Open General discussion - Katherine Jackson vs AEG

[Justthefacts]

It seems like the Jackson&#8217;s lawyer changed course at some point. I mean IMO again it is hard to call someone an addict when you have people saying they never saw him high they never saw him take pills and he was trying to get help. Percocet, didn&#8217;t Michael have dental work done in Vegas? Perhaps the doctor gave Michael some after his root canal and now he is addicted to it? Wonderful. It is hard to take these so called experts seriously<o></o>

 

[Big Apple2]

Shimelman - Jackson expert

- addicted specifically to Demerol
- addicted to opiates and benzos
- actively addicted to opiates at the time of death
- Q : assuming MJ did not die on June 25th, how much his life expectancy affected by opiod and benzo addiction? A: one week to live
- assuming he's not getting propofol, he was getting benzo and his life expectancy reduced moderately
- if murray is treating, clock is running
- believes active opiate addict after 90 rehab
- was not abstinent during the implant, he had another doctor injecting him
- doesn't believe Michael was clean 02/03, has slight hope but not belief
- doesn't think Michael was successful getting of the drugs between 90s to 2009
- no intention to get clean in 2009
- got bad medical treatment from Klein, Metzger, Van Valin, Farshchian, Forecast and so on
- addicts always hide addiction

What in the world!

What was the hourly rate for this expert's testimony? What ever it was, they should just hand the bill to AEG, since this testimony definitely helps AEG and not Mother. In my opinion, of course.

 

[Justthefacts]

It's strange because they had another addiction expert say something totally different then this expert they had. I am going to wait and see there has to be a reason for this. Pannish and Boyle are great lawyers despite the fact they act like children at times. There has to be a reason

 

[Bubs]

What in the world!

What was the hourly rate for this expert's testimony? What ever it was, they should just hand the bill to AEG, since this testimony definitely helps AEG and not Mother. In my opinion, of course.

I wonder if those 2 experts got to read the same medical records and other things that they needed in order to form their opinion?

 

[Justthefacts]

What in the world!

What was the hourly rate for this expert's testimony? What ever it was, they should just hand the bill to AEG, since this testimony definitely helps AEG and not Mother. In my opinion, of course.

This guy was saying what the Jacksons wanted to hear at first they were the ones calling Michael an addict. They were the ones who said he was in denial they were the ones saying they tried to help but you can lead a horse to water nonsense. I wonder what happend, why all of the sudden is this not true?

 

[Big Apple2]

This guy was saying what the Jacksons wanted to hear at first they were the ones calling Michael an addict. They were the ones who said he was in denial they were the ones saying they tried to help but you can lead a horse to water nonsense. I wonder what happend, why all of the sudden is this not true?

Co-sign.

In my opinion, that's what happens when you don't have a case to begin with. You end up putting together different theories, hoping one of them fits your money grubbing agenda.

Didn't Mother's attorney say early on that they were putting their case together by using AEG's discovery?

 

[bouee]

It's strange because they had another addiction expert say something totally different then this expert they had. I am going to wait and see there has to be a reason for this. Pannish and Boyle are great lawyers despite the fact they act like children at times. There has to be a reason

yes, I agree with you, and I'm not sure Shimelman says something that much different from the other Jacksons expert, dr Schnoll, who said Michael was demerol free for 13.5 years.

I can still see a jacksons line and an AEG line in thoses medical experts.

 

[jaydom7]

I am totally confused.. so Shipelman is a Jackson expert? he is contradicting their other expert that said MJ was clean from demerol for 13.5 years right? I am very confused. Why would they put this witness on the stand?

 

[gerryevans]

Yes, I agree with you, this mistake is strange coming from a lawyer. But it's not the first one from AEG, they sound very disorganised.
The big question to her is why issue a contract to Murray at all ? Why not tell AEG that it could be dangerous for thjem to do that and that they should rather issue an advance to Michael and let him deal with his personnal physician ?

