View Full Version : Conrad Murray trial -Day fifteen
Soulmagent
10-21-2011, 10:58 AM
Dr Murray was not to happy with yesterdays Propofol evidence. The demonstratrive examples shown in court having seemed to upset him more than any other aspect of the case so far. (next to the angry looks his gave the security guards) .
The next week will have 15 witnesses for the defence I wonder which one of those witnesses Murray has the most faith in, as it is going to take MJ himself showing up in court for him to be found not guilty , IMO.
MajicAtl.
http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&drKey=910&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fsho wthread.php%3Ft%3D150211&v=1&libid=1317387045927&out=http%3A%2F%2Fmajicatl.com%2Fvideos%2Fmajicatl% 2Fwatch-the-conrad-murray-michael-jackson-death-trial-here-live-stream%2F&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fuse rcp.php&title=Conrad%20Murray%20trial%20-Day%20three.%20-%20Websleuths%20Crime%20Sleuthing%20Community&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fmajicatl.com%2Fvideos%2Fmajicatl% 2F...e-live-stream%2F&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13173872342816
TMZ
http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&drKey=910&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fsho wthread.php%3Ft%3D150800&v=1&libid=1318426669028&out=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.viglink.com%2Fapi%2Fclick%3Ff ormat%3Dgo%26drKey%3D910%26loc%3Dhttp%253A%252F%25 2Fwww.websleuths.com%252Fforums%252Fshowthread.php %253Ft%253D150211%26v%3D1%26libid%3D1317387045927% 26out%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.tmz.com%252F%26ref% 3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.websleuths.com%252Fforums %252Fusercp.php%26title%3DConrad%2520Murray%2520tr ial%2520-Day%2520three.%2520-%2520Websleuths%2520Crime%2520Sleuthing%2520Commun ity%26txt%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.tmz.com%252F%26 jsonp%3Dvglnk_jsonp_13173871051031&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Ffor umdisplay.php%3Ff%3D462&title=Conrad%20Murray%20trial%20-Day%20nine.%20-%20Websleuths%20Crime%20Sleuthing%20Community&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.viglink.com%2Fapi%2Fclick%3Ff or...13173871051031&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13184268344095
My Fox
http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&drKey=910&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fsho wthread.php%3Ft%3D150211&v=1&libid=1317387045927&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.myfoxphoenix.com%2Fdpps%2Fnew s%2Fjustice%2Fconrad-murray-michael-jackson-doctor-trial-app_15219744&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fuse rcp.php&title=Conrad%20Murray%20trial%20-Day%20three.%20-%20Websleuths%20Crime%20Sleuthing%20Community&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.myfoxphoenix.com%2Fdpps%2Fnew ...l-app_15219744&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_131738713427
News star.
http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&drKey=910&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fsho wthread.php%3Ft%3D150211&v=1&libid=1317387045927&out=http%3A%2F%2Fnewstaar.com%2Fwatch-streaming-live-video-dr-conrad-murray-trial-in-michael-jackson-doctor-case-%25e2%2580%2593-opening-statement-as-trial-begins-today%2F354326%2F&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fuse rcp.php&title=Conrad%20Murray%20trial%20-Day%20three.%20-%20Websleuths%20Crime%20Sleuthing%20Community&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fnewstaar.com%2Fwatch-streaming-...-today%2F354326%2F&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13173871808373
Click2Houston
http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&drKey=910&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fsho wthread.php%3Ft%3D150211&v=1&libid=1317387045927&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.click2houston.com%2Fvideo%2F2 9313639%2Findex.html&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fuse rcp.php&title=Conrad%20Murray%20trial%20-Day%20three.%20-%20Websleuths%20Crime%20Sleuthing%20Community&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.click2houston.com%2Fvideo%2F2 9313639%2Findex.html&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13173871975894ng
CNN
http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&drKey=910&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fsho wthread.php%3Ft%3D150800&v=1&libid=1318426669028&out=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.viglink.com%2Fapi%2Fclick%3Ff ormat%3Dgo%26drKey%3D910%26loc%3Dhttp%253A%252F%25 2Fwww.websleuths.com%252Fforums%252Fshowthread.php %253Ft%253D150211%26v%3D1%26libid%3D1317387045927% 26out%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.cnn.com%252Fvideo%2 52F%26ref%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.websleuths.com% 252Fforums%252Fusercp.php%26title%3DConrad%2520Mur ray%2520trial%2520-Day%2520three.%2520-%2520Websleuths%2520Crime%2520Sleuthing%2520Commun ity%26txt%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.cnn.com%252Fvid eo%252F%26jsonp%3Dvglnk_jsonp_13173872142345&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Ffor umdisplay.php%3Ff%3D462&title=Conrad%20Murray%20trial%20-Day%20nine.%20-%20Websleuths%20Crime%20Sleuthing%20Community&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.viglink.com%2Fapi%2Fclick%3Ff or...13173872142345&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13184269652286
LA LOCAL TIMES.
http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&drKey=910&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fsho wthread.php%3Ft%3D150702&v=1&libid=1317929514163&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fnews%2Flocal%2F michael-jackson-trial%2F&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fsho wthread.php%3Ft%3D150702%26page%3D3&title=Conrad%20Murray%20trial%20-Day%20eight.%20-%20Websleuths%20Crime%20Sleuthing%20Community&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.latimes.com%2Fnews%2Flocal%2F mi...jackson-trial%2F&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13179300346441
Upstream
http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&drKey=910&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fsho wthread.php%3Ft%3D150702&v=1&libid=1317929514163&out=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ustream.tv%2Fconradmurraytria l%23utm_campaign%3Dsynclickback%26source%3Dhttp%3A %2F%2Fwww.mediaite.com%2Fonline%2Fwatch-dr-conrad-murray-trial-via-live-stream%2F%26medium%3D9407213&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fsho wthread.php%3Ft%3D150702%26page%3D3&title=Conrad%20Murray%20trial%20-Day%20eight.%20-%20Websleuths%20Crime%20Sleuthing%20Community&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ustream.tv%2Fconradmurraytr.. .medium%3D9407213&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13179301284242
ABC Local channel seven
http://api.viglink.com/api/click?format=go&drKey=910&loc=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fsho wthread.php%3Ft%3D150702&v=1&libid=1317929514163&out=http%3A%2F%2Fabclocal.go.com%2Fkabc%2Flivenow% 3Fid%3D8366366&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.websleuths.com%2Fforums%2Fsho wthread.php%3Ft%3D150702%26page%3D3&title=Conrad%20Murray%20trial%20-Day%20eight.%20-%20Websleuths%20Crime%20Sleuthing%20Community&txt=http%3A%2F%2Fabclocal.go.com%2Fkabc%2Flivenow% 3Fid%3D8366366&jsonp=vglnk_jsonp_13179301490783
ITUNE link.
http://www.apple.com/itunes/affiliates/download/?id=464322481
tweezybird
10-21-2011, 11:54 AM
So when is court going to resume, I thought I heard 3:45?
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 12:04 PM
So when is court going to resume, I thought I heard 3:45?
Court will resume Friday at 12:45 p.m. PDT. The defense, which had expected to start its case tomorrow, has yet to cross-examine Dr. Shafer.
Read more: http://ca.eonline.com/news/michael_jackson_manslaughter_trial/270524#ixzz1bQtUJtMl
Thundar
10-21-2011, 12:14 PM
Court will resume Friday at 12:45 p.m. PDT. The defense, which had expected to start its case tomorrow, has yet to cross-examine Dr. Shafer.
Read more: http://ca.eonline.com/news/michael_jackson_manslaughter_trial/270524#ixzz1bQtUJtMl
I wonder why so late? That doesn't give defense much time if they are going to get in their cross so prosecution can finish with their part of this trial. I bet defense goes all afternoon and part of Monday. Unless they streamline their questions and don't ask the same question ten different ways.
Velouria
10-21-2011, 12:15 PM
Apologies if this subject has been covered, but does anyone have the slightest clue as to what procedure Dr. Arnie Klein could have possibly performed on MJ that would require three office visits per week, including regular doses of Demerol?
While I don't believe he is as directly involved as Dr. Murray in MJ's death, how does his attorney explain the numerous prescriptions from Dr. K, issued in various names and found in MJ's bedroom? IMO, that's a clear indication of prescription fraud at the very least.
__________________
outofstatelawyer
10-21-2011, 12:21 PM
Apologies if this subject has been covered, but does anyone have the slightest clue as to what procedure Dr. Arnie Klein could have possibly performed on MJ that would require three office visits per week, including regular doses of Demerol?
While I don't believe he is as directly involved as Dr. Murray in MJ's death, how does his attorney explain the numerous prescriptions from Dr. K, issued in various names and found in MJ's bedroom? IMO, that's a clear indication of prescription fraud at the very least.
__________________
No idea. I did hear that because of all of the cosmetic and reconstructive surgeries, MJ's face was extremely sensitive. So, apparently it was being used prior to botox injections! (God forbid he not get botox!).
It will be interesting to see what the medical records show. They may have been dummied up, but at least Klein kept medical records!
Thundar
10-21-2011, 12:26 PM
Apologies if this subject has been covered, but does anyone have the slightest clue as to what procedure Dr. Arnie Klein could have possibly performed on MJ that would require three office visits per week, including regular doses of Demerol?
While I don't believe he is as directly involved as Dr. Murray in MJ's death, how does his attorney explain the numerous prescriptions from Dr. K, issued in various names and found in MJ's bedroom? IMO, that's a clear indication of prescription fraud at the very least.
__________________
You made me curious, so I went to Klien's website.
Link (http://www.drarnoldklein.com/)
From Link:
"Considered the father of modern cosmetic dermatology, Dr. Arnold Klein developed the injection techniques for the cosmetic use of Botox, Collagen and Restylane. As you’ll see from our art collection, he also possesses a refined aesthetic sense. A combination of art and science epitomizes his work with fillers."
outofstatelawyer
10-21-2011, 12:32 PM
Does anyone else get driven nuts by the conversation on In Session sometimes?
BTW, they are making a huge deal about Chernoff doing the cross today. As I said on the last thread, Chernoff has been making the objections during Shaffer's direct, so that was no surprise to me. Courts impose a "one lawyer per witness rule", meaning that one lawyer is assigned to each witness, and does the objections and cross on each witness. I may have missed some testimony before yesterday, but it appeared to me that Chernoff was handling the objections on Shaffer's direct.
I suppose the real question is why the guy who has been handling all of the technical medical stuff would not be "taking" Dr. Shaffer. It could be that since Chernoff is the lead attorney, he thought he needed to re-connect with the jury. Chernoff is not a stupid man, and I think he will be able to conduct the cross just fine. I think he will attack the accuracy of the medical examiner's toxicology results, thus trying to take the legs out from the basis of Shaffer's testimony. It could also be that White and Flanagan had personality clashes (doctors can be the biggest divas in the world, after all, and I suspect Dr. White has a very high opinion of himself). Since it was probably Chernoff who retained him, perhaps Chernoff was compelled to "take him" to mollify Dr. White's "diva-ish" tendencies.
Finally, I also noted how agitated Murray looked yesterday when the IV drips came out. It was almost as if he wanted to jump up and show how he really killed MJ! Not to sound like a broken record, but there sure is a lot of wasted time, again, today, in this trial. It's driving me nutz.
peace9274
10-21-2011, 12:34 PM
OK. I'm lost.
I was Skyping with my 3 yr old granddaughter in RI, from 8-9:15 am, my AZ time...
and then said I had errands and had to end the call.
I then rushed to turn on the TV (feeling guilty for ending the Skype session with my DGD so
I could see what's happening with the CM trial).... and then to WS for the Day Fifteen thread.
And all I see is that court will resume at 12:45 PDT.
Did anything happen at all this morning? There's nothing at TMZ.
