Latest on MJJC

Murray Trial Day 22, November 1st

twinklEE

Proud Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2007
Messages
7,862
Points
83
Location
LONDON
Murray Trial Day 22, November 1st - Discussion

Streaming Sites:

http://www.mjjunderground.com/the-trial-of-conrad-murray-live-streaming/
http://www.mjjcommunity.com/the-peop...conrad-murray/
http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/livenow?id=8366366
http://www.ontheredcarpet.com/livevideo?id=8361777
http://www.ustream.tv/conradmurraytrial

Flanagan is on redirect with White, which Walgren's probably gonna recross after that, the defense is going to call Dr. Gabrielle Ornalis before resting their case

Walgren's reported to rebut today by calling back Dr. Shafer, the articles didn't mention Anderson though, so it's unlikely that he'll be back as well.

Murray told the judge yesterday that he's still not made up his mind whether to testify or not, so there is a tiny chance of him taking the stand, though highly unlikely.

Court is going to resume with re-redirect at 9.30am PST which is

12.30pm EST
04.30pm GMT
05.30pm CET




 
Last edited:
do we know what Dr. Gabrielle Ornalis is called to testify about?
 
abc7MurrayTrial ABC7 Murray Trial
Judge said decision 2 testify is Dr #Murray's only, not the attorneys or court. He has constitutional right 2 do either. Should he testify?
1 minute ago
»

abc7MurrayTrial ABC7 Murray Trial
Judge Michael Pastor gave Dr. #Murray until this morning to decide whether he will testify on his own defense or use his rt to remain silent
4 minutes ago
 
My internet crashed yesterday so i missed the entire day!! Im so glad you guys provided me with such great updates in the other thread. Cant wait see what happens today
 
So Shafer is the prosecution only state rebuttal witness?

abc7MurrayTrial ABC7 Murray Trial
Prosecution said they will briefly call Dr Steven Shafer for rebuttal. #ConradMurraytrial
2 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply

abc7MurrayTrial ABC7 Murray Trial
Trial will resume with re-direct examination of Dr Paul White. Defense will call 1 additional witness, Dr Ornellas, then said they will rest
3 minutes ago

abc7MurrayTrial ABC7 Murray Trial
Dr. #Murray's decision should be known before trial resumes at 9:30 am. Murray and attorneys are ordered to appear at 8:30 am.
6 minutes ago
 
Anxiously awaiting his decision. I'm not sure if him testifying would be a good thing or a bad thing. It depends, I guess we'll see.
 
Vici said:
who is she and do we know what she probably will say?
Click to expand...

She made those charts that White testified about friday. She is not a medical doctor. She watched the trial on TV and decided to make those charts for the defense after Flanagan contacted her. She met with White last week.
 
Well Murray might be a total drama queen with a sob story on stand to get the sympathy of the jurors...
 
Oh dear! Bad start to the day...

ABC7 Murray Trial

Judge seems a little frustrated with the attorneys, since he doesn't want to make the jury wait. Trial resumes at 9:30 am. https://twitter.com/#!/search?q=#conradmurray




https://twitter.com/#https://twitter.com/#https://twitter.com/#


From the courtroom: hearing to discuss admission of exhibits going on right now. Over the past 10 mins defense attys trying to organize them


Judge is fuming! "Why did I tell everybody to be ready with exhibits... It's now 5 after 9 an we have gotten nowhere!" Judge left bench.
 
Is it the Prosecution or the Defense that needs to organize the exhibits?
 
Conrad Murray Trial Defense Lawyers Split Over Murray Testifying

Dr. Conrad Murray's lawyers are split over whether the doc should take the stand in his own defense ... TMZ has learned.

Sources connected with the case tell TMZ Ed Chernoff is adamant -- he does NOT want Murray to testify because he would be crucified on cross-examination.

Michael Flanagan feels the opposite -- that Murray MUST take the stand because without his testimony the jury will convict him.

We're told Murray will defer to his lawyers, but Murray and Chernoff are joined at the hip and it's almost certain the doc will follow his lead. Besides, Chernoff is the lead counsel and when push comes to shove -- he wins.

Our 2 cents -- Murray testifying would be a disaster for the defense.
 
just eating for abit appreciate if others can do updates thanks
 
Flanagan questioning White about the models done by Dr. Ornallis. They are quite variable and aren't an exact science.
 
White states the models represent the lorazepam, orally and IV, given by Murray and taken by Michael.
 
0.016mg in the stomach starting at 0. No lorazepam residual was present in the body prior to the time Dr. Murray gave the first bolus dose of lorazepam on the 25th, according to Dr. White. White states that looking at the 7:00 time which suggests he might have taken lorazepam, that assuming it's only 15 minutes later, you would see more residual free lorazepam in the stomach. So you can work the models backwards to get basically any number you desire.
 
They're really just estimates and by shifting along the time axis, you can alter the timing of the peak level as well as the blood level at the time of autopsy, and the amount of residual free drug at the time of the autopsy. All this according to Dr. White about the Ornellis models.
 
Flanagan states 4 bolus' of 10mg, White's model indicative of 8 lorazepam given at approx. 7:00. How many present if you made alterations to the parameters? A huge number.
 
Flanagan pointing out that minor and major changes in the models can cause drastic changes. White states the models are subject to variability because they're assuming population and numbers.
 
White talking about how different models could be made assuming different types of dosage, numbers of pills, and size of dosage for each dose to get the numbers observed at autopsy. Flanagan states the time, dosage, etc can all be altered that can all lead to a 0.169 number in the blood.

Flanagan: we don't know how much lorazepam was used, we don't know how much was given via IV. You can't tell whether it was orally, bolus or IV. White agrees.
 
White was asked about the 0.3 figure used from an article when calculating the urine concentration. White recalls. Flanagan stumbling over words and confusing the exhibits.
 
is it me but flanagan seems to be damaging his own case by saying its all varible and we havnt really got a clue as to what happened and when and you can make up literally an infinate amount of senarios
 
Flanagan states the figure of 0.3% was used from a Simons article. Dr. Ornellis looked at a number of articles - Objection from Walgren, sustained. Answer stricken.

Flanagan asking the question again. White states the Simons article says less than 0.3% according to Walgren. It could have been 0, it could have been 0.1, or 0.2.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top