I do love me some MJ, but I must admit, I would not just give him an additional $150K each month, and expect him or his so called people at the time (who it turns out hadn’t paid his taxes in three years) to properly allocate it.

AEG might not have known about the tax part, but they did know MJ was hundreds of million in debt, and his management team was in transition. If Branca was totally back in the fold, I could see forwarding the monies to him first as an advance, but he wasn’t and MJ seemed to personally be handling these negotiations, so I think most would want some kind of structure in place to ensure their monies were going for the purpose they agreed to pay for. Especially for that large a sum. And MOST especially if that purpose was for a person who supposedly was going to keep MJ “ the machine running” for the duration of the tour.

At the time, I do think the independent contractor agreement with CM made sense. It just turned out he was a nut, and there was nothing to indicate he was.

 

[ivy]

Why Jackson's are opposing their own expert witness? If they hired an expert to testify for them, and the result is something that they don't want to hear, why not dismiss his testimony and him from their witness list?

The thing is that when there's an expert the opposite party selected and paying, you can make a case about how their opinion is bought. We have all seen this being done at Briggs testimony. There's a huge back and forth between Jackson lawyer Boyle and AEG expert Earley, asking about if AEG told him to reduce Michael's life expectancy and such and Earley saying, no never, this is a tragic case, I wish the conditions different and such. So we are seeing that Jacksons are getting ready to challenge AEG experts - which is expected. If AEG plays Jacksons expert, Jacksons cannot argue that AEG "bought" that opinion. If AEG can play /or put on stand their expert and play Jacksons expert, it can make a point that Jackson expert is confirming AEG experts conclusions.

Dr. Farshchain helped Michael and the Jacksons expert threw him under the bus.

I think there is a confusion about the implant Naloxone or Naltrexone and whatever was being put not being the correct one. I can't be sure and it's not from these partial ones but there have been discussion and testimony about that.

Don't take my post wrong way.
I have question about that Michael's autopsy report showed he wasn't addicted to Demerol. How is it determined in autopsy report whether person is addicted to something? As far as I know, Michael's autopsy report showed no Demerol in his system, but how it was determined that he wasn't addicted to it?

I don't think whether a person addicted or not can be determined by autopsy. Autopsy just looks to what was in his system and Demerol wasn't in his system. Half life of Demerol is 2.5 to 4 hours, is out of the system in 10 hours and the metabolite of demerol has 15 to 30 hours half life. So the autopsy shows that June 22 Klein Demerol shot was the last one.

From the summary you posted, he doesn't say the bolded. It could mean on and off - with a relapse in the final year.

it does - him saying not believing Michael was successful, have a slight hope but doesn't believe he wasn't using during 2002 & 2003 was not abstinent during the implant, he had another doctor injecting him and so on

he's contradicting himself here, or there is something missing in the first sentence (Murray and propofol)

that part not clear, he was asked as of June 24 what is Michael's life expectancy affected by opiod and benzo addiction, he replies one week. then they ask what is life expectancy as of May 1, he asks if Murray was giving Propofol. told to assume he wasn't. he replies even he is not getting propofol, he is getting benzos and life expectancy will be negatively affected moderately. so I would think with propofol one week, without propofol moderately reduced.

all 3 experts refuse to give any time / age for life expectancy. it looks like they agree on an early death due to accidental overdose but cannot give a expected time for it.

Which drug ? I don't remeber Dr saunders testifying to that.

Buprenex or actually buprenorphine, there's a comment that it wasn't the right kind

 

[Justthefacts]

If I were sitting on this jury. I would go home everynight with a headache

 

[Bubs]

LOS ANGELES (KABC) -- The Michael Jackson wrongful death trial on Tuesday focused on the agreement with the pop star's doctor, Conrad Murray. That contract could be a key element in the case.

If Jackson's death was caused by his doctor, then whoever hired the doctor for the star's comeback tour should be liable for his death, according to Katherine Jackson's lawsuit.