I figured I'd get the fastest answer here, faster than going around the internet trying to find out.
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 12:48 PM
Dr Murray was not to happy with yesterdays Propofol evidence. The demonstratrive examples shown in court having seemed to upset him more than any other aspect of the case so far. (next to the angry looks his gave the security guards) .
The next week will have 15 witnesses for the defence I wonder which one of those witnesses Murray has the most faith in, as it is going to take MJ himself showing up in court for him to be found not guilty , IMO.
The camera in the courtroom has focused heavily on Dr. M over the past 2 days and I haven't seen Dr. Murray smile once.
Dr. Murray's lawyers opposed the suspension of Dr. Murray's medical license claiming if Dr. Murray didn't work, they wouldn't get paid. Dr. Murray's father was a physician who died in 2001. AFAIK Conrad was an only child so perhaps he inherited some money after his father's death.
Michael Jackson Manslaughter Trial: Conrad Murray Defense Witness Calls Propofol Expert a "Scumbag"
<snipped>
""White, who described Shafer as a friend and colleague, tells E! News that Deputy District Attorney David Walgren's treatment of the evidence has been "unethical and unconscionable." Shafer's testimony, however, has changed the way he thinks of him, White says. "I am going to take the high road, not the low road with him," he adds. "I was his teacher when he was a medical student. The truth will come out. It always does."
UPDATE 3:05 p.m. Pastor immediately called for a break after Murray lost his cool in response to Shafer using an actual infusion stand to demonstrate how Murray could have dosed Michael Jackson with propofol. "Can you believe that?" Murray whispered to Dr. Paul White, an expected defense witness. "What a scumbag," White told the media seated near him.""
Read more: http://ca.eonline.com/news/michael_jackson_manslaughter_trial/270524#ixzz1bQwMDxWA
tweezybird
10-21-2011, 12:59 PM
Thanks Bluesky!
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 01:15 PM
OK. I'm lost.
I was Skyping with my 3 yr old granddaughter in RI, from 8-9:15 am, my AZ time...
and then said I had errands and had to end the call.
I then rushed to turn on the TV (feeling guilty for ending the Skype session with my DGD so
I could see what's happening with the CM trial).... and then to WS for the Day Fifteen thread.
And all I see is that court will resume at 12:45 PDT.
Did anything happen at all this morning? There's nothing at TMZ.
I figured I'd get the fastest answer here, faster than going around the internet trying to find out.
The trial has been delayed until 1:30 p.m. local time Friday due to a funeral for Dr. Shafer's father.
http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktla-conrad-murray-trial-day-15,0,491291.story
outofstatelawyer
10-21-2011, 01:25 PM
The trial has been delayed until 1:30 p.m. local time Friday due to a funeral for Dr. Shafer's father.
http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktla-conrad-murray-trial-day-15,0,491291.story
Thank you; this is certainly an excusable justification for the delay.
Velouria
10-21-2011, 01:28 PM
You made me curious, so I went to Klien's website.
Link (http://www.drarnoldklein.com/)
From Link:
"Considered the father of modern cosmetic dermatology, Dr. Arnold Klein developed the injection techniques for the cosmetic use of Botox, Collagen and Restylane. As you’ll see from our art collection, he also possesses a refined aesthetic sense. A combination of art and science epitomizes his work with fillers."
I'd heard about that Thundar and admit I was very surprised. I hate to sound unkind, but I hope that MJ's appearance wasn't an example of Dr. Klein's "refined aesthetic". IMO, vitiligo aside, whoever was responsible for performing that wretched excess of plastic surgery is nothing short of a butcher. Highly unethical and obviously not acting in the best interest of the patient.
It had occurred to me that perhaps Dr. K. was treating MJ with lasers in order to even out his pigmentation. Still, it's hard for me to believe even that would necessitate such frequent trips to the office. Usually a topical anesthetic is used, and a period of several days of healing time is required between treatments.
NO ONE could possibly need that many fillers or botox injections!
Velouria
10-21-2011, 01:32 PM
Does anyone else get driven nuts by the conversation on In Session sometimes?
Only every time I watch it. :crazy:
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 01:51 PM
I'd heard about that Thundar and admit I was very surprised. I hate to sound unkind, but I hope that MJ's appearance wasn't an example of Dr. Klein's "refined aesthetic". IMO, vitiligo aside, whoever was responsible for performing that wretched excess of plastic surgery is nothing sort of a butcher. Highly unethical and obviously not acting in the best interest of the patient.
It had occurred to me that perhaps Dr. K. was treating MJ with lasers in order to even out his pigmentation. Still, it's hard for me to believe even that would necessitate such frequent trips to the office. Usually a topical anesthetic is used, and a period of several days of healing time is required between treatments.
NO ONE could possibly need that many fillers or botox injections!
I wonder how much Micheal paid Dr. Klein for his services over the years and whether Michael had a contract with him similar to Dr. Murray's?
Thundar
10-21-2011, 02:26 PM
I'd heard about that Thundar and admit I was very surprised. I hate to sound unkind, but I hope that MJ's appearance wasn't an example of Dr. Klein's "refined aesthetic". IMO, vitiligo aside, whoever was responsible for performing that wretched excess of plastic surgery is nothing short of a butcher. Highly unethical and obviously not acting in the best interest of the patient.
It had occurred to me that perhaps Dr. K. was treating MJ with lasers in order to even out his pigmentation. Still, it's hard for me to believe even that would necessitate such frequent trips to the office. Usually a topical anesthetic is used, and a period of several days of healing time is required between treatments.
NO ONE could possibly need that many fillers or botox injections!
I will just agree with your assessment because what was going through my mind as I was reading that was NOT for general message board posting. You did not sound unkind at all (I would have sounded much unkinder).
katydid23
10-21-2011, 02:32 PM
I wonder how much Micheal paid Dr. Klein for his services over the years and whether Michael had a contract with him similar to Dr. Murray's?
Every time I see a picture of Dr Klein I see a major resemblence between Prince and the doctor. And it reminds me of an article in the Enquirer, in which the children's bio mother, a nurse in Dr Klein's office, stated that they used sperm from Dr Klein when she was given IVF to get pregnant.
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 03:26 PM
Every time I see a picture of Dr Klein I see a major resemblence between Prince and the doctor. And it reminds me of an article in the Enquirer, in which the children's bio mother, a nurse in Dr Klein's office, stated that they used sperm from Dr Klein when she was given IVF to get pregnant.
This article has a picture of Dr. Klein and Michael Jackson posted down the page where Part I begins.
http://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/doctors-around-michael-jackson-dr-arnold-klein-and-dr-steven-hoefflin/
Debbie Rowe and Michael were legally married when they had their two children.
Did a paternity test on Paris and Prince establish MJ as their bio father?
Marriages:
•Lisa Marie Presley - May 18, 1994 til January 18, 1996 - ended in divorce. Lisa Marie and Michael were married in the Dominican Republic.
•Debbie Rowe - November 15, 1996 til October 8, 1999 - ended in divorce.
** both marriages ended in divorce due to irreconcilable differences. **
Children:
•Prince Michael Joseph Jackson, Jr: Born in 1997. His mother is Debbie Rowe.
•Paris Michael Katherine Jackson: Born in 1998. Her mother is Debbie Rowe.
•Prince Michael Jackson II aka Blanket: Born in 2002. He had a surrogate mother.
http://marriage.about.com/cs/celebritymarriages/p/michaeljackson.htm
This situation reminds me when Howard K. Stern went on Larry King Live and claimed he was Danny Lynn's biological father. A paternity test identified Larry Birkhead as Danny Lynn's biological father.
http://www.zimbio.com/Larry+Birkhead/pictures/3/Larry+Birkhead+Photo+Album?Page=2
Howard K. Stern was found guilty of conspiracy for feeding the prescription drug addiction that eventually killed Ms. Smith. Stern faced 9 felony counts but was only convicted of two.
Khristine Eroshevich was convicted of four counts of conspiracy, but was acquitted of two.
Another doctor, Sandeep Kapor was acquitted of all six of his charges.
http://vindicatemj.wordpress.com/2011/08/27/doctors-around-michael-jackson-dr-arnold-klein-and-dr-steven-hoefflin/
EPfan
10-21-2011, 03:38 PM
YMOO, but I think that Dr. Shafer should not have mentioned Dr. White's name on anything that he might or might not have said or done, or believed. I think he should have just testified to his knowledge and beliefs. (He was doing a good job so why take a chance)
A student and teacher, both being Dr.s, and both testifying might not be good here in this case. This will be intresting.
Dr Shafer might come out on top, but I don't like this little personal riff.
peace9274
10-21-2011, 03:43 PM
Every time I see a picture of Dr Klein I see a major resemblence between Prince and the doctor. And it reminds me of an article in the Enquirer, in which the children's bio mother, a nurse in Dr Klein's office, stated that they used sperm from Dr Klein when she was given IVF to get pregnant.
BBM
I, too, see a resemblence between Prince and Dr Klein.
I see a resemblece between Prince and Paris, also.
And... I also heard that Dr Klein provided the sperm for her IVF.
katydid23
10-21-2011, 03:53 PM
Wasn't the trial supposed to resume--5 minutes ago?
Thundar
10-21-2011, 03:57 PM
Wasn't the trial supposed to resume--5 minutes ago?
Originally yes, but someone posted either upthread or on yesterday's thread that it was changed to 1:35 California time. So not for another half an hour.
katydid23
10-21-2011, 04:01 PM
Originally yes, but someone posted either upthread or on yesterday's thread that it was changed to 1:35 California time. So not for another half an hour.
Ok thanks. I went and did my errands earlier today so i could get back to see this cross examination. Should be very interesting.
Thundar
10-21-2011, 04:15 PM
Actually it's on now. Defense is just starting their cross.
Credence
10-21-2011, 04:15 PM
Apologies if this subject has been covered, but does anyone have the slightest clue as to what procedure Dr. Arnie Klein could have possibly performed on MJ that would require three office visits per week, including regular doses of Demerol?
While I don't believe he is as directly involved as Dr. Murray in MJ's death, how does his attorney explain the numerous prescriptions from Dr. K, issued in various names and found in MJ's bedroom? IMO, that's a clear indication of prescription fraud at the very least.
__________________
Good afternoon all. Shafer's testimony has been devastating for the defense.
Dr. Klein was not just doing boxtox injections. He was actually restructuring MJ's face which caused him to go into his muscles further. He admitted using demerol for sedation.
According to his attorney -- MJ had been there 1x week - each week in June preceding his death - not 3x/week.
Credence
10-21-2011, 04:17 PM
Every time I see a picture of Dr Klein I see a major resemblence between Prince and the doctor. And it reminds me of an article in the Enquirer, in which the children's bio mother, a nurse in Dr Klein's office, stated that they used sperm from Dr Klein when she was given IVF to get pregnant.
I honestly see no resemblance at all. Not even close IMO LOL
In any event -- don't think about it much. MJ was their dad; biological or not.
Talina
10-21-2011, 04:23 PM
:floorlaugh: Chernoff said to Dr. Shafer that he didn't understand most of what he had said in the last 2 days.
Thundar
10-21-2011, 04:28 PM
Defense is now making a big deal about witness using a different iv line for the demonstration than the one that was found at the scene. Motion to strike, defense is testifying,sustained.
Comparing the two lines, wtf. Is this all they have?
peace9274
10-21-2011, 04:28 PM
I honestly see no resemblance at all. Not even close IMO LOL
In any event -- don't think about it much. MJ was their dad; biological or not.
I totally agree. And, IMO, a very good one, at that!!
Talina
10-21-2011, 04:30 PM
Defense is now making a big deal about witness using a different iv line for the demonstration than the one that was found at the scene. Motion to strike, defense is testifying,sustained.
