Latest on MJJC

Appeal Thread - Murray Filed for Appeal / Update: Appeal DENIED

ivy

Proud Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2009
Messages
16,074
Points
0
Location
USA
The below info is copied from Positively Michael by permission

Posted by GlitterySocks at http://www.positivelymichael.com/forums/showthread.php?29056-The-Appeal-Thread

Yesterday Murray's team indicated that they would file paperwork for an appeal either yesterday or today. This morning I watched a Flanagan interview on 'The Early Show' this morning, and he outlined the defense's rationale for an appeal:

1. No jury sequestration
2. Michael's financial debt was not allowed to be discussed (showed desperation)
3. Couldn't subpena Klein, could only discuss his records
4. Issue of bottle in evidence that contains propofol--if it is 90% propofol, that would validate the infusion theory, if 100% propofol, couldn't have been an infusion.

He said there are several other issues as well, and that they will be discussed in the Appellate court. Yesterday during the post-hearing press conference he implied that Judge Pastor was biased against his team, he was overly harsh on Murray, and that his mind was made up prior to the hearing. He said something along the lines of "Pastor's actions should be evaluated by another court of law".

One other point of interest is that he said that they consider Murray to be in danger in the general prison population. I am assuming this means that they will want him in solitary confinement.
 
ivy;3548912 said:
4. Issue of bottle in evidence that contains propofol--if it is 90% propofol, that would validate the infusion theory, if 100% propofol, couldn't have been an infusion.
Click to expand...

This is a response from Dr. Shafer - posted by Muzikfactorytwo on twitter - http://xltweet.com/show/?id=53515154564D


I asked Dr Steven Shafer his opinion re: Conrad Murray request to test 100ml Propofol vial for Propofol/Lidocaine concentration. Judge Pastor DENIED this request this morning stating that it is too late. Following is Dr. Shafer's response:

"I would assume that since the defense requested the test, they did so because Conrad Murray told them he didn’t inject lidocaine into the bottle (tacitly admitting that he used the bottle for his infusion).

It isn’t relevant. Conrad Murray could just as easily have had a syringe of lidocaine that he injected whenever MJ complained of propofol burning. I thought that he might have mixed lidocaine into the bottle, but since the defense made this request he probably didn’t do that.

The other possibility is that Conrad Murray gave 100 mg of lidocaine IV at the time of the arrest. Since he had no ECG, he didn’t know if Michael Jackson might have had some arrhythmia. In that case, 100 mg of lidocaine would actually have been a reasonable drug to inject. Particularly considering that Murray was a cardiologist, lidocaine injection as part of his efforts would not be too out of line. (Lidocaine is a first line drug in cardiac arrest).

All of this is speculation, because there are no medical records. If there were medical records we wouldn’t be engaging in this “guess what I did” nonsense.

My conclusion from this is that there was no lidocaine in the bottle, and Conrad Murray gave it to Michael Jackson directly rather than mixing it in the bottle. As mentioned, it doesn’t matter, because Michael Jackson died of a propofol overdose, not a lidocaine overdose."
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

Thanks ivy. talk about scrapping the barrell with those reasons for appeal.
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

So if mjs money issues came in so would have murrays so one wipes out the other. klien would have hardly incriminated himself and shaffer has explained the lidocaine. very weak arguments
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

Based on what we have seen from Klein's interviews he could have said that Michael was addicted to Propofol. He blames Hoefflin and talks about interventions. To Pastor other doctors didn't matter. but it's hard to say what the jurors might have thought if Klein was on that stand calling Michael a propofol addict.
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

True. i guess i was thinking more from the demoral side of things.but interms of the actual charge its not evidence that would support an appeal interms of showing murray didnt commit gross negligence
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

gosh please no. I don't want the madness to continue or restart let us all heal from what we've experienced, let Michael for once rest in peace.
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

ivy said:
Based on what we have seen from Klein's interviews he could have said that Michael was addicted to Propofol. He blames Hoefflin and talks about interventions. To Pastor other doctors didn't matter. but it's hard to say what the jurors might have thought if Klein was on that stand calling Michael a propofol addict.
Click to expand...

yes, but the problem was not that propofol was given - that's legal. The problem is the way it was given : no adequate medical equipment then the cover up and lies, 20mn to call 911. And Michael dying on a drip, while Murray was talking on the phone to his girlfriend. Klein would not have helped the defense much, IMO.
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

regardless imo..even if Klein DID testify and he did say that Michael was a propofol addict...NONE of them were in that room on June 25th,,and NONE of them did what Murray did and that was not meeting the standards of care for his patient..so IMO...all convicts will go through their string of appeals...they are entitled to them by law..however..these appeals are also thrown out., I am not worried,
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

Theres also the issue of the jury instructions where even if the jury thought mj self injected they could still convict. so that ruins an appeal theory interms of the defence basically saying mj was desperate and the finances would have shown that
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

Imo the only way for any appeal to even get off the starting block is evidence to show murray wasnt negligent as thats what the charge is about.
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

elusive moonwalker said:
Imo the only way for any appeal to even get off the starting block is evidence to show murray wasnt negligent as thats what the charge is about.
Click to expand...


Exactly. And didn't Murray admit a long time ago to giving Michael the propofol after Michael had been "begging" him? If so, then to me, that would mean that Murray would have had to be initially resisting Michael's request for it. But then gave in when Michael (allegedly) kept "begging". In addition, he has claimed that Michael had dependence issues with Propofol to start with. Personally, the fact that he has admitted to giving Michael the propofol at all when he has claimed to have at least suspected that there was already a problem gives me the impression that he knew better. Why should he get an appeal when he could have prevented the unthinkable from happening by simply not giving Michael that stuff, let alone not even having the stuff in the house to begin with? This is all just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

Bitter_finalEE_twinklEE said:
gosh please no. I don't want the madness to continue or restart let us all heal from what we've experienced, let Michael for once rest in peace.
Click to expand...