Now under scrutiny before the jury is Murray's independent contractor agreement, which was drawn up by AEG Live but never signed. The AEG defense says the document holds evidence that Jackson requested Murray to be his personal physician and dictated his salary.

Attorney Kathy Jorrie, who wrote the agreement, walked the jury through the many changes made to the document. Her appearance set off objections from the Jackson attorneys.

"She never spoke to Michael Jackson, she doesn't know. But we know that, at least based on the evidence, AEG did hire Dr. Murray. And the contract she negotiated was never sent to any representatives of Michael Jackson," said Jackson attorney Brian Panish.

What Panish is on about? Based on what evidence? I cannot think of any reason why would contract would be sent to Michael's rep. It wasn't like MJ was very forthcoming what is the reason for CM and I seriously doubt that he wanted to run that agreement through his people. Or if he did wanted his people to see it, could he not just pass his own copy to his people to read it and tell him whether it was ok to sign?

The defense says Jorrie spoke directly to Murray about the terms the doctor and Jackson wanted.

"Michael Jackson wanted to bring his long-time physician with him. That it was at his solo and absolute direction, that this would only occur with his, um, normally saying he wanted it done, but he actually had to sign and say so, and had to sign and say that he would be the one paying for it," said AEG lawyer Marvin Putnam.

Jorrie says that she questioned Murray's salary of $150,000 a month. Murray's response, she testified, was that his practices in four states brought him $1 million a month.

Jorrie says she did an Internet search and found Murray's practices listed. She said the medical boards in the four states showed no record of disciplinary action against him.

Jurors learned through earlier testimony that Murray was broke. About Murray's contract not being signed, the Jackson attorneys say it doesn't matter.

"You don't really need a contract to hire someone. As we've seen in this case, many people have worked for AEG that didn't have a contract," said Panish.

But AEG's interpretation of the law is that the unsigned agreement nullifies everything.

"As long as you have that agreement that you're not going to have an agreement unless signed by the parties, then you can't override that," said Putnam.

Jorrie is back on the stand Wednesday to face cross examination by the Jackson attorneys.

 

[bouee]

Heads up : AEG want to play Jacksons expert Shimelman deposition, Jacksons are opposing. Shimelman is the doctor who said Michael had one week to live (mentioned by Briggs during his testimony). In his deposition he says Michael was addicted to opioids / Demerol since 1993 and never stopped using them (getting injections even when he had the implant) and actively addicted to Demerol at time of his death. He lists almost all of Michael's doctors for giving him not good medical care.

AEG has 2 of their own witnesses to testify to similar things.

Where does that info come from ? I just wanted to check what was said exactly, but I couldn't find it in the news thread. I was thinking maybe they were arguing about what part of the depo they wanted to play.

Apparently he is a psychiatrist , from the trial summary thread

Myer B. Shimelman. MD

Psychiatrist in Connecticut 46 yrs experience

----

I read Kathie Jorrie's testimony :

ABC7 Court News &#8207;@ABC7Courts 45m
Jorrie said ultimately she made the changes. Dr. Murray was the one who would identify who this medical person would be, but never did.
Expand
ABC7 Court News &#8207;@ABC7Courts 46m
Jorrie said Dr. Murray wanted to have the flexibility to have someone on stand by, payable for by AEG Live.
Expand
ABC7 Court News &#8207;@ABC7Courts 46m
Jorrie: I asked why you needed another physician as opposed to a nurse. He told me in case he was unavailable or tired.

Probably david Adams- but how much would this person be paid, and who would utimately pay his salary ? AEG ? Murray ? Michael ?

Jorrie said Dr. Murray told her he had 4 medical practices making a million dollar a month, and it was not fair to have to return money.
Expand

Even if we assume that 1 million is a gross figure, Murray was willing to give up on 850 000 per month, total 8 and a half millions in 10 months. And she believed that ? :busted:

Jorrie asked if MJ would be paying him even though the tour would be on break. He said yes.