Comparing the two lines, wtf. Is this all they have?
If this is how they are going to go with their cross examination, I don't think they are headed to poking many holes. What the heck difference does it make whether it was the exact same IV tubing? The fact remains there was no method of controlling the amount of the drip and no monitoring and CM left the room. Good grief.
Thundar
10-21-2011, 04:31 PM
It seems that no one wants the witness to say anything but yes or no. He even shushed himself once. Making defense work for the answers. Defense is testifying and trying to get witness to agree.
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 04:32 PM
Every time I see a picture of Dr Klein I see a major resemblance between Prince and the doctor. And it reminds me of an article in the Enquirer, in which the children's bio mother, a nurse in Dr Klein's office, stated that they used sperm from Dr Klein when she was given IVF to get pregnant.
I don't. These children to me have much better features than Klein.
IMO, I have always felt MJ pulled the secret of the century on everyone even over on Debbie Rowe.
I think Debbie was led to believe a sperm donor was given. May have even been told it was Klein although I don't remember that. I thought she said she did not know who the sperm donor was. Klein may have even helped MJ and told Rowe he was the donor.
And to me MJ didn't want her to know either. If she knew he was the sperm donor then he knew if there was ever a divorce from her it would cost him way way more than 8 million to get full custody of the children if she knew Prince and Paris were his own bio children.
They all look like bi-racial children, imo. Imo, Klein and Rowe would have had very light skin children and not dark olive skinned.
IMO
Credence
10-21-2011, 04:33 PM
Chernoff is good at misstating facts -- he has done this on every cross
Thundar
10-21-2011, 04:35 PM
Defense asked witness about when an iv infusion was ordered. Why is this witness testifying about what Murray ordered. He is reading from his laptop about Murray's orders.
Defense is that what you are relying on? Answered, asked again, defense is going somewhere with this, but where is the question.
Talina
10-21-2011, 04:37 PM
It think Chernoff is trying to say that there is no proof that particular IV vented spike and tubing was never shipped and therefore no proof it could have been used. IMO
Credence
10-21-2011, 04:38 PM
No way was that propofol injected -- it was a spike in that rubber stopper not a needle mark which would not have been noticeable
Credence
10-21-2011, 04:39 PM
It think Chernoff is trying to say that there is no proof that particular IV vented spike and tubing was never shipped and therefore no proof it could have been used. IMO
Right without the tube with the vent; there couldn't have been an infusion but that is the tubing that is missing and has never been found by investigators.
peace9274
10-21-2011, 04:39 PM
Dr Shafer is not going to let Chernoff get to him.
And Dr Shafer's assuredness, attitude, and demeanor shows that he is NOT going to let CM get away with murder.
Thundar
10-21-2011, 04:39 PM
It think Chernoff is trying to say that there is no proof that particular IV vented spike and tubing was never shipped and therefore no proof it could have been used. IMO
Is defense then trying to point the finger at another doctor or at MJ for spiking the propofol bottle?
Defense is pointing out to witness that everything is just your opinion, you understand that, don't you. What kind of questions are these? Of course it's his opinion, his expert opinion.
Credence
10-21-2011, 04:42 PM
Dr Shafer is not going to let Walgren get to him.
And Dr Shafer's assuredness, attitude, and demeanor shows that he is NOT going to let CM get away with murder.
True. One thing for certain is Dr. Shafer truly believes that his opinion is exactly what happened. You cannot simply shake someone's belief
Credence
10-21-2011, 04:46 PM
OMG -- Shafer said tubing can be easily removed by curling it up. This is going to be a battle
Thundar
10-21-2011, 04:49 PM
Not really sure if Chernoff is doing any better than Flannegan was doing with the other experts. Defense makes me want to scream when they do this around in circle questioning.
Now questioning the 20 cc syringe. Witness, the size is irrelevant.
This witness is testifying to Murrays interview also.
thumbtack
10-21-2011, 04:53 PM
Did you hear earlier when Chernoff addressed the doc as "Shafer" & then immediately changed it to "Dr. Shafer?" How rude. I think he did this on purpose to show lack of respect.
peace9274
10-21-2011, 04:58 PM
According to TMZ: Dr. Conrad Murray made a pretty shocking statement last night, leaving a restaurant in Santa Monica, with his GF and baby son. He said, "I would like to pray for the prosecutor, his associates, and his expert witness."
Dr. Conrad Murray: 'I'm Praying for the Prosecutor' | TMZ.com (http://www.tmz.com/2011/10/21/dr-conrad-murray-praying-for-prosecutor-jury-michael-jackson/)
Not sure what kind of prayers CM is saying for the prosecution, et al...
BUT, IMO... CM should be heavy-duty praying for himself!
*~Aimee~*
10-21-2011, 05:02 PM
OMG -- Shafer said tubing can be easily removed by curling it up. This is going to be a battle
and it is. Dr. Murray could of easily hid the tubing.
Thundar
10-21-2011, 05:02 PM
Now asking questions about a Dr. Larson. Witness did not rely on Dr. Larson's report to write his report. It must be a differing opinion.
Defense now going through the witness's report, or written opinion. Witness is bringing it up on his laptop.
Even the judge is getting a little testy with defense. Page 14 of the report. Witness is looking on his laptop. About what might have happened. Empty bottle of propofol was found in blue bag where it was placed by Alverez. Witness would be happy to read Alverez's statement if you would get me one to read. Defense said they would be happy to do that, but of course did not.
This is going to be a long afternoon with this line of questioning.
*~Aimee~*
10-21-2011, 05:04 PM
Apologies if this subject has been covered, but does anyone have the slightest clue as to what procedure Dr. Arnie Klein could have possibly performed on MJ that would require three office visits per week, including regular doses of Demerol?
While I don't believe he is as directly involved as Dr. Murray in MJ's death, how does his attorney explain the numerous prescriptions from Dr. K, issued in various names and found in MJ's bedroom? IMO, that's a clear indication of prescription fraud at the very least.
__________________
I think it is to do with MJ vitiligo skin conditon. But not sure....
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 05:05 PM
All I see him doing is trying to confuse him.
IMO
Thundar
10-21-2011, 05:09 PM
Defense is asking about the hanging tag on the propofol bottle. The one found at the scene's hanging tag was not used. That tag had not been opened or used before it was in court.
Well I know why that is so, but does the jury?
peace9274
10-21-2011, 05:12 PM
All I see him doing is trying to confuse him.
IMO
And he's trying to get Dr Shafer flustered, playing with his memory,
twisting the questions around, etc, so that Dr Shafer will make a mistake.
And then the defense will tell the jurors to not trust Dr Shafer's memory and that he's not credible.
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 05:13 PM
Defense is asking about the hanging tag on the propofol bottle. The one found at the scene's hanging tag was not used. That tag had not been opened or used before it was in court.
Well I know why that is so, but does the jury?
Yes, the stipulation was read to the jury yesterday where it said that the hanging tag was not used and the state used it only for the demo.
IMO
Thundar
10-21-2011, 05:13 PM
Sidebar. Showing Dr. White writing away on papers in his lap. I guess he didn't go away.
Judge just went through his speech about statements of attorneys are not evidence.
ges79
10-21-2011, 05:13 PM
I don't know how this cross-exam is playing with the jury, but I'm not exactly getting where the line of questioning is going.:waitasec:
peace9274
10-21-2011, 05:17 PM
To Judge Pastor:
You are so cool!
Thundar
10-21-2011, 05:19 PM
Defense: going back to 1978, and asking about his first wife and conversations about residency.
Wow he had to go back quite a ways to get to something. Perhaps defense's version of being chummy?
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 05:20 PM
What has Chernoff done to his hair?:waitasec:
Credence
10-21-2011, 05:20 PM
He is trying so hard to discredit Dr. Schafer
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 05:23 PM
He is asking some of the most goofball questions.
Nothing is clear.
Sheesh.........Cher..........just spit it out.
peace9274
10-21-2011, 05:25 PM
He is trying so hard to discredit Dr. Schafer
No can do.
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 05:28 PM
And the sad thing is Dr. Shafer only tries to be helpful when asked questions.
IMO
Credence
10-21-2011, 05:29 PM
What has Chernoff done to his hair?:waitasec:
Do you recall when Dr. Shafer said there was brown stains on the tubing and asked if it were blood? I bet you it was the dye from Chernoff's hair. :floorlaugh:
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 05:31 PM
:floorlaugh:Do you recall when Dr. Shafer said there was brown stains on the tubing and asked if it were blood? I bet you it was the dye from Chernoff's hair.
:floorlaugh: He buzzed it off too and now his receding hairline really shows up more.
Cher is putting everyone to sleep. This is so disjointed.:banghead:
CarolinaMoon
10-21-2011, 05:32 PM
I'm listening to the cross and I have to say that the defense SEEMS to be going after itty-bitty pieces of his testimony. In going through the propofol set-up, they are trying to make the jury believe that he based his research partially on Alonso's (?) lies... defense hits at him whenever they can, insinuating that the DA's set up the story about the bottle in the bag.
Counting on you good peeps to keep me up to date after the afternoon break. I have to leave and HLN on DVR has too many commercials which seem to mostly interrupt the good stuff.
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 05:32 PM
The jury made it one hour!:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
ges79
10-21-2011, 05:35 PM
Defense has failed to put any dents in Dr. Shafer's testimony. One would think if he had anything credible, it would have been presented by now. JMO
peace9274
10-21-2011, 05:35 PM
Thank gawd I became a nurse, an artist, an art & antiques gallery owner...
and not a lawyer.
I would not be able to stay composed, with the fake nice responses for as long as they are.
I think I would be laughing out loud, spitting & choking on my water, swearing at the idiot attys,
looking at the jurors & rolling my eyes... and I'd prolly be doing some name calling.
IOW: I'd be asked to leave the court about now!
katydid23
10-21-2011, 05:39 PM
Defense has failed to put any dents in Dr. Shafer's testimony. One would think if he had anything credible, it would have been presented by now. JMO
Here is one thing Chernof tried to insinuate. He was talking about Schafer's role in the early paper on propofol he did with White and his first wife. Schafer said his main role was doing the math because early computers could not keep up with the necessary math. And so Chernoff tried to kind of downplay Schafers role by saying stuff like " those were old computers, like the Osborn models, tiny screens, old school computers..." Making it sound as if him doing the math was not that big of a deal.
peace9274
10-21-2011, 05:45 PM
The jury made it one hour!:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ
Let's just move on and get to Dr White's testimony!!!
peace9274
10-21-2011, 05:57 PM
To Chernoff:
Billy Flynn, you're not!
So please just sit down...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
ETA: Last verse of Billy's song, "Razzle Dazzle Them"
"Give 'em the old Razzle Dazzle
Razzle dazzle 'em
Show 'em the first rate sorcerer you are
Long as you keep 'em way off balance
How can they spot you've got no talents?
Razzle Dazzle 'em
Razzle Dazzle 'em
Razzle Dazzle 'em
And they'll make you a star!
CHICAGO THE MUSICAL - RAZZLE DAZZLE LYRICS (http://www.metrolyrics.com/razzle-dazzle-lyrics-chicago-the-musical.html#ixzz1bSJ3SVJw)
katydid23
10-21-2011, 05:58 PM
I think Chernoff did a little damage. He reminded the jury that Schafer got his 'theory' for the demonstration by reading Alvarez's statement about the bottle in the IV bag. And Alvarez has been somewhat discredited, imo. That testimony might come into question during deliberations.
Thundar
10-21-2011, 06:02 PM
Court is in session.
Talina
10-21-2011, 06:02 PM
I think Chernoff did a little damage. He reminded the jury that Schafer got his 'theory' for the demonstration by reading Alvarez's statement about the bottle in the IV bag. And Alvarez has been somewhat discredited, imo. That testimony might come into question during deliberations.