I understand that but they will file for an appeal.
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

ivy said:
Based on what we have seen from Klein's interviews he could have said that Michael was addicted to Propofol. He blames Hoefflin and talks about interventions. To Pastor other doctors didn't matter. but it's hard to say what the jurors might have thought if Klein was on that stand calling Michael a propofol addict.
Click to expand...

I'm sure if Klein was on the stand calling Michael a Propofol addict the jury would have condemned Murray a Dr for ordering gallons of the stuff instead of refusing to give him what he wanted. It looks like there's an answer for every one of the defence appeal request's 'at least I hope there is.'
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

Even if Michael were the most raging propofol addict in the history of mankind, none of it would matter because it still would not explain why Murray taped him drugged up over the phone, nor why he chose to order more propofol mere days after said recording took place, not to mention administering the propofol on June 25, 2009. If anything, it would make his actions look even worse, since he was the one doing the administering and the ordering of propofol.

No matter which way you paint it, Murray is at fault.

I understand Flanagan is just doing his job, but for Christ's sake, there's only so much self-delusion you can do in a certain case. Time to move on. If he were smart, he'd take the money and run. That's what I'd do.
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

Does Pastor have to send a list of his rulings to the appeals court or do the appeals court request them from the court reporter?
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

I have no experience with appeals so my question is what will it be like if he gets his appeal?
There will be a new judge and jury so does that mean we have go through it all again from the start?
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

Appeal judges rule not a jury.they decide on what should happen ie a re trial. but tbh im not concerned about any appeal.there is nothing in this case that even remotley supports an appeal. the defence are just going through the motions.
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

Another thing that I don't understand is why they are using the fact that the jury was not sequestered as part of the appeal request. So just because the jury was not sequestered and found Murray guilty, they weren't fair? I'm sure there are plenty of trials where the jury is not sequestered and the jury still finds the defendant not guilty. And also during Murray's trial wasn't it said that there were money problems regarding sequestering the jury? I don't remember. So I might be wrong. Anyhow, in Murray's case if I'm hearing correctly, the defense wanted to be able to bring Michael's finances into the trial when, as I heard, one of Murray's excuses for giving in to Michael's alleged "demands" for propofol is that Murray was deeply in debt and needed the money. So he just "HAD" to do what Michael wanted. Or were they going to go on and on about Michael's supposed financial difficulties and portraying him as desperate while trying to keep Murray's debt issues out of the trial? How is that right? I think Pastor made the correct decision in not letting Murray's financial business be talked about and not letting Michael's financial business be talked about either. But yet they want all these things as reasons for an appeal? This is just so silly to me. This is all just my opinion
 
Last edited:
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

If that's all they have as grounds for appeal I believe they are clutching at straws and appeal will probably be thrown out.
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

Kingofpop4ever3000 said:
Another thing that I don't understand is why they are using the fact that the jury was not sequestered as part of the appeal request.
Click to expand...

Theoretically speaking, that is the only argument Flanagan has made which has an ounce of reason in it. Especially in high-profile cases where the media talking heads ruminate over the day's proceedings, infecting them with their own bogus opinions as we know only too well, the sequestration of a jury to ensure the integrity of a given verdict may be of paramount importance.

However, looking at the events in this case as they unfolded, I very highly doubt sequestering the jury would have made any difference at all in the verdict. The extent of Murray's negligence and criminal disregard is just too great to ignore.

Like Elusive said, the defence is just going through the motions, and from what I heard neither Chernoff nor Flanagan will be part of the appeal process.
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

Thx ivy

first of all what does sequestration of a jury mean?

And i like ang doesnt know much about appeal, who will determine and when if the appeal is granded?

And the part about the 90 procent vial and 100 procent vial, im confused by this. How does this prove a drip or no drip?
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

Ingelief said:
Thx ivy

first of all what does sequestration of a jury mean?
Click to expand...

USLegal.com said:
Judges will have members of a jury sequestered or kept together in order to protect juries from outside influences This includes any communication with persons not allowed to be in contact with the jurors as well as the content of news reports concerning the case. Courts view sequestration as a great burden on the personal lives of the jurors as well as the cost involved, and it is used, therefore, only if the lawyer for the defense is able to show the judge there is prejudice in the surrounding community against the defendant, or that news reports would prevent members of the jury from being impartial.
Click to expand...

Ingelief said:
And the part about the 90 procent vial and 100 procent vial, im confused by this. How does this prove a drip or no drip?
Click to expand...

That's just Flanny showing us his talents again. Dr. Shafer already said all that was irrelevant.
 
Re: Possible Appeal Thread - All Discussion

I could never understand what financial problems can do with doctor who didn't call 911
 
Murray Appeals Conviction

Conrad Murray
Appeals Manslaughter Conviction

1002-cm-ex-appeal.jpg


Dr. Conrad Murray has just filed an appeal, challenging his conviction for involuntary manslaughter in the death of Michael Jackson ... TMZ has learned.

Murray filed the document in pro per -- which means he's representing himself instead of using a lawyer.

On the portion of the document where a lawyer will usually state his or her firm's contact information -- Murray lists "Men's Central Jail" ... and includes his booking number.

While he is representing himself, Murray is still communicating with one of the lawyers who repped him in the manslaughter trial, Nareg Gourjian.

Gourjian tells TMZ ... "This case presents a gold mine of issues for any appellate lawyer. Dr. Murray is confident that the Court of Appeal will vindicate him."

http://www.tmz.com/2011/12/02/conrad-murray-files-appeal-involuntary-manslaughter/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top