End date changed from Sept, 2009 to March, 2010
Expand
ABC7 Court News &#8207;@ABC7Courts 26m
Jorrie: He wanted to extend, by about 5 months, his engagement.
Expand
ABC7 Court News &#8207;@ABC7Courts 27m

ABC7 Court News &#8207;@ABC7Courts 21m
Judge: How do you know if you don't talk t the artist that the agreement is what the artist's want?
Expand

Good question from the judge : she added 5 months (750 000 $) , maybe added another doctor on his bill, and was looking for his medical files without ever considering to check with Michael.

She also said that AEG was about to / hired Murray on Michael's behalf, which is exactly the situation IMO.

I do love me some MJ, but I must admit, I would not just give him an additional $150K each month, and expect him or his so called people at the time (who it turns out hadn&#8217;t paid his taxes in three years) to properly allocate it.

AEG might not have known about the tax part, but they did know MJ was hundreds of million in debt, and his management team was in transition. If Branca was totally back in the fold, I could see forwarding the monies to him first as an advance, but he wasn&#8217;t and MJ seemed to personally be handling these negotiations, so I think most would want some kind of structure in place to ensure their monies were going for the purpose they agreed to pay for. Especially for that large a sum. And MOST especially if that purpose was for a person who supposedly was going to keep MJ &#8220; the machine running&#8221; for the duration of the tour.

At the time, I do think the independent contractor agreement with CM made sense. It just turned out he was a nut, and there was nothing to indicate he was.

I thought lawyers had to be borderline paranoid to anticipate and protect their clients, it doesn't seem to be her case.

She did have doubts about Tohme and asked for him to be checked and she asked to make sure Michael understood he was going on a "world tour" and understood the AEG contract (from her mails), so when she wants, she can check.

Gerryevans, Phillips was talking to Michael's people in that period of time (Klein's invoice, myriads of lawsuit), they should have seen this contract.

---

Question about her situation : can AEG sue her if they lose ? She sounds like she made a lot of mistakes with this particular contract.

 

[ivy]

I was thinking about Klein and Demerol so I went back to the files from Lloyds. You might remember I wrote before such as 100 mg Demerol + 100 mg Demerol one hour later

I'm going to write one day in more detail

April 22

11:30 200 mg Demerol / 1 mg Midazolam
12:30 100 mg Demerol / 1 mg Midazolam
1:30 75 mg Demerol / 1 mg Midazolam
1.00cc x1 , 0.4cc x2 Restylane

It's like this for all of the days, Michael gets a shot of Demerol, gets another one later and then the treatment

They deposed a nurse - Brunn - who worked at Klein's and gave some of those Demerol shots. Basically doctors tell her to give the shots and she does. She says Michael came unannounced and wait for the doctor Klein to come. She says Michael would come, she would be told to give him a Demerol shot thinking in 30-40 minutes the doctor will come in to start the treatment, then it would take longer for the doctor to come in and Michael was given another shot. She says Klein determined how many shots and how much Michael would get.

so even though it might be painful procedure and assuming Michael needed Demerol, Klein is giving him double doses by making him wait. Also technically Demerol's half life is 2.5 to 4 hours , so he shouldn't be needing a second shot in an hour. If you assume , he would need another dose in an hour (either the first one not enough or it wears off quickly) , then it can show high tolerance to Demerol.

I will continue to say that Klein and his Demerol injections are fishy.

 

[ivy]

Where does that info come from ?

it's a motion filed by the court, it's a motion filed by Jacksons opposing AEG playing the deposition. Relevant sections from 3 doctors are added as exhibits. a reply from AEG and oral arguments would follow later.

 

[Petrarose]

Earley - AEG Expert

- no liver damage
- spider bite on his leg could be a injection site infection
- scars from needles

Look at what Earley has to say^^. It seems if you are looking for addiction you will find it. Everything is suspect including a spider bite.

