Latest on MJJC

Murray Trial Day 22, November 1st

Originally Posted by Erikmjfan

dont understand how the character witnesses in itself can create reasnoble doubt!? It should be what happened in the bedroom on june 25th that matters.However glad see the prosecution got the in the chance of convicting even if so dumb juror believe the self administration theory.

Whatever reasonable doubt the 5 character witnesses raise, all the doctors, even the defense's, counter IMO. And how many doctors were there on the pros side, at least 5 condemning Murray's actions. Even White said, "absolutely not" in references to Murrays use of propofol in the home. I really do believe fellow doctors, professionals in the same field, saying one of their own was grossly negligent in his actions outweighs what Murray's patients said. Even one of Murray's patients admitted everyone deserves a basic standard of care. He may have received it, but it was proven beyond a reasonable doubt that MJ didn't.

I'm preparing myself for the worse, but I don't think the character witnesses are what will get Murray's lying boohooing butt off.
 
Erikmjfan said:
dont understand how the character witnesses in itself can create reasnoble doubt!? It should be what happened in the bedroom on june 25th that matters.

However glad see the prosecution got the in the chance of convicting even if so dumb juror believe the self administration theory.
Click to expand...

elusive moonwalker said:
Ivy come in here and make us feel better about these instructions.!!!!

i fail to see why these instructions even happen the definition of the charge is what it is.
Click to expand...

I personally did not see it as "reasonable doubt". In this case you have 2 sides and Murray chose to not to talk for himself.

As prosecution brought in Paul Gongaware to demonstrate that Murray was greedy and asked for $5 million, the jurors are given the option to weight the words of his other patients that say he wasn't after money. In my mind there's nothing wrong with that. Also he might had this clinic at a ;ow income location but he left them to take the more profitable job, didn't he?

To me this is the most important part :

Over defense attorneys' objections, Pastor also accepted a jury instruction that goes to the question of whether Murray could be convicted even if jurors believe the defense's contention that Jackson injected himself.

Jurors will be told that Murray is still criminally liable "if the defendant should have foreseen the possibility of harm that could
result from his act."
Click to expand...

this is huge and really good for us.


I wish in a way that White's talks with Murray had been let into the evidence -
Click to expand...

well to this I would say be careful for what you wish for. What Murray said to White and what White repeated on the stand was actually to introduce reasonable doubt. I do not understand why people think that if murray took the stand and/or what he said to White was the truth.

Look to overall now: according to Murray's statement to the police he left Michael alone only for 2 minutes. From a reasonable person's perspective - even leaving all medical information aside - to believe that MJ woke up all alert, draw up the Propofol in a syringe (which we all know is a hard thing to do), injected himself and died instantly to the point of being not savable is a hard thing to believe. Add that to the fact that Murray said he found him with a pulse and heartbeat it also makes it hard to grasp why he couldn't save him or call for help.

Then look to what Murray told to White : Michael was walking around (alert and mobile) , he was addicted enough to have his own stash, Murray left the room for 40 minutes and left a half full syringe and when he returned Michael was already long gone so any attempt was futile. When you "believe" that story the 40 minute window with an already filled syringe gives you the reasonable doubt. - which the prosecution refuted with medical evidence.

Again I understand that everyone - including me- wants to know what happened that day but honestly I do not believe for a second that Murray would tell us the truth. Whatever he tells us would be a modified version just to make him look good - and blame Michael.
 
No matter how great he was to those patients lets not forget he left them for more money. Let's not forget that he told one patient that he was dying one week by yet left him to go work for Michael. And when this guy said he would sue Murray all of the sudden Murray calls him when he should have been watching Michael and said his heart had healed after a heart attack.
 
ivy said:
Again I understand that everyone - including me- wants to know what happened that day but honestly I do not believe for a second that Murray would tell us the truth. Whatever he tells us would be a modified version just to make him look good - and blame Michael.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. Murray had two days after Michael's death to cook up a story. At the time, he didn't know what evidence police had, and that evidence eventually countered much of what Murray said in his interview. Now, he knows the evidence and has had months to come up with a better story. He'd just twist facts, exaggerate circumstances, do whatever he could to put himself in an innocent light, like he apparently did with White.
 