Possibly but I don't think so because there is no other explanation as to how the propofol levels in the femoral blood could have been as high as it was.
Credence
10-21-2011, 06:06 PM
I think Chernoff did a little damage. He reminded the jury that Schafer got his 'theory' for the demonstration by reading Alvarez's statement about the bottle in the IV bag. And Alvarez has been somewhat discredited, imo. That testimony might come into question during deliberations.
I do not think AA was discredited. I believe if the jury thinks like most; that the sequence of events may be out of order in a chaotic situation, but not that the events did not happen. Much of his testimony was supported by the EMTs except the sequence
Fleak made a huge error though not photographing the prop bottle inside of the saline bag
peace9274
10-21-2011, 06:07 PM
wow... Chernoff just said "Garbage in. Garbage out" when discussing Dr Shafer's study data!!
Dr Shafer, slightly annoyed, chuckled & said, "All data is... paramount."
Talina
10-21-2011, 06:08 PM
I do not think AA was discredited. I believe if the jury thinks like most; that the sequence of events may be out of order in a chaotic situation, but not that the events did not happen. Much of his testimony was supported by the EMTs except the sequence
Fleak made a huge error though not photographing the prop bottle inside of the saline bag
I tend to agree and I look at Shafer's explanation and basically ruling out any other method to get the blood levels to what it was in the toxicology report as lending credence to Alvarez and Fleak testimony about the seeing the bottle in the bag.
katydid23
10-21-2011, 06:08 PM
Why is he going over ALL of the papers Schafer did on Propofol? Is that supposed to discredit him somehow? To me it makes him seem even more credible.
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 06:10 PM
Chernoff firmly reminded Dr. Shafer that Dr. Murray was on trial for his life.
Talina
10-21-2011, 06:13 PM
Chernoff firmly reminded Dr. Shafer that Dr. Murray was on trial for his life.
Perhaps on redirect Walgren should ask Dr. Shafer if, in his opinion, did anything other than Dr. Murray's egregious deviations from standard of care put Dr. Murray "on trial for his life" as Mr. Chenoff so eloquently reminded of us all during his cross?
Credence
10-21-2011, 06:14 PM
Why is he going over ALL of the papers Schafer did on Propofol? Is that supposed to discredit him somehow? To me it makes him seem even more credible.
Most research is argumentative too. It is all part of validating the methodology and subjected to peer review with various opinions. The general consensus of the majority of the scientists who review the research is what determines validity. I hope someone on the jury understands this.
katydid23
10-21-2011, 06:20 PM
I am confused now. I suppose that is what Chernoff is going for with the jury too.
peace9274
10-21-2011, 06:24 PM
Isn't some of this hearsay?
katydid23
10-21-2011, 06:29 PM
"You preferred to shove it down his professional throat"
" You literally swallowed Porpofol, correct?"
" You then cam to court and had nerve to say YOU were disappointed in Dr White? "
Wow, Chernoff is going to town on Schafer now. I wonder if the jury is going along with it?
Credence
10-21-2011, 06:30 PM
Sorry, but Chernoff is totally unethical and he knows exactly what he is doing and that his comments would be objected to and sustained but gets them out there.
Dr. Schafer based his opinion on Dr. White saying MJ had swallowed propofol period and was disappointed in his fellow professional. Nothing wrong with that either since the literature states that oral profofol has low bioavailability. Surely Dr. White had access to those same studies.
Thundar
10-21-2011, 06:31 PM
I missed some of the latest, I was on my way home. Did I just hear defense ask witness if he went further and then shoved it down Dr. White's perfessional throat? And then defense withdrew the question. Trying to play dirty now, I don't think the judge will let defense go down this road.
thumbtack
10-21-2011, 06:32 PM
Sorry, but Chernoff is totally unethical and he knows exactly what he is doing and that his comments would be objected to and sustained but gets them out there.
Dr. Schafer based his opinion on Dr. White saying MJ had swallowed propofol period and was disappointed in his fellow professional. Nothing wrong with that either.
Exactly! I hope the jury agrees.
katydid23
10-21-2011, 06:32 PM
Sorry, but Chernoff is totally unethical and he knows exactly what he is doing and that his comments would be objected to and sustained but gets them out there.
Dr. Schafer based his opinion on Dr. White saying MJ had swallowed propofol period and was disappointed in his fellow professional. Nothing wrong with that either.
I agree. And I hope the jury understands that.
thumbtack
10-21-2011, 06:33 PM
I agree. And I hope the jury understands that.
I said it first :)
Credence
10-21-2011, 06:35 PM
I missed some of the latest, I was on my way home. Did I just hear defense ask witness if he went further and then shoved it down Dr. White's perfessional throat? And then defense withdrew the question. Trying to play dirty now, I don't think the judge will let defense go down this road.
Yes and those comments were objected to and sustained. That is what my post was referring to when I said Chernoff is unethical. :banghead:
EPfan
10-21-2011, 06:41 PM
The judge got upset with Dr. Shafer. Please just answer the questions!!! I don't think that Dr. Shafer is as confident with this kind of questioning. I don't know where this is going to go but I have a icky feeling in my tummy. I wonder what the jury is thinking.
katydid23
10-21-2011, 06:42 PM
So Chernoff is really good at mocking and accusing and acting 'shocked' at how stupid Dr Schafer is. I hope the jury can see through this charade.
I like how Schafer said " Oh, I will look up the testimony and see why I made that assumption...and Chernoff says " Oh No, you don't have to do that, let's move on. "
So I am guessing there was a good reason for Schafer to make that assumption in the first place. Chernoff was not taking any chances.
Thundar
10-21-2011, 06:43 PM
Defense looks right at the witness and says in a stern voice, so you made that assumption? (About what Murray was giving MJ for drugs and the amount of drugs ordered). He is trying to make that assumption seem so out of the realm of possibility that the jurry will suspect all four days of testimony.
Credence
10-21-2011, 06:43 PM
"No other agenda as you are alleging?" WTG Dr. Shafer because that is exactly what Cher is doing
Melanie
10-21-2011, 06:43 PM
This cross is painful. The Doc is coming across as defensive with the defense and that shouldn't be happening.
katydid23
10-21-2011, 06:44 PM
The judge got upset with Dr. Shafer. Please just answer the questions!!! I don't think that Dr. Shafer is as confident with this kind of questioning. I don't know where this is going to go but I have a icky feeling in my tummy. I wonder what the jury is thinking.
I think Dr Schafer is just trying not to get forced into admitting things he did not really say or do. Chernoff is good at asking and framing questions in a fake way, forcing a yes/no answer that is unfair, imo.
EPfan
10-21-2011, 06:49 PM
I think Dr Schafer is just trying not to get forced into admitting things he did not really say or do. Chernoff is good at asking and framing questions in a fake way, forcing a yes/no answer that is unfair, imo.
Yes, I agree but the judge clearly said he wanted him to answer yes or no!! Now they have settled down a bit.
Thundar
10-21-2011, 06:57 PM
So Chernoff is really good at mocking and accusing and acting 'shocked' at how stupid Dr Schafer is. I hope the jury can see through this charade.
I like how Schafer said " Oh, I will look up the testimony and see why I made that assumption...and Chernoff says " Oh No, you don't have to do that, let's move on. "
So I am guessing there was a good reason for Schafer to make that assumption in the first place. Chernoff was not taking any chances.
He is good at what he does, I can see why Murray hired him. If I was the defendant I would be glad he was on my side. But I am not the defendant, I am a bystander that is loosing patience with this questioning. I have come to really like this witness and it is making me upset that defense is trying to discredit him. I hope the jury has come to like this witness and is upset with defense too.
outofstatelawyer
10-21-2011, 06:58 PM
I think Dr Schafer is just trying not to get forced into admitting things he did not really say or do. Chernoff is good at asking and framing questions in a fake way, forcing a yes/no answer that is unfair, imo.
That is what cross examination is! Dr. Shafer should just say "I cannot give a simple yes or no answer to that". I wish Walgren had prepped him a bit better.
Thundar
10-21-2011, 06:59 PM
That is what cross examination is! Dr. Shafer should just say "I cannot give a simple yes or no answer to that". I wish Walgren had prepped him a bit better.
Yes, he should say that instead of what is happening.
outofstatelawyer
10-21-2011, 07:01 PM
He is good at what he does, I can see why Murray hired him. If I was the defendant I would be glad he was on my side. But I am not the defendant, I am a bystander that is loosing patience with this questioning. I have come to really like this witness and it is making me upset that defense is trying to discredit him. I hope the jury has come to like this witness and is upset with defense too.
Well, it's Chernoff's job to discredit him, after all. I have not listened to much of the cross, but effective cross can be done without being flippant, sarcastic, etc. The tone of Chernoff's voice is what is irritating me.
Thundar
10-21-2011, 07:03 PM
Well, it's Chernoff's job to discredit him, after all. I have not listened to much of the cross, but effective cross can be done without being flippant, sarcastic, etc. The tone of Chernoff's voice is what is irritating me.
And I agree again. It is the tone and the way the questions are asked. Thank you, I just knew I was getting irritated and now I know why.
peace9274
10-21-2011, 07:04 PM
In the past several years, there have been a lot of changes and/or eliminations when using some of the official & standard medical abbreviations and terminology that have been used for a zillion years.
Using mls now, instead of cc's is one of those changes.
I'm glad to see that I'm not the only "old-timer" that hasn't
fully adjusted to using the changes.
Dr Shafer used the term m-l's in the very beginning.
Then he used cc's, but corrected himself. Now he just
says cc's and doesn't even bother correcting himself!!!!
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 07:08 PM
Chernoff pointed out that the assimilation Dr. S did on lorazepam states MJ received the first 2 mg dose at midnight when he was still at the rehearsal hall.
ges79
10-21-2011, 07:10 PM
And I agree again. It is the tone and the way the questions are asked. Thank you, I just knew I was getting irritated and now I know why.
Add me in too. I'm not a fan of Chernoff's style. :sick:
Credence
10-21-2011, 07:10 PM
Chernoff pointed out that the assimilation Dr. S did on lorazepam states MJ received the first 2 mg dose at midnight when he was still at the rehearsal hall.
True but I honestly don't see a big deal with it. He needed a starting point; the main point of his testimony is that multiple injections were given over a period of 4-5 hour or so.
katydid23
10-21-2011, 07:12 PM
Chernoff pointed out that the assimilation Dr. S did on lorazepam states MJ received the first 2 mg dose at midnight when he was still at the rehearsal hall.
I know. I wish Dr S had not done a hypothetical model based upon something that is so easy to disprove.
Thundar
10-21-2011, 07:12 PM
Is court over for the day? I was watching hln instead of starting another computer and they went to JVM and another case.
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 07:15 PM
I think Chernoff did a little damage. He reminded the jury that Schafer got his 'theory' for the demonstration by reading Alvarez's statement about the bottle in the IV bag. And Alvarez has been somewhat discredited, imo. That testimony might come into question during deliberations.
He was probably sent his other statement afterwards.
How has his testimony been discredited? I thought he was one of the most genuine witnesses to testify for the state.
Didn't he say he saw a saline bag with a slit in it and wasnt that found in the bag he described that Murray fessed up and told them where it was? Doesnt that same bottle of propofol found with the silit bag have only the fingerprint of CM on it?
IMO
thumbtack
10-21-2011, 07:16 PM
Is court over for the day? I was watching hln instead of starting another computer and they went to JVM and another case.
Yes, until Monday AM
EPfan
10-21-2011, 07:16 PM
Is court over for the day? I was watching hln instead of starting another computer and they went to JVM and another case.
I am wondering the same thing.
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 07:17 PM
True but I honestly don't see a big deal with it. He needed a starting point; the main point of his testimony is that multiple injections were given over a period of 4-5 hour or so.
