Status hearings discussion thread / all threads merged

[StacyJ]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

agree girl

It's obvious he won't testify, because he knows what he was doing was wrong. He will not be able to give a reasonable explaination as to why he gave MJ anesthesia at home without monitoring equipment and without watching him at all times.

 

[Soundmind]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

I'd like to know how many other times he left MJ alone hooked up to the IV?

when the trial starts some members here will finally understand how much time was wasted and how many great threads were ruined arguing about things that medically speaking are very illogical among them the believe that MJ survived many nights while being hooked to a propofol IV without any kind of monitoring equipment or that he indeed died hooked to a propofol IV ,which contradicts everything presented by the prosecutors' experts so far. But for dramatic effect some of you can't abandon those very unrealistic theories.

The defence and the prosecutors are arguing about a 10cc syringe that was used to inject the last dose and still some insist he was hooked to propofol and left to die . At least use what is presented as evidence to refute the defence case instead of wild theories that no longer add to the understanding of the current proceedings. Why do some of you still push theories that neither the prosecutors nor the defence even consider a possibility ?

less than 2 months for the trial and we still blindly ignore the facts of this case !!!!!

 

[StacyJ]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

when the trial starts some members here will finally understand how much time was wasted and how many great threads were ruined arguing about things that medically speaking are very illogical among them the believe that MJ survived many nights while being hooked to a propofol IV without any kind of monitoring equipment or that he indeed died hooked to a propofol IV ,which contradicts everything presented by the prosecutors' experts so far. But for dramatic effect some of you can't abandon those very unrealistic theories.

The defence and the prosecutors are arguing about a 10cc syringe that was used to inject the last dose and still some insist he was hooked to propofol and left to die . At least use what is presented as evidence to refute the defence case instead of wild theories that no longer add to the understanding of the current proceedings. Why do some of you still push theories that neither the prosecutors nor the defence even consider a possibility ?

less than 2 months for the trial and we still blindly ignore the facts of this case !!!!!

I agree with you.. there is no way MJ would've survived being hooked to propofol for all of those weeks with that incompetent fool not watching him.

Soundmind, do you think Murray is going to testify?

 

[Soundmind]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

no way he will take the stand, the prosecutors will destroy him . The prosecutors were not aware of many things when they conducted that interview with him, many important and crucial questions were not raised .

 

[smoothlugar]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

there is no way MJ would've survived being hooked to propofol for all of those weeks with that incompetent fool not watching him.

It's clear that MJ could not have survived without any proper monitoring equipment if he had been hooked the weeks before.Another different thing is what Murray did on that final day...

The defence is arguing about the proportions of lidocaine and propofol in the syringe of 10cc, "broken", that's it, "separated", as the investigator said: needle on the floor, syringe on the bedtable. Their "theory" is that the proportion of lidocaine in that syringe is too high and is not the same as in the other syringe (the one Murray admitted using). Their theory is the empty bottle of juice...

Prosecutors are arguing because that test implies the destruction of the sample and that's why they got granted by the judge half of the samples last December.

The bottle of propofol in the IV bag collected by Elissa on her second search in MJ's residence, which was almost empty has not been explained by Murray so far. It was the FIRST goal of Murray to hide it, interrupting CPR to do so.

In Trials and Tribulations, there are some medical explanations given by KZ, an anesthetic nurse. In part four, she explains how that evidence could have been used on that 25J as IV infusion.

She also asks if prosecutors have investigated how many punctures that bottle stopper had. She suggests that if there was only a puncture that could prove that that bottle of 100ml was used for infusion because it was almost empty and the syringes were of only 10cc.
...............
Criticising some different opinions as being mistaken is very subjective. In the past it was strongly defensed by those same critics that Murray would allegue he gave propofol via IV drip: it was the opposite, the defence made correct a transcription error in Murray's statement to the police: where it read "infusion during 25 minutes", should read "infusion during 2 - 5 minutes".
As I had said in the thread of the "syringes testing", for Murray it was more convenient to deny the use of any propofol via IV drip.

 

[Soundmind]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

She also asks if prosecutors have investigated how many punctures that bottle stopper had. She suggests that if there was only a puncture that could prove that that bottle of 100ml was used for infusion because it was almost empty and the syringes were of only 10cc.

did she ever consider that propofol concentration in his urine was only 0.10 ug/ml ?