I'm wondering, with over 300 pieces of evidence and everything else the jurors need to examine, review, discuss, etc, is it even possible for them to come up with a verdict on Friday? I would not want them to rush through this just because they don't want to return to court on Monday. What's most likely to happen? This is nerve wracking.
 
Depends on what happens on the first vote. normally they pick a jury foreperson then do the first vote. if everyone agrees in the first vote thats it. if not you start from there say for example theres only two ppl saying not guilty. the others work on why those two say not guilty. its not like u have to look through every bit of evidence. u look at what u need to look at
 
elusive is right. probably by the end of the day they'll take a first vote. if they all agree the verdict can be quick. also as this trial has gone on for a while and if they don't want to come back again, they might "rush" the verdict as well.

T-Mez on Positively Michael podcast was expecting them to take 2-3 days so a verdict by tuesday -wednesday next week is what he was expecting. but we'll see.
 
I've got a question re the new defence theory put forward by white regarding murray leaving for 45 mins and mj self-injecting and dying immediately. White got admonished by the judge for using conversations he had had with murray in his testimony eg mj's private prop stash. So why was he, a prop expert, allowed to put forward this brand new theory of murray being away for 45 mins and a loaded syringe lying around the bedroom, and impeaching murray's statement that mj had a pulse on the pulse oximeter. If murray's not testifying, shouldn't that have only come in the defence closing statement?

I'm not actually concerned by this new theory - i'm hoping the jury will see it for the self-serving theory it is, designed purely to get round the facts in the case eg immediate heart attack to allow for high prop blood levels when respiratory arrest is far more common esp in a healthy 50 yr old. And it raises more questions - what happened to the syringe - in mj's hand/the port in the iv/the bed? How could murray not notice it. I hope walgren re-uses steinberg's analogy of a baby left on a kitchentop, he said this when he thought murray was out of the room for 2 mins, now the baby was left for 45 mins with a knife next to it. That's murder 2, never mind IM.
 
If i remember right with mj the first vote was 6 not guilty 3 guilty 3 undecided
 
I'm translating White right now and have to watch parts on youtube again, because some things are unclear to me in the summary (the stuff with the graphs especially, if you don't see all this in front of you and don't know exactly what is in the graph, it's hard to translate).

I just noticed again, apart from the things he said, that White is nothing compared to Shafer. Shafer is an expert in many different fields, he could do everything by himself, from the graphs to explaining all kinds of things about all kinds of meds, huge knowledge about articles and books and what they say, made his own research, etc. While White was advertised as the "father of Propofol", which may be true, but he doesn't know anything about anything, didn't read anything, no articles in detail, didn't do his graphs (because he is not an expert ... but he also never really spoke to the person who made the graphs in detail telling her what should be in the graphs or never talked to her about the graphs after she provided them), didn't do any research, etc.

I get the feeling that he didn't do all those things because they won't pay him what he was asking and because he wanted to have as many other people do all kinds of things for him, so that he can say he is not responsible for them (so most of his testimony is basically just him sitting there saying "I don't know, I didn't do this"). And apart from that, in general, he just doesn't seem to care about his field the way Shafer does.
 
Ive asked this question before but cant remem the answer. the fingerprint stipulation where mj murray and others were ruled out as having prints on certain things. what were those things and what items had un recoganisable prints on them
 
From summary:

Murray's fingerprint was found on 100ml Propofol bottle found inside the IV bag.
Fleak's fingerprint was found on the syringe on the table.
IV bag with the slit had 4 fingerprints on it. 2 fingerprints was found on saline bag and 20ml Propofol . 1 fingerprint was found on 20 ml propofol bottle. but no identification was made about these fingerprints. The following people were eliminated by manual comparison: Michael Jackson, Conrad Murray, Alberto Alvarez, Michael Amir Williams, Faheem Muhammed, Scott Smith, Mark Goodwin, Martin Blount, Jimmy Nicholas, Blanca Nicholas, Elissa Fleak, Kai Chase.
No useable fingerprints on : 2 midozolam vials, 1 lorazepam vial, 2 lidocaine vials, 1 lidacaine vial, eyedrops, tube marked bq, a bottle labelled ephedrine/caffeine/asprine , 2 100ml propofol vials, 7 20 ml propofol vials, 2 lidocaine vials, 1 lidocaine vial, 2 lorazepam vials, 4 flumanezil vials, 3 midazolam vials, IV tubing, IV y connector tubing, syringe with needle.