I don't see it as a big deal. He had to work out all the scenarios until he found the one that match the levels found at time of autopsy.
IMO
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 07:18 PM
Chernoff asked Dr. S why he omitted the red line in the assimilation graph he showed to the Jury on Lorazepam which indicates when a patient becomes non-responsive to painful stimulus.
Dr. S said the reason he omitted it was because in his opinion it would confuse the Jury members.
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 07:20 PM
Chernoff pointed out that the assimilation Dr. S did on lorazepam states MJ received the first 2 mg dose at midnight when he was still at the rehearsal hall.
Walgren will clear all of this up on re-direct. He always does.
IMO
Credence
10-21-2011, 07:23 PM
Have a great weekend all . Just hope Shafer is not on the stand too much longer. I am bored already and no holes in his testimony and I would think if there were any we would have been aware already. :)
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 07:25 PM
And I agree again. It is the tone and the way the questions are asked. Thank you, I just knew I was getting irritated and now I know why.
I have found both of these cross examiners very irritating. I love a good cross but do not like the snarkiness and put downs especially when they aren't necessary.
Dr. Shafer is trying very hard to answer all of Cher's questions honestly. You can tell DS doesn't appear in court too often since he knows none of the courtroom rules. It makes him more endearing to me.
IMO
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 07:28 PM
I know. I wish Dr S had not done a hypothetical model based upon something that is so easy to disprove.
During cross examination of Dr. Shafer, Chernoff's discussed Dr. Shafer's professional relationship with Dr. White and what he knew about Dr. White testifying for the prosecution.
Chernoff pointed out that Dr Shafer quickly, within 2 weeks, completed a study on Propofol taken orally in which he participated and published the article shown in court.
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 07:29 PM
Chernoff firmly reminded Dr. Shafer that Dr. Murray was on trial for his life.
Which is a load of bull.:furious:
He is not on trial for his life. Heck if convicted he may not even do jail time.
That was for the jury not DS.
IMO
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 07:34 PM
"You preferred to shove it down his professional throat"
" You literally swallowed Porpofol, correct?"
" You then cam to court and had nerve to say YOU were disappointed in Dr White? "
Wow, Chernoff is going to town on Schafer now. I wonder if the jury is going along with it?
They were probably sitting there :furious::furious: that the nut job would say such a rude crude thing.
Beth and Jean both said the jury has really bonded with Dr. Shafer.
IMO
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 07:34 PM
Which is a load of bull.:furious:
He is not on trial for his life. Heck if convicted he may not even do jail time.
That was for the jury not DS.
IMO
That's right.
Dr. Shafer will be back on the stand Monday morning when court resumes at 8:45 PDT.
katydid23
10-21-2011, 07:36 PM
He was probably sent his other statement afterwards.
How has his testimony been discredited? I thought he was one of the most genuine witnesses to testify for the state.
Didn't he say he saw a saline bag with a slit in it and wasnt that found in the bag he described that Murray fessed up and told them where it was? Doesnt that same bottle of propofol found with the silit bag have only the fingerprint of CM on it?
IMO
When I watched his testimony I thought he was very genuine and believable. But there are two big problems, IIRC. One was that he testified about helping CM move MJ off of the bed BEFORE the EMTs arrived. But the paramedic said that MJ was still on the bed when they arrived. I thought that was problematic.
Also, in the cross examination, I think a lot of damage was done about the bottle in the bag because of a few things. Alvarez did not initially tell LE about that bottle in the bag. It was months before he did so. And that , added to the fact the CSI girl never took a picture, and did not write it that way in her report, makes it suspect. If I were on the jury I might feel it was tainted info.
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 07:39 PM
Here is one thing Chernof tried to insinuate. He was talking about Schafer's role in the early paper on propofol he did with White and his first wife. Schafer said his main role was doing the math because early computers could not keep up with the necessary math. And so Chernoff tried to kind of downplay Schafers role by saying stuff like " those were old computers, like the Osborn models, tiny screens, old school computers..." Making it sound as if him doing the math was not that big of a deal.
I'd like to see Chernoff try to do it!:floorlaugh:
If EC shuffles those papers on Monday like he did this afternoon I will be bonkers.
peace9274
10-21-2011, 07:48 PM
[quote=katydid23;7264620]When I watched his testimony I thought he was very genuine and believable. But there are two big problems, IIRC. One was that he testified about helping CM move MJ off of the bed BEFORE the EMTs arrived. But the paramedic said that MJ was still on the bed when they arrived. I thought that was problematic.
Also, in the cross examination, I think a lot of damage was done about the bottle in the bag because of a few things. Alvarez did not initially tell LE about that bottle in the bag. It was months before he did so. And that , added to the fact the CSI girl never took a picture, and did not write it that way in her report, makes it suspect.qu If I were on the jury I might feel it was tainted info.[/ote]
BBM
Regardless of any issues that are problematic, any holes, or descrepensies,
any changes in stories, or questionible evidence, any assumptions, theories,
or way-off simulations (if any).....
..... there still remains PROOF of 15 (or is it 17?) violations that CM
committed while MJ was in his care!!!
Even if MJ had lived... CM should still have had his license suspended with
scoldings from the Texas, Calif, & Neveda Medical Licensing Boards.
But with no witnesses or camera's watching CM, he would've gotten away with it...
and probably had gotten away with negligence many times before.
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 07:50 PM
When I watched his testimony I thought he was very genuine and believable. But there are two big problems, IIRC. One was that he testified about helping CM move MJ off of the bed BEFORE the EMTs arrived. But the paramedic said that MJ was still on the bed when they arrived. I thought that was problematic.
Also, in the cross examination, I think a lot of damage was done about the bottle in the bag because of a few things. Alvarez did not initially tell LE about that bottle in the bag. It was months before he did so. And that , added to the fact the CSI girl never took a picture, and did not write it that way in her report, makes it suspect. If I were on the jury I might feel it was tainted info.
He was on the 911 call for over two minutes and he and CM were in the middle of moving MJ off the bed when the EMTs walked into the room. So I don't see that as a problem at all. The more pertinent question is why didnt Murray already have MJ on the floor? He certainly had ample time as he waited for security to show up.
He had no reason to tell them in the quick interview LE did with him at the ER. They just asked him was he the one who called 911 and when he came on duty that day. They had no reason to ask him further questions since they were only assisting in a death investigation at that time. The homicide investigation didn't even start until August, 2009. At the time it happened Alberto had no clue that Murray was the reason MJ was dead. IMO, everyone at that time ..even the public thought MJ had probably overdosed on his own.
He tried through his lawyer to make contact with them when he saw in the media where LE was carrying out bags out of the mansion. That was in early July and he tried to meet with LE two times but because of LE scheduling and only 3 detectives assigned to the case that didn't happen until August due to no fault of Alberto's. The lead detective testified that AA did try to contact them and LE was shorthanded.
If the evidence wasnt found just like he said he saw....now that would be one thing but LE did find the propofol bottle with Murray's fingerprint and the slit bag along with the bag AA said he used to pick up Murray's drug stash.
There is nothing to be suspicious about when it comes to Alberto imo.
The SW of what was taken from the mansion was sealed and not released to the public until many many months later.
IMO
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 08:02 PM
[/QUOTE]
=peace
BBM
Regardless of any issues that are problematic, any holes, or discrepancies,
any changes in stories, or questionable evidence, any assumptions, theories,
or way-off simulations (if any).....
..... there still remains PROOF of 15 (or is it 17?) violations that CM
committed while MJ was in his care!!!
Even if MJ had lived... CM should still have had his license suspended with
scoldings from the Texas, Calif, & Neveda Medical Licensing Boards.
But with no witnesses or camera's watching CM, he would've gotten away with it...
and probably had gotten away with negligence many times before.[/QUOTE]
They have no reason to disbelieve Alberto. They know he is not the one that bought, brought and administered the drugs that caused the death of MJ.
If the jury concentrates on Alberto who is a non-issue and not an element in proving the case whatsoever then the defense has succeeded in throwing up smoke and mirrors.
ETA: Sorry the quote seems to be messed up.
IMO
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 08:02 PM
Chernoff asked Dr. Shafer about the level of Propofol found in MJ’s brain which was written on the Coronor's Report.
Dr. Shafer said there was no propofol level in MJ's brain.
katydid23
10-21-2011, 08:08 PM
He was on the 911 call for over two minutes and he and CM were in the middle of moving MJ off the bed when the EMTs walked into the room. So I don't see that as a problem at all. The more pertinent question is why didnt Murray already have MJ on the floor? He certainly had ample time as he waited for security to show up.
He had no reason to tell them in the quick interview LE did with him at the ER. They just asked him was he the one who called 911 and when he came on duty that day. They had no reason to ask him further questions since they were only assisting in a death investigation at that time. The homicide investigation didn't even start until August, 2009. At the time it happened Alberto had no clue that Murray was the reason MJ was dead. IMO, everyone at that time ..even the public thought MJ had probably overdosed on his own.
He tried through his lawyer to make contact with them when he saw in the media where LE was carrying out bags out of the mansion. That was in early July and he tried to meet with LE two times but because of LE scheduling and only 3 detectives assigned to the case that didn't happen until August due to no fault of Alberto's. The lead detective testified that AA did try to contact them and LE was shorthanded.
If the evidence wasnt found just like he said he saw....now that would be one thing but LE did find the propofol bottle with Murray's fingerprint and the slit bag along with the bag AA said he used to pick up Murray's drug stash.
There is nothing to be suspicious about when it comes to Alberto imo.
The SW of what was taken from the mansion was sealed and not released to the public until many many months later.
IMO
I hope the jury will understand all of it in this way. I have missed some of the testimony so I did not have all of this info in my mind. I know they are taking it all in.
I agree with you that CM is the negligent and guilty party here. I am just shell shocked after the last trial I followed, so I am not too optimistic.
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 08:09 PM
Chernoff asked Dr. Shafer about the level of Propofol found in MJ’s brain which was written on the Coronor's Report.
Dr. Shafer said there was no propofol level in MJ's brain.
I believe he said that the coroner did not test the level of propofol in the brain, didn't he?
But Dr. Shafer said he didn't need it because there is a model which will tell the amount in the brain based on what was found else where.
IMO
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 08:10 PM
Dr Shafer told Chernoff because there were no medical records kept on June 25 2009 by Dr. Murray, he is missing important data.
EPfan
10-21-2011, 08:13 PM
When I watched his testimony I thought he was very genuine and believable. But there are two big problems, IIRC. One was that he testified about helping CM move MJ off of the bed BEFORE the EMTs arrived. But the paramedic said that MJ was still on the bed when they arrived. I thought that was problematic.
Also, in the cross examination, I think a lot of damage was done about the bottle in the bag because of a few things. Alvarez did not initially tell LE about that bottle in the bag. It was months before he did so. And that , added to the fact the CSI girl never took a picture, and did not write it that way in her report, makes it suspect. If I were on the jury I might feel it was tainted info.
I am going to totally agree with you. Because, I have been thinking the same thing.
This is a criminal case, we know there is negligence, but is this Criminal.(there is a big difference) That is what the question is going to be.
I also think the verdict is going to depend on the testimony of Dr. Shafer verses Dr. White. JMOO So far Dr. Shafer isn't as good a witness being cross examined as a prosecution witness but that is to be expected. I have no ideal what Dr. White is going to say but it will be interesting because he is either going to make or break this case.
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 08:13 PM
I hope the jury will understand all of it in this way. I have missed some of the testimony so I did not have all of this info in my mind. I know they are taking it all in.
I agree with you that CM is the negligent and guilty party here. I am just shell shocked after the last trial I followed, so I am not too optimistic.
I think they are listening very closely. All the time Beth, Alan Duke and Jean have said this jury is very attentive and have not been bored although today Judge Pastor took a break after an hour so they may have become bored quickly this afternoon.