Does anyone know where these needle scars are? Is he talking about the dr's statement about the buttock in 93? Did the coroner say the body was scarred? I think he mentioned something about a mark on the leg that he could not tell what it was. I also remember that when Michael died the news said his body was riddled with needle marks. Then, we found out that was not true and the marks on his body were due to efforts of the hospital staff to revive him.

Did the experts from AEG use the medical to make their determination, because I find a lot of their statements seem so generic. It seems to me that AEG's experts knew what AEG wanted and gave it to them.

Bubs I think Panish kept in his expert because he was flirting with the addict angle himself. He played both sides in the trial, so he kept this guy in case he wanted to stress the argument that Michael was a known addict that AEG knew about. At some point in the trial he might have felt the guy's testimony was too extreme for his case, and forgot that discovery had already taken place.

 

[bouee]

it does - him saying not believing Michael was successful, have a slight hope but doesn't believe he wasn't using during 2002 & 2003 was not abstinent during the implant, he had another doctor injecting him and so on

based on what you quoted, I disagree, i think it's an interpretation.
Narcan : already explained, Michael had it removed at one point.
The rest is an interpretation for me : he could consider Michael was unsuccesful because he relapsed. Dr Schnoll said Michael used demerol for 2.5 years after 93. Schnoll said "mostly sucessful - demerol free for 13.5 years" , Shilman could be thinking unsuccessful because he used it for 2.5 years after 93.
We don't know that, at least from what you posted. To me , it doesn't mean Michael never stopped using opiates, we'll have to wait to see if/what is played.

that part not clear, he was asked as of June 24 what is Michael's life expectancy affected by opiod and benzo addiction, he replies one week. then they ask what is life expectancy as of May 1, he asks if Murray was giving Propofol. told to assume he wasn't. he replies even he is not getting propofol, he is getting benzos and life expectancy will be negatively affected moderately. so I would think with propofol one week, without propofol moderately reduced.

Your explanation is clear : propofol - 1 week . Benzos : life expectancy moderately reduced . Both were given by Murray.
So Propofol (and Murray) were actually missing from the first sentence I quoted.

 

[bouee]

I was thinking about Klein and Demerol so I went back to the files from Lloyds. You might remember I wrote before such as 100 mg Demerol + 100 mg Demerol one hour later

I'm going to write one day in more detail

April 22

11:30 200 mg Demerol / 1 mg Midazolam
12:30 100 mg Demerol / 1 mg Midazolam
1:30 75 mg Demerol / 1 mg Midazolam
1.00cc x1 , 0.4cc x2 Restylane

It's like this for all of the days, Michael gets a shot of Demerol, gets another one later and then the treatment

They deposed a nurse - Brunn - who worked at Klein's and gave some of those Demerol shots. Basically doctors tell her to give the shots and she does. She says Michael came unannounced and wait for the doctor Klein to come. She says Michael would come, she would be told to give him a Demerol shot thinking in 30-40 minutes the doctor will come in to start the treatment, then it would take longer for the doctor to come in and Michael was given another shot. She says Klein determined how many shots and how much Michael would get.

so even though it might be painful procedure and assuming Michael needed Demerol, Klein is giving him double doses by making him wait. Also technically Demerol's half life is 2.5 to 4 hours , so he shouldn't be needing a second shot in an hour. If you assume , he would need another dose in an hour (either the first one not enough or it wears off quickly) , then it can show high tolerance to Demerol.

I will continue to say that Klein and his Demerol injections are fishy.

yes they are fishy. He IS fishy. But did he get in trouble with the medical board because of this ?

We would need to know how long it takes to be effective & allow for tolerance . Impossible calculation to make if you are not a pharmacologist.

It would be interesting to scan the doses / times , by day, if you can.