So, the conclusion I came to reluctantly, and astoundingly, was that CM was indeed "free dripping" propofol. Without ANY electronic infusion pumps or volume control devices. And very likely using maxi drip IV tubing. And he piggybacked the whole "arts and crafts" project into the Y site nearest MJ's left leg (saphenous vein, below the knee) insertion site, which is why the Y-site had propofol (and lidocaine, from his syringe doses) in it, and the tubing upstream to the NS IV bag, did not. That there was LIDOCAINE in the Y site lends support to the possibility that it was not a drip ALONE that produced the respiratory arrest. He may, indeed, have bolused him from a syringe, on top of the drip, if he was not adding lidocaine to the 100cc vials. OR he could have been injecting some lidocaine into each bottle before spiking it.

WTF .

Once I recovered from my own nausea while imagining the ramifications of that horrifying free drip/ maxi drip tubing "technique", I was determined to figure out how and WHY he was dripping propofol this way. (When there were SO MANY easier, less hazardous methods.....like a cheap IV pump, or a buretrol.) I was determined to figure out the "bottle in a bag" that was SO important for him to get rid of quickly-- before paramedics were called. Because there is absolutely no evidence that adds up that CM was NOT dripping the 100cc bottles of propofol, except HIS own words. And he is a liar.

there is one evidence only the 0.10 ug/ml posted in the autopsy report. An autopsy report that was ignored completely by her when assessing the evidence

she explained in other parts what the blood , kidney and heart concentrations mean by comparing the results found in this case with other cases of deathes by propofol , something I was mocked here for doing .

Would you please ask her to explain what the 0.10 ug/ml concentration in urine mean? I know what it means but I'm sure when she formed her opinion that was not in her mind. No doubt her opinion will change drastically .

 

[xthunderx2]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

did she ever consider that propofol concentration in his urine was only 0.10 ug/ml ?




WTF .



there is one evidence only the 0.10 ug/ml posted in the autopsy report. An autopsy report that was ignored completely by her when assessing the evidence

ya really funny cuz your debating the evidence with a medical professional...Someone who knows MORE than we do..

 

[Soundmind]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

ya really funny cuz your debating the evidence with a medical professional...Someone who knows MORE than we do..

thus she will understand what I'm saying better than you , I'm respectively asking those who are active on that site to bring this figure to her attention and I have no doubt she will agree with me on this issue. Those are medical facts. When she tried to explain she used similar cases and compared concentrations levels detected in similar situations , again that is the scientific way to analyze and determine the amount used which some here mocked me when I used. Ask her or give me her email to contact her and trust me she will 1000% agree with me on this MEDICAL FACT.

Tim Lopez confirms that CM ordered propofol (and other meds) four times. Because I'm focusing this series on building my conclusions toward the Propofol Death Drip technique CM employed, I'm not going to devote much discussion to the boatload of injectable benzodiazepines CM also ordered. The propofol alone is interesting enough! Because I think it is somewhat confusing to talk about the different size vials CM ordered, I will convert the vial sizes to total cc (or ml) for propofol. This is MUCH more understandable (and relevant) than the "255 vials" of propofol that some media outlets have reported.

Order 1- date unknown from testimony transcription

* 1 box of 100cc vials = 10 vials =1000cc propofol
* 1 box of 20cc vials = 25 vials = 500cc propofol

Order 2- April 28, 2009

* 4 boxes of 100cc vials = 40 vials =4000cc propofol
* 1 box of 20cc vials = 25 vials = 500cc propofol

Order 3- May 12, 2009

* 4 boxes of 100cc vials = 40 vials = 4000cc propofol
* 1 box 20cc vials = 25 vials = 500cc propofol
* Flumazenil ordered for the first time-- a BUNCH of it. (This medication reverses benzodiazepines, but NOT propofol.)

Order 4 - June 10, 2009

* 4 boxes of 100cc vials = 40 vials = 4000cc propofol
* 2 boxes of 20cc vials = 50 cials = 1000cc propofol

You will first note that CM appears to be ordering propofol about every 4 weeks toward the end, and that he ESCALATED his orders after the first ordering cycle. Order 2 and order 3 are only two weeks apart, and order 4 doubles the box of small vials again.

Let's do a bit of math: that is 15,500cc of propofol in about 8 weeks or so. That is more than 15 liters of propofol. Nearly 4 GALLONS of propofol. A mere 12 unopened vials (unknown sizes) were found in the mansion, and there were 2 weeks left in CM's ordering cycle of 4 weeks. So, is that a lot of propofol? Enough to drop an elephant, several times over.

