gonna go back to the usa for xmas or if murray was when the shows were on the xmas break that murray might not have needed one because of where he was born. but considering the pros dont seem to be going in this direction we may never know whether he had all his papers sorted (if he needed them)

Right. I think that's based on the unsigned contract (which is a fact. It was on the seat of Murray's car when it was impounded). But also based on Ortega's testimony about that meeting at Michael's house, where Murray was clearly VERY angry at Ortega (and at Michael, too? Don't know for sure, but clearly it was an unpleasant meeting.) Michael had been missing some rehearsals, and then Ortega had sent him home, and then there was that unpleasant meeting -- so Murray had to be worried about the show -- and his future employment.

Other factual stuff we know about Murray is that he was behind on house-payments, and also behind on child-support, so we know that he had financial stress. He really needed that money, as the physician "caring for" Michael. (I don't think he "cared for" him, at all.)

 

[elusive moonwalker]

so Murray had to be worried about the show -- and his future employment.

defo. murrays objective was to get to london by any means poss

 

[Autumn II]

Added to that is that call to Lee. Michael didn't call MURRAY. His "doctor."

 

[CherubimII]

Do you remember when Conrad Murray went missing for about
48 hours after Michael Jackson was killed?
He seemingly just disappeared. The police could not contact him.

Why did the police allow him to just disappear?
Where was Conrad Murray? Who was he with?
What was he doing during this time period?

Anyone care to speculate on this mystery?

 

[elusive moonwalker]

Why did the police allow him to just disappear?
Where was Conrad Murray? Who was he with?
What was he doing during this time period?

with his lawyers creating his defence which he then gave to the police on the 27th

 

[StacyJ]

with his lawyers creating his defence which he then gave to the police on the 27th

well that interview was helpful, because it shows his lies and negligence all the way through. He gave a timeline during that interview with the police which the prosecutor is using against him

 

[Autumn II]

Do you remember when Conrad Murray went missing for about
48 hours after Michael Jackson was killed?
He seemingly just disappeared. The police could not contact him.

Why did the police allow him to just disappear?

He was careful not to call time-of-death at the house, which would have meant an automatic coroner's investigation (which happened anyway. Initially there was caution-tape around Michael's house, but IMHO it was taken down too soon). Hospital staff didn't have any evidence to give to police that a crime had been committed (i.e. no signs of physical trauma). So, Murray was able to just walk away. We know he wanted to get back into the house, but don't think he accomplished it.

Where was Conrad Murray? Who was he with?

I don't think that's ever been said. I'd expect he was with his girlfriend?

What was he doing during this time period?

He contacted his attorneys. I remember reading that the police said his attorneys had set up a time when he'd be interviewed. Therefore ,he was, nominally, "cooperating." (not really) He had 48 hours to confer with attorneys to set up a defense-story.

 

[StacyJ]

So is Chernoff and Murray going to try and blame Dr Adams for killing MJ? Dr Adams had nothing to do with Murray's insane decision to give MJ propofol at his house. And Murray is lying when he says he did not sign up for this.. The man was buying tons of propofol in March according to the pharmacist so what does he mean he didn't sign up for it?

Did he not think the pharmacist would be testifying?

Did he not think the authorities would find out that he was having the propofol sent to his girlfriend's house? what does he mean he did not sign up for this and he was trying to get him off that stuff?