In short MJ's fingerprints was not on any of the items. Murray's fingerprints was only found on a 100ml Propofol bottle.
 
can someone tell me what is said to jury instructions? Ivy told us they can make a quilty verdict if they believe michael did it himself? But what else is said? Cant find it anywhere?

X
 
Bonnie Blue said:
I've got a question re the new defence theory put forward by white regarding murray leaving for 45 mins and mj self-injecting and dying immediately. White got admonished by the judge for using conversations he had had with murray in his testimony eg mj's private prop stash. So why was he, a prop expert, allowed to put forward this brand new theory of murray being away for 45 mins and a loaded syringe lying around the bedroom, and impeaching murray's statement that mj had a pulse on the pulse oximeter. If murray's not testifying, shouldn't that have only come in the defence closing statement?
Click to expand...

it's a simulation / theory that he came up with to explain the medical evidence. It's very similar to how Shafer said he believed an IV was started around 9 AM and continued to run even after Michael was dead.


Milka said:
I'm translating White right now and have to watch parts on youtube again, because some things are unclear to me in the summary (the stuff with the graphs especially, if you don't see all this in front of you and don't know exactly what is in the graph, it's hard to translate).
Click to expand...

I don't even understand half of it honestly :p

I just noticed again, apart from the things he said, that White is nothing compared to Shafer. Shafer is an expert in many different fields, he could do everything by himself, from the graphs to explaining all kinds of things about all kinds of meds, huge knowledge about articles and books and what they say, made his own research, etc. While White was advertised as the "father of Propofol", which may be true, but he doesn't know anything about anything, didn't read anything, no articles in detail, didn't do his graphs (because he is not an expert ... but he also never really spoke to the person who made the graphs in detail telling her what should be in the graphs or never talked to her about the graphs after she provided them), didn't do any research, etc.
Click to expand...

Shafer is impressive. I believe he took this issue to his heart and really worked on this to the point of drinking Propofol. He seemed researched and involved and ready. Walgren seemed highly knowledgeable as well and I tend to think that Shafer educated Walgren on the basics as well.

White on the other hand seemed like the professional witness that can be bought - $3,500 for a day in court. and it seemed like he came up with theories to fit the payment he's receiving and did not even search the subject at all.

And apart from that, in general, he just doesn't seem to care about his field the way Shafer does.
Click to expand...

totally agree

Ingelief said:
can someone tell me what is said to jury instructions? Ivy told us they can make a quilty verdict if they believe michael did it himself? But what else is said? Cant find it anywhere?

X
Click to expand...

we don't know the full jury instructions yet. we only know what is being reported in the media. the judge would probably make it public after he delivered them to the jurors. so we'll probably see it in a day or two.
 
@ivy i made a thread for thursday. Can you make it a sticky one? i dont know how to do that???? PLEASE? x
 
elusive moonwalker said:
Depends on what happens on the first vote. normally they pick a jury foreperson then do the first vote. if everyone agrees in the first vote thats it. if not you start from there say for example theres only two ppl saying not guilty. the others work on why those two say not guilty. its not like u have to look through every bit of evidence. u look at what u need to look at
Click to expand...

ivy said:
elusive is right. probably by the end of the day they'll take a first vote. if they all agree the verdict can be quick. also as this trial has gone on for a while and if they don't want to come back again, they might "rush" the verdict as well.

T-Mez on Positively Michael podcast was expecting them to take 2-3 days so a verdict by tuesday -wednesday next week is what he was expecting. but we'll see.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the clarification/reminder. I served on a jury once several years ago and have forgotten how it goes (I did not like the experience one bit).
 
elusive moonwalker said:
If i remember right with mj the first vote was 6 not guilty 3 guilty 3 undecided
Click to expand...

I haven't really followed trials in the past as I have this Murray one (not even the OJ trial or regretfully, Michael's) so I want to ask, will we know the results of the juror's initial votes from the media before the final verdict or is that information released after the trial is over?
 