Let's look at a comparison, to understand just HOW much propofol CM was ordering for ONE patient. Our small hospital does about 35 cases a week in the O.R. using varying amounts of propofol per patient. We use less than a liter (1000cc) a week for ALL 35 patients combined.

Let me also say that it is highly unlikely that CM was ordering all of these vials just to line them up on the shelves of the walk-in closet. He ORDERED that much because he was USING that much, plain and simple. The particular sizes of vials he chose to order is HIGHLY significant, also, and relevant to the Death Drip technique. Knowing that propofol must be discarded after 6 hours to prevent blood infections in patients, once a vial is opened, it has to be used or discarded. So if he planned to give small amounts, CM would have ordered all small vials (the 20cc size), to minimize wastage.

Also notice the amount of 100cc vials ordered: 40 per order beginning April 28th. Simple math says that CM's administration to MJ was averaging about 1 to 2 100cc vials/ bottles every night. (Plus a boatload of other meds.) This is NOT the usage pattern of a patient who is weaning off of anything. CM's final order June 10th doubled the small vials from 25 to 50 ordered.

great post and explains alot , but if indeed as she believes Murray was using 1 to 2 1000 mg of propofol EVERYNIGHT, the way he used it that last night MJ would have died long before 25 june, right? what is the other explanation ? he was lucky he survived ? really ? According to Rafelo a 10cc syringe ended his life , but we are to believe he was being hooked for a propofol drip for hours for months and he survived? really ?

if not , if Murray was not using those bottles then what he was ordering all those boxes? why did he take 3 bottles size 1000mg to MJ's mansion that day ? why none of them was even empty at noon ?we have 550 ml of urine at the scene , we have 450ml of urine in his bladder that requires many hours to be produced ? why those bottles were not used during those long hours ?

 

[xthunderx2]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

^^^^I am not saying she wouldn't know better than ME...But..we have already established the fact that YOU dont have a degree of this type either...so I dont think you would know BETTER than she....oh yeah..I forgot ..YOU are always right...cuz YOU know everythng.

 

[Soundmind]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

less than two months you will know then how many threads were ruined cause some of you refuse to accept medical facts. I'm not claiming I know everything but at least I don't ignore the autopsy report while I assess the evidence , medically speaking no way mj received the amount of 1000mg bottle and the urine concentration was only 0.10 ug/ml. that's it. I have a right to dismiss any theory based on something that blindly contradict a figure posted in the autopsy report , what I don't understand is why some of you get overly defensive when this figure is brought to your attention? :scratch:

Dr.White a prominent expert according to Falagan called MJ a demerol addict . we looked through the evidence we knew that in his last 15 days MJ visited Klien twice and almost every six days he recieved at most 2 IM injections , a medical expert who supposedly know better than me and you could say whatever he wants , but I have the right to say based on the evidence I believe he was not addicted to anything.
That's just one example that refutes your logic. As long as a medical expert is basing his/her opinion on undisputed facts we have no choice but to agree with him/her but once he/she ignores important figure like the urine concentration we have every right to bring it to her/his attention and if facts are ignored blindly because they contradict a preconcieved theory then this expert loses comeplety his/her credibility.

 

[smoothlugar]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

but if indeed as she believes Murray was using 1 to 2 1000 mg of propofol EVERYNIGHT, the way he used it that last night MJ would have died long before 25 june, right?

In this point agree with you. The anesthetist is only giving her opinion, but it's true that belief about the previous weeks is not fully explained.

According to Rafelo a 10cc syringe ended his life ,

Ruffalo was only answering to the defence hypothesis when he said that could have happened.

why none of them was even empty at noon ?

One was labeled as "empty" by Elissa. (It must be the same that it was in the IV bag described by Alberto, with some little white substance in the bottom of the bag).

we have 550 ml of urine at the scene , we have 450ml of urine in his bladder

The other way round.

that requires many hours to be produced ?

Not necessarily. (For certain urinary tests, patients are made to drink 2 or even more litres before their urine is tested and usually in a short scope of time).
Murray was administering MJ intravenous fluids.

 

[smoothlugar]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

and the urine concentration was only 0.10 ug/ml.

0.15 ug/ml exactly.

In the preliminary this was not referred to by any expert as an estimation of the amount of propofol given to MJ.