I know you are and I am still in shock and dismayed by the Anthony verdict. I think it has made a lot of us very unsure of our justice system but really truthfully cases like Anthony's and jurors like the Pinellas 12 rarely happen.
IMO
Melanie
10-21-2011, 08:17 PM
Chernoff firmly reminded Dr. Shafer that Dr. Murray was on trial for his life.
He is? From what I heard Dr. Murray has little chance of going to prison and will probably serve his sentence at home with an electronic monitor. It's not like the dude is going to death row.
As far as not being able to practice again, all I can say is Thank Gawd. Who would want him as a doctor now anyway?
MOO
Mel
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 08:19 PM
I am going to totally agree with you. Because, I have been thinking the same thing.
This is a criminal case, we know there is negligence, but is this Criminal.(there is a big difference) That is what the question is going to be.
I also think the verdict is going to depend on the testimony of Dr. Shafer verses Dr. White. JMOO So far Dr. Shafer isn't as good a witness being cross examined as a prosecution witness but that is to be expected. I have no ideal what Dr. White is going to say but it will be interesting because he is either going to make of break this case.
It is just as criminal as someone getting on the road behind the wheel and acting with gross recklessness and negligence and killing someone.
Yes, this case is very much a criminal case. In fact IMO due to the gross deviations in the standard of care the acts were soooooo wantonly reckless and negligent that it should have been charged at a higher degree.
Every medical expert I have seen speak out have said in their opinion Murray's actions are criminal. So even his own peers knows he committed criminal acts.
IMO
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 08:20 PM
The claim by attorneys of Michael Jackson's doctor that the singer killed himself with an injection of the powerful anesthetic propofol is a "crazy scenario," a top anesthesiology expert testified on Thursday.
http://www.dnaindia.com/entertainment/report_jackson-self-injecting-fatal-drug-a-crazy-scenario-anesthesiologist_1601614
oceanblueeyes
10-21-2011, 08:22 PM
He is? From what I heard Dr. Murray has little chance of going to prison and will probably serve his sentence at home with an electronic monitor. It's not like the dude is going to death row.
As far as not being able to practice again, all I can say is Thank Gawd. Who would want him as a doctor now anyway?
MOO
Mel
That was meant for the jury. He is not on trial for his life. That is Drama Queen spin.
The public would be better off without doctors like Murray out there.
He is a high risk taker with a patient's life. Drs should stick to their hypocrattic oaths.
IMO
EPfan
10-21-2011, 08:32 PM
It is just as criminal as someone getting on the road behind the wheel and acting with gross recklessness and negligence and killing someone.
Yes, this case is very much a criminal case. In fact IMO due to the gross deviations in the standard of care the acts were soooooo wantonly reckless and negligent that it should have been charged at a higher degree.
Every medical expert I have seen speak out have said in their opinion Murray's actions are criminal. So even his own peers knows he committed criminal acts.
IMO
The difference is there is negligence all the time with Dr's and nurses, in hospitals and clinics, they lose their license but aren't prosecuted criminally. This is a criminal case. You have to prove criminal negligence. Maybe the prosecution has already done this in the eyes of the jury. We will also have to hear what the instructions are from the judge when the jury deliberates. I have a relative that is a very great attorney and helps me alot. If this case wasn't Michael Jackson we wouldn't be in the court room.
peace9274
10-21-2011, 08:34 PM
That was meant for the jury. He is not on trial for his life. That is Drama Queen spin.
The public would be better off without doctors like Murray out there.
He is a high risk taker with a patient's life. Drs should stick to their hypocrattic oaths.
IMO
Every word you said is absolutely the truth.
Very well said, o.blueeyes!
Short and to the point!
EPfan
10-21-2011, 08:35 PM
He is? From what I heard Dr. Murray has little chance of going to prison and will probably serve his sentence at home with an electronic monitor. It's not like the dude is going to death row.
As far as not being able to practice again, all I can say is Thank Gawd. Who would want him as a doctor now anyway?
MOO
Mel
That's what I think he meant, like not his life literally but his lifestyle and that sort of life, job, reputation, etc.
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 09:15 PM
Murray defense cross-examines propofol expert
Toxicology studies of drugs in Jackson's blood and computer models Shafer used to analyze how he died were overshadowed Friday when Chernoff focused on the personal and professional rivalry between Shafer and Dr. Paul White, the defense expert.
The experts first met in 1978 when White was an assistant professor at Stanford University and Shafer was a medical student. They became friends and co-authored research papers, but this trial appears to have changed their friendship.
Chernoff accused Shafer of wanting to "shove it down his (White's) professional throat" in a question stricken from the record by Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor.
White was lectured by Judge Pastor about comments about Shafer attributed to him in an online blog.
White admitted Friday that he told a reporter that he had changed his opinion of Shafer after hearing his testimony Thursday. "I was his teacher when he was a medical student," E! News Online quoted White as saying. "The truth will come out. It always does."
White denied calling Shafer "a scumbag," as the website quoted him as saying.
Pastor, who imposed a gag order on all parties in the trial, set a contempt of court hearing for White next month.
"You are not in any way shape or form, to comment on your views regarding the state of the evidence, witnesses or your views as to any counsel in this case," Pastor said.
http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/21/justice/california-conrad-murray-trial/index.html?hpt=hp_bn2
Bluesky#1
10-21-2011, 09:51 PM
I believe he said that the coroner did not test the level of propofol in the brain, didn't he?
But Dr. Shafer said he didn't need it because there is a model which will tell the amount in the brain based on what was found else where.
IMO
<snipped>
At one point, Chernoff became testy with Shafer, snapping, "You do understand the difference between opinion and fact, don't you? You do understand that everything you've said in the last two days is your opinion, don't you?"
Chernoff added, "Would you be at all surprised if other medical experts disagree with you?"
Shafer's testimony also contradicted the earlier account of Dr. Paul White -- the anesthesiologist expert who will testify for the defense and who is a 30-year colleague and friend of Shafer's.
White earlier in the year prepared a report that said Jackson could have died from ingesting propofol, a theory Shafer picked apart on the stand Thursday.
That led to a "heated" discussion between White and attorney Chernoff, according to CNN.
The day ended with Shafer telling defense that there was no measurement of the propofol in Jackson's brain included in his coroner's report -- which should spark a robust discussion when court resumes on Monday.
CNN reports the trial is expected to go to the jury for deliberations next week.
Murray faces up to four years in prison and loss of his medical license if convicted, though a new California law could mean his sentence would be reduced to two years and be served in a county jail.
http://www.thewrap.com/music/column-post/conrad-murray-trial-day-15-defense-team-will-cross-examine-dr-steven-shafer-propofol-exp?page=0,1
borndem
10-21-2011, 10:49 PM
BBM
I, too, see a resemblence between Prince and Dr Klein.
I see a resemblece between Prince and Paris, also.
And... I also heard that Dr Klein provided the sperm for her IVF.
BBM
I see the Klein/Prince resemblance as well. Face shape and especially the middle section of their faces (high part of cheeks and their eyes). It's not easy, tho, for me so see a resemblance between Prince and Paris.
But I will say this about Paris: She is one of the prettiest young girls I have ever seen. Her eyes are absolutely gorgeous and her face is near-perfect. What a beautiful, beautiful child (young lady).
borndem
10-21-2011, 11:19 PM
Chernoff is good at misstating facts -- he has done this on every cross
And notice how he phrases the mixture of propofol (2.5cc) and lidocaine (25mgs) -- please excuse the use of the decimal point placement if it is incorrect -- my emphasis is that he repeatedly uses cc's and mgs instead of apples to apples, as it s/be stated, cc's and cc's or mg's and mg's. Shafer corrects him every time. Little pieces of straw. Not bricks. That's all they've got folks. Grains of sand -- and not many of them. Of course they're just getting started.
Settle back for the tedium folks... it's on its way...
borndem
10-21-2011, 11:25 PM
Is defense then trying to point the finger at another doctor or at MJ for spiking the propofol bottle?
Defense is pointing out to witness that everything is just your opinion, you understand that, don't you. What kind of questions are these? Of course it's his opinion, his expert opinion.
BBM
Exactamundo, Thundar!!!
This man is beginning to pizz me off, but then I think, it could have been Flanagan....
borndem
10-21-2011, 11:38 PM
What has Chernoff done to his hair?:waitasec:
I think he and Flanagan have missed their last appointments with Donald Trump's hairdresser!!!
borndem
10-21-2011, 11:57 PM
I tend to agree and I look at Shafer's explanation and basically ruling out any other method to get the blood levels to what it was in the toxicology report as lending credence to Alvarez and Fleak testimony about the seeing the bottle in the bag.
Yep, Talina, you're right. Further, the bottle in the bag set-up was no more or less jack-leg that the rest of CM's "operating room," so what's the big deal here? CM was fairly creative with that one, as we've agreed previously, but this was pretty much his modus operandi and SOP.
borndem
10-22-2011, 12:03 AM
Perhaps on redirect Walgren should ask Dr. Shafer if, in his opinion, did anything other than Dr. Murray's egregious deviations from standard of care put Dr. Murray "on trial for his life" as Mr. Chenoff so eloquently reminded of us all during his cross?
And in addition to that, Talina, Walgren might well ask who else was on trial for his life on that fateful night? And who lost? And not for only four years.... :maddening:
borndem
10-22-2011, 12:30 AM
He is good at what he does, I can see why Murray hired him. If I was the defendant I would be glad he was on my side. But I am not the defendant, I am a bystander that is loosing patience with this questioning. I have come to really like this witness and it is making me upset that defense is trying to discredit him. I hope the jury has come to like this witness and is upset with defense too.
I think Shafer is still a jury favorite, IMO. He had kept good eye contact with them from the beginning, and I think they know that he is exceptional and very talented and intelligent. All of that might have been off-putting, but Shafer has patiently explained all that medical and math-y stuff to them as a teacher would to a student, and he has done it a lot, and his manner has been neither arrogant, know-it-all, or impatient. I think he has established a bond with them with his manner and his caring and his impartiality by not accepting payment -- all in the midst of a very sad personal loss. And the jury certainly should notice both Flanagan's and Chernoff's adversarial and aloof manners, and they are bound to not like it and to not be lured by these weird-haired dudes. JMO.
scandi
10-22-2011, 12:37 AM
<snipped>
At one point, Chernoff became testy with Shafer, snapping, "You do understand the difference between opinion and fact, don't you? You do understand that everything you've said in the last two days is your opinion, don't you?"
Chernoff added, "Would you be at all surprised if other medical experts disagree with you?"
Shafer's testimony also contradicted the earlier account of Dr. Paul White -- the anesthesiologist expert who will testify for the defense and who is a 30-year colleague and friend of Shafer's.
White earlier in the year prepared a report that said Jackson could have died from ingesting propofol, a theory Shafer picked apart on the stand Thursday.
That led to a "heated" discussion between White and attorney Chernoff, according to CNN.
The day ended with Shafer telling defense that there was no measurement of the propofol in Jackson's brain included in his coroner's report -- which should spark a robust discussion when court resumes on Monday.
CNN reports the trial is expected to go to the jury for deliberations next week.
Murray faces up to four years in prison and loss of his medical license if convicted, though a new California law could mean his sentence would be reduced to two years and be served in a county jail.
http://www.thewrap.com/music/column-post/conrad-murray-trial-day-15-defense-team-will-cross-examine-dr-steven-shafer-propofol-exp?page=0,1
Hi, Re: your Bolded script, what they didn't say is following this comment Shafer said something like: That doesn't matter, as knowing how much propofol was in another part of the body can give a calculation as to how much was in the brain.