When the judge instructs the jury presume thats on t.v aswell?
 
ivy said:
I don't even understand half of it honestly :p
Click to expand...

Oh, that's why the science summaries were somewhat unclear to me sometimes, had to rewatch quite a bit on youtube, lol. I understand most of it, it's not rocket science (well, almost ;) ), but yeah, the summaries confused me sometimes.

ivy said:
White on the other hand seemed like the professional witness that can be bought - $3,500 for a day in court. and it seemed like he came up with theories to fit the payment he's receiving and did not even search the subject at all.
Click to expand...

Yes, he came up with the theories and didn't have all that much to back them up. Because he didn't do his own research or invest any time into reading articles like Shafer did (I like how Shafer commented on those articles in the rebuttal and said that he researched them, when White said about the same articles that he doesn't even know them or hasn't read them in detail). I mean, the defense even had to do their own study on beagles, probably because it was cheaper than to pay White for it. And then White didn't even really look at it, all he had to say about it was basically one sentence.
 
Milka said:
I'm translating White right now and have to watch parts on youtube again, because some things are unclear to me in the summary (the stuff with the graphs especially, if you don't see all this in front of you and don't know exactly what is in the graph, it's hard to translate).

I just noticed again, apart from the things he said, that White is nothing compared to Shafer. Shafer is an expert in many different fields, he could do everything by himself, from the graphs to explaining all kinds of things about all kinds of meds, huge knowledge about articles and books and what they say, made his own research, etc. While White was advertised as the "father of Propofol", which may be true, but he doesn't know anything about anything, didn't read anything, no articles in detail, didn't do his graphs (because he is not an expert ... but he also never really spoke to the person who made the graphs in detail telling her what should be in the graphs or never talked to her about the graphs after she provided them), didn't do any research, etc.

I get the feeling that he didn't do all those things because they won't pay him what he was asking and because he wanted to have as many other people do all kinds of things for him, so that he can say he is not responsible for them (so most of his testimony is basically just him sitting there saying "I don't know, I didn't do this"). And apart from that, in general, he just doesn't seem to care about his field the way Shafer does.
Click to expand...

Milka, I am actually glad that White turn down Walgren and Walgren then got Shafer as the expert witness. Thank god! Imagine what would it be like for Michael if White is the prosecution witness. sheeeesh....
 
Oh yeah, I want to add that Shafer is great! He is passionate and believes that injustice is done. If jury found Murray not guilty, I don't know what justice is anymore. Keep praying....
 
I don't know, I think White was maybe doing that on purpose. He was just trying to do his "job", trying to take the prosecution by surprise with last minute "theories", like the urine, lidocaine... but you can't defend Murray , so the only way to do his "job" was bringing up theories, but he couldn't say he had researched the subject ... I loved how the urine theory came back at him : he was using it to show that Michael only had 2 25mg boluses, and Shafer used to show, much more efficiently, that actually Michael received much more propofol than 50mg
 
Milka said:
I mean, the defense even had to do their own study on beagles, probably because it was cheaper than to pay White for it. And then White didn't even really look at it, all he had to say about it was basically one sentence.
Click to expand...

honestly if they did the research - remember the articles that Shafer mentioned about piglets, rats, mice and monkeys - it seemed like any animal study was unnecessary. I really cannot see if they knew it had no effect on all those animals why would they expect to see anything on the dogs. The only thing left was a human study for the remote chance that it might have affected the humans differently and shafer did that.
 
ivy said:
To me this is the most important part :

"Over defense attorneys' objections, Pastor also accepted a jury instruction that goes to the question of whether Murray could be convicted even if jurors believe the defense's contention that Jackson injected himself."

Jurors will be told that Murray is still criminally liable "if the defendant should have foreseen the possibility of harm that could
result from his act."

this is huge and really good for us.
Click to expand...



And this brings up another point. Didn't Murray say that Michael was "begging" for the Propofol? 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 should have forseen the danger of giving Michael that stuff. This is all just my opinion.
 