 

[Bubs]

I was thinking about Klein and Demerol so I went back to the files from Lloyds. You might remember I wrote before such as 100 mg Demerol + 100 mg Demerol one hour later

I'm going to write one day in more detail

April 22

11:30 200 mg Demerol / 1 mg Midazolam
12:30 100 mg Demerol / 1 mg Midazolam
1:30 75 mg Demerol / 1 mg Midazolam
1.00cc x1 , 0.4cc x2 Restylane

It's like this for all of the days, Michael gets a shot of Demerol, gets another one later and then the treatment

They deposed a nurse - Brunn - who worked at Klein's and gave some of those Demerol shots. Basically doctors tell her to give the shots and she does. She says Michael came unannounced and wait for the doctor Klein to come. She says Michael would come, she would be told to give him a Demerol shot thinking in 30-40 minutes the doctor will come in to start the treatment, then it would take longer for the doctor to come in and Michael was given another shot. She says Klein determined how many shots and how much Michael would get.

so even though it might be painful procedure and assuming Michael needed Demerol, Klein is giving him double doses by making him wait. Also technically Demerol's half life is 2.5 to 4 hours , so he shouldn't be needing a second shot in an hour. If you assume , he would need another dose in an hour (either the first one not enough or it wears off quickly) , then it can show high tolerance to Demerol.

I will continue to say that Klein and his Demerol injections are fishy.

He is more than creepy and should be in jail!
So MJ would get 275 Demerol because Klein cannot get his fat arse to his practice fast enough!
It looks like he was purposely feeding Demerol to MJ to get him addicted so MJ would keep coming back to him.

 

[jaydom7]

He is more than creepy and should be in jail!
So MJ would get 275 Demerol because Klein cannot get his fat arse to his practice fast enough!
It looks like he was purposely feeding Demerol to MJ to get him addicted so MJ would keep coming back to him.

I said that from the beginning.. Both Klein and Hoefflin are fishy and they should've stopped treating MJ 25 years ago. I was fishy about the scalp surgery in 1993. Why have scalp surgery 9 years after the 1984 burn?? that makes no sense. I think they both took advantage of MJ and gave him unnecessary treatments and unnecessary plastic surgery. Mike needed an intervention from those two rogue doctors 25 years ago.

 

[Petrarose]

He is more than creepy and should be in jail!
So MJ would get 275 Demerol because Klein cannot get his fat arse to his practice fast enough!
It looks like he was purposely feeding Demerol to MJ to get him addicted so MJ would keep coming back to him.

Some said the same think about Muarry when he was giving Michael those benzo cocktails, that he was getting Michael addicted to them so that michael would really be dependent on him.

Anyone notice that Earley painted Michael like a junkie but then claims there was no liver damage. That is why I do not agree with their testimony that Michael was getting all these drugs since 93 and never stopped. The way I tell an ungoing addict from an atopsy is by looking at what they say about the organs. When I see LIVER, especially and kidneys and other organs are in good shape, then I say there is no ongoing addiction. Now if the coroner said his liver was shot and his kidneys were a mess, then I would agree with these experts doomed prognosis.

It is so easy to say someone would die in 1 week, when you are talking about someone who had already died. Think about it.

 

[Bubs]

Bubs I think Panish kept in his expert because he was flirting with the addict angle himself. He played both sides in the trial, so he kept this guy in case he wanted to stress the argument that Michael was a known addict that AEG knew about. At some point in the trial he might have felt the guy's testimony was too extreme for his case, and forgot that discovery had already taken place.

Yeah, I re-read their opening statement (once again) and they did go for addict route, but it doesn't make any sense to me.
Maybe they took u-turn as they cannot go on claiming Mj would do 4 world tours after 50 concerts in UK, and other things they claimed MJ would have done. So in supporting Erks testimony, they have to claim MJ wasn't addict. Thats the only reasonable explanation I could think of.

Co-sign.

In my opinion, that's what happens when you don't have a case to begin with. You end up putting together different theories, hoping one of them fits your money grubbing agenda.

Didn't Mother's attorney say early on that they were putting their case together by using AEG's discovery?

They are going to finish their case the same way they started. They threw 6 or 7 claims on the wall and waited which one sticks, and now they do the same, throw something out in case it sticks.
Of course, it could be that they weren't prepared to go this far as they were counting on AEG to settle, thus 2 settlement offers.