A fascinating afternoon of testimony IMO
katydid23
10-22-2011, 12:38 AM
I think Shafer is still a jury favorite, IMO. He had kept good eye contact with them from the beginning, and I think they know that he is exceptional and very talented and intelligent. All of that might have been off-putting, but Shafer has patiently explained all that medical and math-y stuff to them as a teacher would to a student, and he has done it a lot, and his manner has been neither arrogant, know-it-all, or impatient. I think he has established a bond with them with his manner and his caring and his impartiality by not accepting payment -- all in the midst of a very sad personal loss. And the jury certainly should notice both Flanagan's and Chernoff's adversarial and aloof manners, and they are bound to not like it and to not be lured by these weird-haired dudes. JMO.
I hope you are right. That is how I feel about it so far, but my faith in juries has been shaken somewhat.
I think the key will be how Dr White does on the stand. If he is able to win over the jury and if he comes off as intelligent and caring and credible, then the prosecution might be in some trouble, imo.
I agree that they have shown 15 major neglectful mistakes. but they still need to prove that MJ died as a direct result of those exact errors.
One of my sons friends said today, " Well if Dr Murray gave him that milk drug for 2 months and nothing bad ever happened, then how negligent can he be?"
borndem
10-22-2011, 12:39 AM
True but I honestly don't see a big deal with it. He needed a starting point; the main point of his testimony is that multiple injections were given over a period of 4-5 hour or so.
I think he used midnight since it is the simplest way to express time, and to figure elapsed time, as in "five hours after his first dose," etc., and it's easy to realize, "Yeah, 5:00 in the morning."
I think for the scenario he built, Shafer was simply using his normal way of showing time lines -- a kind of "neutral" start-time. Empirical. Bless his smart, smart heart. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon11.gif
borndem
10-22-2011, 12:49 AM
Walgren will clear all of this up on re-direct. He always does.
IMO
No doubt he will, ocean. He hasn't missed one in cross yet. I'm biased ( :eek: ), but I think Walgren is dayam good.
borndem
10-22-2011, 07:59 AM
I said it first :)
:snowball: : :lol: : :thumb:
Bluesky#1
10-22-2011, 09:45 AM
Hi, Re: your Bolded script, what they didn't say is following this comment Shafer said something like: That doesn't matter, as knowing how much propofol was in another part of the body can give a calculation as to how much was in the brain.
A fascinating afternoon of testimony IMO
It certainly was. I'm not satisfied with Dr. Shafer's answer.
Dr. Shafer said he omitted the red line from the assimilation on LOR which evaluates a patient's ability to respond to pain so he "wouldn't confuse the jurors" and I disagree with his decision.
Talina
10-22-2011, 09:51 AM
It certainly was. I'm not satisfied with Dr. Shafer's answer.
Dr. Shafer said he omitted the red line from the assimilation on LOR which evaluates a patient's ability to respond to pain so he "wouldn't confuse the jurors" and I disagree with his decision.
Why? What relevance would that have had to anything? If he was trying to hide something about that line he'd have never even shown it to the prosecution and defense wouldn't have gotten it in discovery.
Looks to me like he did two charts. One with and one without. The one without left out something irrelevant to the issue at hand and that is the one the prosecutor chose to use - for the exact reason Dr. Shafer left out the responding to pain line. It has no relevance so why even show it.
The defense is showing it to give the impression there is some relevance and cast doubt as to why it was left out of the exhibit used by the prosecution. Smoke and mirrors.
IMO
oceanblueeyes
10-22-2011, 10:04 AM
The difference is there is negligence all the time with Dr's and nurses, in hospitals and clinics, they lose their license but aren't prosecuted criminally. This is a criminal case. You have to prove criminal negligence. Maybe the prosecution has already done this in the eyes of the jury. We will also have to hear what the instructions are from the judge when the jury deliberates. I have a relative that is a very great attorney and helps me alot. If this case wasn't Michael Jackson we wouldn't be in the court room.
While that is true, I doubt doctors who are on medical boards cite those doctors with so many gross deviations from the standard of care as is seen in this case. Dr. Shafer states in his opinion it is 17 deviations. I highly doubt other doctors are so wantonly negligent and reckless as Murray.
But if there are doctors out there that grossly deviate as much as Murray did and are not being held accountable in a criminal trial then IMO that needs to change. No doctor should be held up to be above the law. That is like giving them a license to kill at will no matter how criminal their acts are.
I don't believe that. Right now over 200 doctors in California have been charged criminally for their own wrongdoings. So it is not just because it is Michael Jackson. It is not just about Michael but others who are losing their lives due to the gross recklessness and neglect.
Respectfully, I find that to be an old tired stand by dismissive argument as if because it is Michael Jackson he shouldn't receive justice for what was criminally done to him because he was known internationally. I don't care who the person happened to be and society shouldn't care about the status of the victim's fame either. Are some saying because he is THE Michael Jackson then he should receive no justice??? When did that become a threshold in our justice system?
This doctor should be held accountable for his own wrongdoings that resulted in a human being losing their life, period, no matter if their name is Joe Schmoe or someone famous. We are a country built on the solid foundation of "Justice for ALL" and that includes MJ.
And the deviations from the standard of care weren't 'mistakes.' Each thing Murray did and failed to do that day were done with cognitive thinking and choices he made under his own free will.
So this isn't like accidentally leaving a sponge inside of someone during surgery. These were willfully done and a man lost his life because of Murray and for no other reason.
IMO
Talina
10-22-2011, 10:06 AM
Regarding the last question Dr. Shafer answered yesterday at the end of the day about the AR with no testing having been done on propofol in the brain.
I don't think at this point any of us should jump to any conclusions as to what that answer means or doesn't mean. Court for the day ended smack dab in he middle of a topic that was not completed with questions and answers. We have no idea where Chernoff was going with that or how Dr. Shafer would respond.
It could very well be something as simple as this sort of test is not ever done so there was no reason to even expect that it would the in the autopsy. Dr. Shafer certainly didn't need it since he'd previously done research to determine brain level based on their EEG readings of the test subjects under the influence of propofol. No reason he'd have needed that from the autopsy. Conversely, the coroner didn't need it based on the actual blood levels he saw in the toxicology reports being as high as they were.
I see a red herring here and more of Chernoff's just trying to throw whatever he can to the wall hoping to make it stick.
IMO
oceanblueeyes
10-22-2011, 10:14 AM
<snipped>
At one point, Chernoff became testy with Shafer, snapping, "You do understand the difference between opinion and fact, don't you? You do understand that everything you've said in the last two days is your opinion, don't you?"
Chernoff added, "Would you be at all surprised if other medical experts disagree with you?"
Shafer's testimony also contradicted the earlier account of Dr. Paul White -- the anesthesiologist expert who will testify for the defense and who is a 30-year colleague and friend of Shafer's.
White earlier in the year prepared a report that said Jackson could have died from ingesting propofol, a theory Shafer picked apart on the stand Thursday.
That led to a "heated" discussion between White and attorney Chernoff, according to CNN.
The day ended with Shafer telling defense that there was no measurement of the propofol in Jackson's brain included in his coroner's report -- which should spark a robust discussion when court resumes on Monday.
CNN reports the trial is expected to go to the jury for deliberations next week.
Murray faces up to four years in prison and loss of his medical license if convicted, though a new California law could mean his sentence would be reduced to two years and be served in a county jail.
http://www.thewrap.com/music/column-post/conrad-murray-trial-day-15-defense-team-will-cross-examine-dr-steven-shafer-propofol-exp?page=0,1
Right, if one has read the AR they would know propofol was not tested for in the brain by the coroner.
That is why Dr. Shafer looked it up to be sure.
IMO
oceanblueeyes
10-22-2011, 10:20 AM
Regarding the last question Dr. Shafer answered yesterday at the end of the day about the AR with no testing having been done on propofol in the brain.
I don't think at this point any of us should jump to any conclusions as to what that answer means or doesn't mean. Court for the day ended smack dab in he middle of a topic that was not completed with questions and answers. We have no idea where Chernoff was going with that or how Dr. Shafer would respond.
It could very well be something as simple as this sort of test is not ever done so there was no reason to even expect that it would the in the autopsy. Dr. Shafer certainly didn't need it since he'd previously done research to determine brain level based on their EEG readings of the test subjects under the influence of propofol. No reason he'd have needed that from the autopsy. Conversely, the coroner didn't need it based on the actual blood levels he saw in the toxicology reports being as high as they were.
I see a red herring here and more of Chernoff's just trying to throw whatever he can to the wall hoping to make it stick.
IMO
Oh he is going to try to bash the coroner for not testing the brain for propofol. Even Dr. Shafer said it was not needed and one of his models can show the amount in the brain based on the amount found elsewhere.
You are right another smoke and mirrors red herring.
IMO
oceanblueeyes
10-22-2011, 10:35 AM
That's what I think he meant, like not his life literally but his lifestyle and that sort of life, job, reputation, etc.
He didn't say livelihood.
He has said that so much in other cases that it just rolled over his tongue. I have no doubt he does that continuously in murder cases even though he knows full well there will be an objection since attorneys arent to mention that trying to taint the jury. It just shows how little repect he has for the court and the rules and poor Judge Pastor was getting so aggravated with him yesterday.
But his assertion in this case is ridiculous and done for nothing more than the drama affect to get the jury to feel sorry for his guilty client.
If he wants to talk about life or the loss of life and liberty.......then maybe it would behoove him to really know who's life ended needlessly along with all of his and his family's hopes and dreams.
I chuckle when I see you write 'lifestyle' :floorlaugh: but I bet he does miss that for sure. Now he is more or less stuck with one baby's momma now.
IMO
EPfan
10-22-2011, 03:00 PM
He didn't say livelihood.
He has said that so much in other cases that it just rolled over his tongue. I have no doubt he does that continuously in murder cases even though he knows full well there will be an objection since attorneys arent to mention that trying to taint the jury. It just shows how little repect he has for the court and the rules and poor Judge Pastor was getting so aggravated with him yesterday.
But his assertion in this case is ridiculous and done for nothing more than the drama affect to get the jury to feel sorry for his guilty client.
If he wants to talk about life or the loss of life and liberty.......then maybe it would behoove him to really know who's life ended needlessly along with all of his and his family's hopes and dreams.
I chuckle when I see you write 'lifestyle' :floorlaugh: but I bet he does miss that for sure. Now he is more or less stuck with one baby's momma now.
IMO
I didn't say Livelihood, I said lifestyle, meaning his life not death, but as a person, doctor, parent, life as he knew it. His life meaning everything in general.
I don't think for one minute this jury is ignorant and didn't get it. They know he isn't on trial with a punishment of death. jmoo
The defense has a job and that is to defend their client, just like the prosecution has a job to convict the person accused, they both are getting paid to do the best they can. I don't have personal hate toward an attorney just because he is a defense attorney and trying to do his job. I don't judge the defense or make jokes or statements about how they are asking questions. If they don't attack the evidence at every angle Dr. Murray could go scot free because he didn't get adequate representation.
Dr. Murray deserves a fair trail just like any person accused of any crime. Even though in your eyes he is 100 percent guilty the law required it to be proven. There is very troubling evidence that has been presented but the defense hasn't presented their side and I do get aggravated with people that think this is a slam dunk case because I don't think it is. I do see negligence but I will still keep an open mind and try to understand the evidence.
I also don't like that there is controversy on the propofol being in the bag or not because if it is the key evidence and the drug that killed MJ then why not a picture. That was a big mistake because there is every reason to believe they had the ability to take that picture. JMOO
azwriter
10-22-2011, 03:17 PM
Every time I see a picture of Dr Klein I see a major resemblence between Prince and the doctor. And it reminds me of an article in the Enquirer, in which the children's bio mother, a nurse in Dr Klein's office, stated that they used sperm from Dr Klein when she was given IVF to get pregnant.
katydid, come sit next to me because I too see a mirrored image of Dr. Klein when I see a pic of Prince. An amazing resemblence between the two. I too have heard the story of Klein supposingly being the bio father of the oldest child.