Last edited:
I just read this on another board (LSA)

Rumor has it that Walgren wanted to set the charges at 2nd degree, Voluntary Manslaughter, and Involuntary Manslaughter and let the jury decide but Steve Cooley shut down all efforts to go that route and dictated the charge be IVM.
Click to expand...
Now I don't know how true this is, but I also read that Cooley's decision was partially based on his personal ill feelings towards Michael and his innocence. Maybe this is just bs, fantalk, rumors etc but I can't help but think that there may be some truth behind it, imo the optimal charge would have been 2nd degree murder with the option of instructing the jury to convict on a lesser charge (IM)). But I guess that wasn't meant to be and we have to deal with whatever we got now, as long as he is convicted.
 
beatbox said:
ITA mjchris - even if he's found guilty, there are some things we'll never know about what really happened
to Michael that night & morning - I wish in a way that White's talks with Murray had been let into the evidence -
as it is - CM's just sat there, - he knows what he did - he doesn't even have to testify, whilst all others in
court, including the jurors, have given their time & expertise over the weeks - as well as posters here in
their discussions..
Click to expand...

White's conversation with Muarry will not tell you what happened that night/morning. It makes sense that what Muarry told him would be a tale to get himself out of the problem and to show that he did everything right and Michael was at fault. We cannot believe that Muarry would tell the truth based on all the inconsistencies in his story so far. The judge did the right thing in not allowing any information from Muarry that was not part of the evidence presented earlier in the case.

About Cooley, if this is true, basically he used his power to promote injustice of another American citizen. My only comfort is that people never really get away with the evil they do.
 
Last edited:
Shafer believes in what he is saying, and he's being honest just stating proven facts.....white is just trying to manipulate things to fit the defense's crock pot theories. If he was being honest he wouldn't have to be corrected every 30 seconds and he would still have credibility. All the hard work he's done over the years to be a respected professional has just been thrown out the window and it is dissapointing and unbelievable....why would you throw away all that hard work on defending the indefensable. Sad.


now on to the evidence, i'm getting frustrated.......we all want to know what happened to michael, how murray killed him. I keep mentioning something white said and am looking for someone to tell me whether it is plausible or if i've got it all wrong but no one has commented. Can anyone tell me if i'm completely wrong, because i think perhaps white gave away why michael died that morning.


1. IV bag had a slit. Investigator said their was a propofol bottle inside the iv bag.

2. Murray said in interview with police that he would give the initial shot of prop and then slowly infuse the rest. He said he did not do that on the morning Michael died but that is probably b.s.

3. The exhibit WW was a tube that had a missing tab on the valve....can anyone tell me was this the tube that was being used on Michael...because if it was it might explain how Murray was able to make such a colossal error and kill MJ.

4. If WW was the iv tube that was being used on Michael, and Murray did have him attached to a makeshift propofol IV, then i believe it may be the torn/cut tab on the iv tube that may have resulted in MJ's death because White said that the tab (on the tube he just whipped out of his pocket) could be opened to allow air flow. This extra air flow would make the iv drip faster. If their was no tab on the iv tube that was attached to MJ then the flow of propofol would have been too fast because of the constant air flow. Murray being clueless as to what he was doing and how to safely administer propofol may not have realised that the iv flow would be going too fast and just left the room while propofol was being pumped into Michael at a very fast rate, ultimately killing him



Now if the tube shown in court was not the one used on Michael, then my theory is wrong, but if it is then that might be how murray f*cked up so badly. He overdosed michael somehow and i doubt it was by just injecting more and more prop, so it must have been something to do with the iv set up. Just my thoughts but i thought that testimony of Whites was very telling and would love to hear if any of you thought the same.
 
twinklEE said:
I just read this on another board (LSA)


Now I don't know how true this is, but I also read that Cooley's decision was partially based on his personal ill feelings towards Michael and his innocence. Maybe this is just bs, fantalk, rumors etc but I can't help but think that there may be some truth behind it, imo the optimal charge would have been 2nd degree murder with the option of instructing the jury to convict on a lesser charge (IM)). But I guess that wasn't meant to be and we have to deal with whatever we got now, as long as he is convicted.
Click to expand...

wow never knew that. Would have made much more sence if that would have happend. let the jury decide what they want. Now that cant happen anymore. IVM is to low! And we all know it. It make sence that there must be something happend that Da only wanted Walgren to charge IVM. Cooley is the DA?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top