 

[ivy]

based on what you quoted, we disagree, i think it's an interpretation.

To me , he doesn't mean Michael never stopped using opiates, we'll have to wait to see if/what is played.

how about now?

active opiate addict after rehab, he was not abstinent during the 2002 /2003 implant, no successful time to get off drugs between 90s through 2009 doesn't sound to me like he's saying on and off. if he was off that would be a successful attempt in my opinion but if you interpret something different be my guest.

So Propofol (and Murray) were actually missing from the first sentence I quoted.

It wasn't a part of the question asked so nothing is missing in what I wrote. I quoted the almost exact question.

it continues trying to push him to give a time frame, Shimelman saying he can't give a time frame and saying "moderately" affected at the end.

 

[#MJforever57]

I have a sneaky little feeling that Mother's attorneys DID take a "411 discovery & evidence" meeting, but it wasn't with Mother, it was with Randy Jackson.

I have always been of the opinion that this case was brought by Randy Jackson and Company. Mother, as usual, is just THE FACE of this lawsuit. (Just like she was for that bogus tribute concert and Gene Simmons is STILL talking smack about MJ. But I digress. Sorry about that.)

And as Jermaine so eloquently put it: "Mother will always take care of her cubs." My note: Even though most of those so-called cubs are already AARP Members.

I love your post and in the bold you got me laugh i never heard it said that why before but you are so right.

 

[bouee]

He is more than creepy and should be in jail!
So MJ would get 275 Demerol because Klein cannot get his fat arse to his practice fast enough!
It looks like he was purposely feeding Demerol to MJ to get him addicted so MJ would keep coming back to him.

Actually, the example Ivy gave is 375 mg, not 275. It's april 22nd, the highest dose that was given in march-june period.
Considering he ended in june with 200 mg (in 2 100 mg doses) it does sound like a massive dose.

 

[bouee]

how about now?

Thanks, yes, I still feel the same : different interpreation than Schnoll, could be based on the same facts. Based on that, it could be one doctor seeing the glass half full, the other one half empty.

With one more info that is actually confirming my guess : he says van Valin gave him demerol by the fall of 02 - when the Narcan (I know it was not Narcan, but that other name is too long... sorry) so when the first Narcan imlant was in november 02. The second one shortly after the the first one, because another doctor (Van Valin ?) had taken it off.
I don't remember to what injury it was corresponding, the ankle I guess, from Farschian's testimony.

It wasn't a part of the question asked so nothing is missing in what I wrote. I quoted the almost exact question.

it continues trying to push him to give a time frame, Shimelman saying he can't give a time frame and saying "moderately" affected at the end.

My original post was a question, not an accusation. You made a summary of several questions and answers and I said that from what was quoted below, something must have been missing, because the statements were contradictory. See below, there are contradictory. You explained, so that's fine. There's no propofol in the first line , so it sounds like the difference is opioids, and that didin't make sense to me.

Summary of 3 experts



I'm going to do this in bullet point format, it's basically shortened versions of what they are saying

Shimelman - Jackson expert

- Q : assuming MJ did not die on June 25th, how much his life expectancy affected by opiod and benzo addiction? A: one week to live
- assuming he's not getting propofol, he was getting benzo and his life expectancy reduced moderately
-

 

[ivy]

Yeah, I re-read their opening statement (once again) and they did go for addict route, but it doesn't make any sense to me.

Maybe they took u-turn as they cannot go on claiming Mj would do 4 world tours after 50 concerts in UK, and other things they claimed MJ would have done. So in supporting Erks terstimony, they have to claim MJ wasn't addict. Thats the only reasonable explanation I could think of.

It's a paradox.