No mention of the urine in the scene either in the prel.

PS: I don't know what caused the "ruin" of threads commented above, but I saw some very negative ways of self-defending; fortunately it's there... Sometimes the misunderstandings in written communication are unavoidable, but many other times the wrong attitude doesn't help...

 

[Autumn II]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

thus she will understand what I'm saying better than you , I'm respectively asking those who are active on that site to bring this figure to her attention and I have no doubt she will agree with me on this issue. Those are medical facts. When she tried to explain she used similar cases and compared concentrations levels detected in similar situations , again that is the scientific way to analyze and determine the amount used which some here mocked me when I used. Ask her or give me her email to contact her and trust me she will 1000% agree with me on this MEDICAL FACT.

I guess what I'd like to know is what your opinion is about this "medical fact?" I mean, there is a punch-line, right?

Is it that Murray wasn't really giving Michael what it seemed like he was giving? Do you think that he was TRICKING Michael (i.e. flushing the propofol)?

Is the point that he wasn't really doing anything dangerous? Is that the strategy you think the defense will use? Or what?

great post and explains alot , but if indeed as she believes Murray was using 1 to 2 1000 mg of propofol EVERYNIGHT, the way he used it that last night MJ would have died long before 25 june, right? what is the other explanation ? he was lucky he survived ? really ? According to Rafelo a 10cc syringe ended his life , but we are to believe he was being hooked for a propofol drip for hours for months and he survived? really ?

But, what is your POINT, given all these medical facts? (see above) That Murray was giving a smaller, and "safer" amount of propofol? Even though we've seen a lot of FACTS saying that NO amount of propofol is acceptable in a home setting without rescue equipment and additional staff?

When you say, "according to Rafelo, a 10cc syringe ended his life," do you mean to say you think the defense strategy will be that Michael SELF-injected, and up to that point Murray was doing nothing dangerous, and actually FLUSHING this dangerous drug down a TOILET?

if not , if Murray was not using those bottles then what he was ordering all those boxes? why did he take 3 bottles size 1000mg to MJ's mansion that day ? why none of them was even empty at noon ?we have 550 ml of urine at the scene , we have 450ml of urine in his bladder that requires many hours to be produced ? why those bottles were not used during those long hours ?

Murray's never said what was done with all that propofol he ordered, and it's unlikely that he will testify. Seriously, do you think the defense strategy could be that: Murray bought all that propofol just for show, and that Michael was somehow COUNTING vials of propofol -- that he actually had the time and interest in that and kept some sort of tally? He'd have to record it in writing somewhere, wouldn't he, if he were really keeping track? -- despite rehearsing, planning for the show, and being a single-parent of three children? Seriously, wasn't his issue to SLEEP? So why "count" the propofol, if he was getting some sleep? I can see no sense at all in this argument.

So the question is, do you think that the defense strategy will be: "Murray wasn't doing anything that 'should have' killed Michael, and that Michael gave the fatal dose to HIMSELF, and that Murray wasn't really responsible?" Is that what you think they will try to prove?

 

[Petrarose]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

The defence and the prosecutors are arguing about a 10cc syringe that was used to inject the last dose and still some insist he was hooked to propofol and left to die . At least use what is presented as evidence to refute the defence case!!!!!

I am with you on that one. I really do not believe Murray was giving Michael doses of propofol for weeks without the appropriate care either. We will see during the trial.

 

[8701girl]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

Actually u know what it wouldnt surprise me if he decided to take the stand. Being the arrogrant man he is, he will probably do it to make himself look good

 

[StacyJ]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

Actually u know what it wouldnt surprise me if he decided to take the stand. Being the arrogrant man he is, he will probably do it to make himself look good

I don't think he's brave enough to do that.. He will be torn to shreds by the prosecutors.

 

[Petrarose]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

I don't think he's brave enough to do that.. He will be torn to shreds by the prosecutors.

No attorney would make Murray take the stand. Not even Oxman would ask him to take the stand, and you know who incompetent Oxman is.

 

[xthunderx2]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

I am with you on that one. I really do not believe Murray was giving Michael doses of propofol for weeks without the appropriate care either. We will see during the trial.

I agree 100% I really do not think that Murray was giving Michael propofol for weeks either...he is not that smart....look what he did..he killed Michael.

I don't think he's brave enough to do that.. He will be torn to shreds by the prosecutors.

me either...he is gonna have to be really desperate to get on that stand..Murders usually dont.

 

[StacyJ]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

He can't explain away anything he did.. everything he did was medically wrong.. Who loads a healthy patient up with ativan, valium, lorazapem and propofol? Michael wasn't in hospice or dying of cancer. He wasn't having surgery so why the hell was anesthesia needed? Murray screwed up for money. He didn't give a damn what he was doing to MJ. Mike weighed a 130lbs how could his little frame withstand all of that crap pumped into him? All Murray had to do was say No Mike, propofol is not for sleep and it won't help solve the problem, let's get you some real help. He could've referred Mike to a sleep specialist and saved his life instead of being careless and reckless and taking his life.. What kind of pharmacology did he study in school that says mixing sedatives in a cocktail is good to treat insomnia?

 

[8701girl]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

I don't think he's brave enough to do that.. He will be torn to shreds by the prosecutors.

I sure hope he would

 

[morsmordre]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

He can't explain away anything he did.. everything he did was medically wrong.. Who loads a healthy patient up with ativan, valium, lorazapem and propofol? Michael wasn't in hospice or dying of cancer. He wasn't having surgery so why the hell was anesthesia needed? Murray screwed up for money. He didn't give a damn what he was doing to MJ. Mike weighed a 130lbs how could his little frame withstand all of that crap pumped into him? All Murray had to do was say No Mike, propofol is not for sleep and it won't help solve the problem, let's get you some real help. He could've referred Mike to a sleep specialist and saved his life instead of being careless and reckless and taking his life.. What kind of pharmacology did he study in school that says mixing sedatives in a cocktail is good to treat insomnia?

That is the truth. Said perfectly. At the end of the day, Murray was money hungry, neglectful, stupid and reckless and responsible for Michael's death. What kind of a doctor would jeopardise his patient's life for money? Sickening.

 

[ms fairy]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

Murray provided the drugs for the killers, its very doubtful that he was even there. Of course he is guilty but there are many others far more guilty and MJ already showed who are all involved. We can't accept autopsy report as gospel especially when it comes to the rich and famous. Will there be fans going? Can some L.A fans have a thread where they can help organize cheap motels, directions, maps, etc.?

 

[bouee]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

Is the point that he wasn't really doing anything dangerous? Is that the strategy you think the defense will use?


So the question is, do you think that the defense strategy will be: "Murray wasn't doing anything that 'should have' killed Michael, and that Michael gave the fatal dose to HIMSELF, and that Murray wasn't really responsible?" Is that what you think they will try to prove?

Soundmind's theory is that Murray was inducing sleep with propofol, maitaining sleep with something else , at one point lorazepam, used flumazenil and propofol again so Michael would see he woke up from propofol.

I can't talk about the medical facts, I don't have much medical knowledge. I have one question though : what would happen after the flumazenil injection, would Michael wake up ?

I don't think this would help Murray, it's a question of interpretation :

My understanding of this theory : Murray and did that because he knew propofol was dangerous. Yet he used it anyway. Even if it was lesser amounts, he used it without proper equipment, knowing he wasn't qualified enough to give it. We wouldn't be far from murder 2 if this is what happened.

Then buying lots of propofol ...I don't think Michael would be counting the vials, but maybe Murray wanted the bills from the pharmacy to get Michael to pay for the drugs ?

Murray lied to Michael, we know that. Now we don't know to what extent he lied. It will be interesting to hear Lee, Metzger and Adams, to know what their side of the story is. If it appears that Murray promised 8 hours sleep with propofol, and eventually did something else, it doesn't really make him look good at all : he should have told Michael : "I don't want to do that, I'll do this instead". If he had told Michael, then there was no need to buy gallons of propofol.
Especially if it's true that Dr Adams eventually accepted to work for Michael, and contacted Murray about that. Murray turned down an anaethesiologist.

That's a lot of "ifs", but I've always thought that if the prosecution could prove this theory, we would have a murder 2 charge.

 

[StacyJ]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

I can't wait to heat Adams has to say.. Adams is an anesthesiologist, why would Murray turn him down knowing Adams knew what he was doing?

 

[bouee]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

I can't wait to heat Adams has to say.. Adams is an anesthesiologist, why would Murray turn him down knowing Adams knew what he was doing?