There are certain things that cannot be denied - which is the 93 rehab and 2002/2003 implants. Jacksons themselves talked about interventions. there are multiple doctors that would testify and who knows what they would say. so the best Jackson lawyers can do is acknowledge dependency at times and not continuous - which they did during opening statements.

however for life expectancy and earnings they need to show that these dependency wasn't going to be a factor. their theory have been if you remove Murray / propofol, everything would be fine. so these doctors who claim demerol addiction and say even if you remove propofol from the mix, his life expectancy would still be negatively affected due to opiates, and think it is unlikely that he could get clean is working against them.

It's that reason Erk did not consider Michael's health in his calculations and it's the same reason why Briggs focused on Shimelmans "one week" comment and labelled everything as speculative.


note: interestingly Jackson lawyers at one point had an idea of possible suboxone treatment - it was asked during these depositions as well - as a way to get Michael clean of Demerol. For some reason it sounds like they dropped that theory. apparently suboxone cannot be used with benzos, and there's an interaction. so jackson lawyers plan for rehab included no propofol, no opiates and no benzos, that could be hard to do all at once. plus they assume no more future problems or relapses and make calculations based on tours until 66 years old.

 

[jaydom7]

this case is a complete mess... whatever it is, MJ had terrible doctors and he had no support at all during his issues. He needed a sober coach and a therapist and good doctors that cared in order to beat his pain issues.

 

[bouee]

It's a paradox.

There are certain things that cannot be denied - which is the 93 rehab and 2002/2003 implants. Jacksons themselves talked about interventions. there are multiple doctors that would testify and who knows what they would say. so the best Jackson lawyers can do is acknowledge dependency at times and not continuous - which they did during opening statements.

however for life expectancy and earnings they need to show that these dependency wasn't going to be a factor. their theory have been if you remove Murray / propofol, everything would be fine. so these doctors who claim demerol addiction and say even if you remove propofol from the mix, his life expectancy would still be negatively affected due to opiates, and think it is unlikely that he could get clean is working against them.

It's that reason Erk did not consider Michael's health in his calculations and it's the same reason why Briggs focused on Shimelmans "one week" comment and labelled everything as speculative.


note: interestingly Jackson lawyers at one point had an idea of possible suboxone treatment - it was asked during these depositions as well - as a way to get Michael clean of Demerol. For some reason it sounds like they dropped that theory. apparently suboxone cannot be used with benzos, and there's an interaction. so jackson lawyers plan for rehab included no propofol, no opiates and no benzos, that could be hard to do all at once. plus they assume no more future problems or relapses and make calculations based on tours until 66 years old.

They claim Michael could have been cured, so it's not really a paradox. You can believe it or not, but I don't see a paradox. Hence Drs schnoll pointing out Michael succeeded at times, and was free of medication in early 09 - which I have believed since we've had the info that came out for the Murray trial. Addiction to demerol in 09 was actually his defense. Then they brought in that sleep specialist saying Michael could have been treated for his insomnia- which I doubt.

Saying an addcit or dependant person can not recover is a bit harsh for me. I remember I asked Shafer in the Q&A (about benzos) , and he said it was possible.

And, as I said many times, opiates are the only solution to pain. So if those experts - both sides - take out the problems that created pain (accidents, burn, etc...) out of the equation, the picture is not complete. It's important to know why he was taking pain medication. I guess we will agree that after such burns and accidents, Michael was not faking his pain.

 

[ivy]

It was the doctors - not me - that claimed recovery wasn't going to be easy. I do think addicts with right motivation could get clean but relapse is a possibility as well. There's a paradox for me with Jackson lawyers saying Michael had dependency issues at times which got worse when he was going through a rigorous schedule, such as concerts, preparing for concerts and then come up with a easy recovery and claiming he would be doing 5 tours with no problems. I would have expected at least if the tours are the stressor , he would stay away from them. Because that's the other theory - I believe your theory as well - that he was clean and he only needed drugs / Propofol due to the stress and demands of TII as he needed to sleep. So if you argue he was clean but the pressure of TII 50 shows prompted the drug use, how can you say 5 tours with no problems is a possibility? Isn't that a paradox?