I also believe Adams testimony will be extremely important, for various reasons.
But I'm also a little bit worried about it. If he accepted the job, it could also mean he accepted to use propofol to treat insomnia. Leading Michael and Murray to think it could be OK to do that, and implicating himself.

 

[Kingofpop4ever3000]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

I can't wait to heat Adams has to say.. Adams is an anesthesiologist, why would Murray turn him down knowing Adams knew what he was doing?

Personally, I think that Murray was afraid that if anybody else came around to help Michael, then Murray would be out of the job.

I also believe Adams testimony will be extremely important, for various reasons.
But I'm also a little bit worried about it. If he accepted the job, it could also mean he accepted to use propofol to treat insomnia. Leading Michael and Murray to think it could be OK to do that, and implicating himself.

I agree.

 

[daisy]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

It seems like the concentration of propofol in urine indeed says that Murray did not use all of these vials of propofol that night.
But I guess the discussion was also that in comparison to concentration elsewhere it could be said that propofol injection was rapid and that Michael died shortly after being injected, as the body did not have time to metabolise it. I am also not an expert, but can it be that the concentration in urine as such could not reflect the amount of propofol administered to Michael, as the sooner Michael died after the administration of propofol, the less propofol got into his urine? (I know it is not that simple, but just trying to figure this out).

For sure, I think this is ok to say that on that night Michael was not "hooked to propofol" during the nights and the content of these vials could indeed go down the toilet in Murray's not really successful efforts to get rid of the evidence. So on that particular night, I would agree. But this is it and the rest is not known for sure. Hair tox results would show about the long term use of propofol.

As people here say very often, it is very unlikely Michael would have survived six weeks with propofol being administered like that by an incompetent doctor.

Now, Murray had two days to rethink what to say to the police and therefore he told the story about small amount of propofol. But he also told the story about 6 weeks of propofol. Why did he tell that knowing (??) that hair test results would (probably) show that he is a liar?

 

[bouee]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

..../.... that Michael gave the fatal dose to HIMSELF,..../....

About the self injection theory :

a few thing from the february and march hearings :

The defense wants to analyse the fingerprints themselves, and possibly have a fingerprints expert.
Why ? Aren't those fingerprints clear enough ??

they want to subpeona all the security staff that was there on that day.

They want to know about all the surveillance footage (from Michael and Murray arriving at the house, until the paramedics arrives)

They want other coroners to work on Elissa Fleak's evidence. Logically , it must be what was in the house, not the autopsy itself. And, interestingly, they say their expert can't write a report, because they need more evidence , or see the evidence from Elissa Fleak.

To me, it sounds like it's not only about self injection , it's ALSO about someone else (a third person) did it. The defense doesn't seem to have a clear theory about that. But they are desperate to show that it's possible Murray didn't do the last injection. So this last injection is important to them.

About Michael drank the propofol :

I think (but I would need help on that ) that Dr Rogers said he didn't believe in it, partly because there was too little propofol in the stomach. Could this be that there was too little in the stomach compared to the amounts found in the blood and other organs ? So it would rule out the 'he drank the propofol" theory ?
The transcripts of the prelim are also on teammichaeljackson.com.

 

[daisy]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

About Michael drank the propofol :

I think (but I would need help on that ) that Dr Rogers said he didn't believe in it, partly because there was too little propofol in the stomach. Could this be that there was too little in the stomach compared to the amounts found in the blood and other organs ? So it would rule out the 'he drank the propofol" theory ?
The transcripts of the prelim are also on teammichaeljackson.com.

I would think that one of the strongest argument rejecting this theory is that there was no propofol traces detected in Michael's mouth and throat, esophagus.
Another thing is that lidocaine was present in stomach as well, which means Michael would have to drink both. There were also many many other arguments. Therefore, this goes back to what was stated in AR that the propofol in stomach got there as a result of PCR. IMO that should be enough for complete dismissing of this theory.

I guess comparing concentration in stomach to concentration in blood could be additional evidence.

 

[bouee]

Re: Status hearings discussion thread / next hearing Feb 28th

I would think that one of the strongest argument rejecting this theory is that there was no propofol traces detected in Michael's mouth and throat, esophagus.

was it tested ??

Therefore, this goes back to what was stated in AR that the propofol in stomach got there as a result of PCR.

Yes, Dr Rogers said that, and he also said it could come from the autopsy directly. I don't want to be too graphic, but he said that blood from other parts of the body could have been mixed with the stomach content during the autopsy.