And yet, the other two children don't resemble Prince the oldest child nor each other. I'm not about to say anything more since knocking MJ in this thread can bring on wrath.
Regardless of whoever is the bio dad or mom, these are Michael's children according to the laws in California. But seeing photos of the children does bring about a lot of questions.
just my O
EPfan
10-22-2011, 03:27 PM
While that is true, I doubt doctors who are on medical boards cite those doctors with so many gross deviations from the standard of care as is seen in this case. Dr. Shafer states in his opinion it is 17 deviations. I highly doubt other doctors are so wantonly negligent and reckless as Murray.
But if there are doctors out there that grossly deviate as much as Murray did and are not being held accountable in a criminal trial then IMO that needs to change. No doctor should be held up to be above the law. That is like giving them a license to kill at will no matter how criminal their acts are.
I don't believe that. Right now over 200 doctors in California have been charged criminally for their own wrongdoings. So it is not just because it is Michael Jackson. It is not just about Michael but others who are losing their lives due to the gross recklessness and neglect.
Respectfully, I find that to be an old tired stand by dismissive argument as if because it is Michael Jackson he shouldn't receive justice for what was criminally done to him because he was known internationally. I don't care who the person happened to be and society shouldn't care about the status of the victim's fame either. Are some saying because he is THE Michael Jackson then he should receive no justice??? When did that become a threshold in our justice system?
This doctor should be held accountable for his own wrongdoings that resulted in a human being losing their life, period, no matter if their name is Joe Schmoe or someone famous. We are a country built on the solid foundation of "Justice for ALL" and that includes MJ.
And the deviations from the standard of care weren't 'mistakes.' Each thing Murray did and failed to do that day were done with cognitive thinking and choices he made under his own free will.
So this isn't like accidentally leaving a sponge inside of someone during surgery. These were willfully done and a man lost his life because of Murray and for no other reason.
IMO
I am going to have to respectfully disagree with you because I don't believe that Dr. Murray willfully killed MJ. He wasn't charged with that crime.
From what I am gathering is MJ was given this milk often to be put to sleep, and he lived through this up until this last night. I still have to see the defense present their case before complete convict him. What I think is one thing but the evidence is what the sentence of guilty or not guilty should be based on.
We all have fun here on this site and I'm sure I have said things that maybe I shouldn't have. (so I might have been a hypocrite but I don't mean to.) When it comes down to it I take this judicial process seriously because there are plenty of people convicted that are innocent, and it all boils down to a prosecution theory and a no good defense team.
borndem
10-22-2011, 04:59 PM
While that is true, I doubt doctors who are on medical boards cite those doctors with so many gross deviations from the standard of care as is seen in this case. Dr. Shafer states in his opinion it is 17 deviations. I highly doubt other doctors are so wantonly negligent and reckless as Murray.
But if there are doctors out there that grossly deviate as much as Murray did and are not being held accountable in a criminal trial then IMO that needs to change. No doctor should be held up to be above the law. That is like giving them a license to kill at will no matter how criminal their acts are.
I don't believe that. Right now over 200 doctors in California have been charged criminally for their own wrongdoings. So it is not just because it is Michael Jackson. It is not just about Michael but others who are losing their lives due to the gross recklessness and neglect.
Respectfully, I find that to be an old tired stand by dismissive argument as if because it is Michael Jackson he shouldn't receive justice for what was criminally done to him because he was known internationally. I don't care who the person happened to be and society shouldn't care about the status of the victim's fame either. Are some saying because he is THE Michael Jackson then he should receive no justice??? When did that become a threshold in our justice system?
This doctor should be held accountable for his own wrongdoings that resulted in a human being losing their life, period, no matter if their name is Joe Schmoe or someone famous. We are a country built on the solid foundation of "Justice for ALL" and that includes MJ.
And the deviations from the standard of care weren't 'mistakes.' Each thing Murray did and failed to do that day were done with cognitive thinking and choices he made under his own free will.
So this isn't like accidentally leaving a sponge inside of someone during surgery. These were willfully done and a man lost his life because of Murray and for no other reason.
IMO
:goodpost: : :justice:
katydid23
10-22-2011, 05:06 PM
katydid, come sit next to me because I too see a mirrored image of Dr. Klein when I see a pic of Prince. An amazing resemblence between the two. I too have heard the story of Klein supposingly being the bio father of the oldest child.
And yet, the other two children don't resemble Prince the oldest child nor each other. I'm not about to say anything more since knocking MJ in this thread can bring on wrath.
Regardless of whoever is the bio dad or mom, these are Michael's children according to the laws in California. But seeing photos of the children does bring about a lot of questions.
just my O
I agree that Michael was their true father and always will be. They loved him very much and he did a fine job with them. It is heartbreaking to imagine how they had to see such chaos and agony that day in their own home. :rose:
borndem
10-22-2011, 05:21 PM
He didn't say livelihood.
He has said that so much in other cases that it just rolled over his tongue. I have no doubt he does that continuously in murder cases even though he knows full well there will be an objection since attorneys arent to mention that trying to taint the jury. It just shows how little repect he has for the court and the rules and poor Judge Pastor was getting so aggravated with him yesterday.
But his assertion in this case is ridiculous and done for nothing more than the drama affect to get the jury to feel sorry for his guilty client.
If he wants to talk about life or the loss of life and liberty.......then maybe it would behoove him to really know who's life ended needlessly along with all of his and his family's hopes and dreams.
I chuckle when I see you write 'lifestyle' :floorlaugh: but I bet he does miss that for sure. Now he is more or less stuck with one baby's momma now.
IMO
BBM
Yeah, and about that -- I've been wondering, now that the "shine" is wearing off her no-longer-making-150K/mo-doctor-of-MJ-who-might-be-in-jail-for-a-while roomie, how long she will put up with him. And if she kicks him out, or gets tired of waiting for her jailhouse boyfriend, where will he go from there?
oceanblueeyes
10-22-2011, 06:10 PM
I didn't say Livelihood, I said lifestyle, meaning his life not death, but as a person, doctor, parent, life as he knew it. His life meaning everything in general.
I don't think for one minute this jury is ignorant and didn't get it. They know he isn't on trial with a punishment of death. jmoo
The defense has a job and that is to defend their client, just like the prosecution has a job to convict the person accused, they both are getting paid to do the best they can. I don't have personal hate toward an attorney just because he is a defense attorney and trying to do his job. I don't judge the defense or make jokes or statements about how they are asking questions. If they don't attack the evidence at every angle Dr. Murray could go scot free because he didn't get adequate representation.
Dr. Murray deserves a fair trail just like any person accused of any crime. Even though in your eyes he is 100 percent guilty the law required it to be proven. There is very troubling evidence that has been presented but the defense hasn't presented their side and I do get aggravated with people that think this is a slam dunk case because I don't think it is. I do see negligence but I will still keep an open mind and try to understand the evidence.
I also don't like that there is controversy on the propofol being in the bag or not because if it is the key evidence and the drug that killed MJ then why not a picture. That was a big mistake because there is every reason to believe they had the ability to take that picture. JMOO
I am sorry EP, I was in error (forgive me I am not feeling too well) and it was the 'lifestyle' that you posted that gave me the chuckle. His livelihood would pertain more to him losing his license to practice medicine.
IMO, there are ethical defense attorneys that respect the rulings of the court and there are those that break the rules as a officer of the court. That is why when they pull their shenanigans the objection is sustained as it was when Chernoff did his spiel of 'this man is on trial for his life.":innocent:
Some of the best lawyers I have ever seen were/are defense attorneys. Those who knew their cases and were respectful to both the court and to the witnesses but were extremely skilled cross examiners and walked away with acquittals. Imo, no one likes a bully. Not in a prosecutor nor a defense attorney and the DT in this case comes across as sullen bullies. Will that bode well for the defendant? We will have to wait and see. Since we know the Pinellas 12 exist who really knows these days.
Both the state and the defense deserves a fair trial. Judge Pastor is trying hard to see that happens for both sides.
My opinion of 100% guilty on a MB has nothing to do with a court of law so I am not sure why you are interjecting that. I don't believe you will find one post where I have ever said this case is a slam dunk nor have I ever said it didn't have to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. My entitled opinion has nothing to do with the jury.
The bag with the slit in it at the scene was seen and taken as evidence and photographed. Yes she should have left the bottle inside the bag but unfortunately even death investigators who are human beings make an error in judgment. I really don't see it as that big of an issue though since that particular bottle had only CMs sole fingerprint on it. I think the jury will definitely think she erred in judgment but will not think she lied about it or was in some vast conspiracy with a man she never talked to and never met.
IMO, it will boil down to common sense imo. Why would the saline bag be slit in the first place if it wasnt meant to jerry rig the propofol bottle? When Dr. Shafer put the bottle in the bag I think it became clear how easy it was to setup the bottle this way. The bottle did have a hanger hook on it but it was never pulled up and engaged. The hanger apparatus was unused when taken in as evidence and both the defense and the state stipulated to that fact.
IMO
katydid23
10-22-2011, 06:18 PM
My father was a great defense attorney. And he made it his mission to try and discredit the state's expert witnesses too. But he did not act snarky or contemptuous or rude towards them. He acted more like their friend, just asking them more and more about their expertise, then kindly 'catching them' in their errors or mistakes. " Oh, excuse me, but didn't you say that A was correct, because if I am not mistaken, you are now telling us that B is correct." He was able to allow them to discredit themselves, without being a jerk himself.
oceanblueeyes
10-22-2011, 06:22 PM
katydid, come sit next to me because I too see a mirrored image of Dr. Klein when I see a pic of Prince. An amazing resemblance between the two. I too have heard the story of Klein supposingly being the bio father of the oldest child.
And yet, the other two children don't resemble Prince the oldest child nor each other. I'm not about to say anything more since knocking MJ in this thread can bring on wrath.
Regardless of whoever is the bio dad or mom, these are Michael's children according to the laws in California. But seeing photos of the children does bring about a lot of questions.
just my O
I don't think so but respect anyone who does not agree with me.
First, Dr. Klein has had very several serious health issues. In fact if I am not mistaken he is bound to a wheelchair now. Seems like he was sitting in one on LKLs show.
Imo, MJ would never want those serious medical issues passed on to his children.
Prince has been seen in public a lot more since the passing of his father and he seems to have the same skin disease as his father. Viliago is often inherited. I don't find it a mere coincidence that he also is showing white patches under one of his arms and on his hands and throat area.
But other than that. MJ was a very healthy man.
IMO
katydid23
10-22-2011, 06:29 PM
I don't think so but respect anyone who does not agree with me.
First, Dr. Klein has had very several serious health issues. In fact if I am not mistaken he is bound to a wheelchair now. Seems like he was sitting in one on LKLs show.
Imo, MJ would never want those serious medical issues passed on to his children.
Prince has been seen in public a lot more since the passing of his father and he seems to have the same skin disease as his father. Viliago is often inherited. I don't find it a mere coincidence that he also is showing white patches under one of his arms and on his hands and throat area.
But other than that. MJ was a very healthy man.
IMO
But this was 14 or 15 years ago. I don't think Dr Klein seemed to be unhealthy at that time. And I do not think Prince looks ANYTHING like MJ. Not one bit. And I don't take away anything from his being the true father to all 3 of his children. But he is not the bio dad, imo.
LyndyLoo
10-22-2011, 06:37 PM
Ocean..R U still here??..I just read thru this thread and could see the confusions going on as the testimony and Dr. Shafer's demeanor and Chernoff's questions... I sort of wonder why many are even thinkng about Klein and just what he has to do with MJ's actual death??..Talk about confusions..
Chernoff is upset and trying to shame Shafer for demeaning their expert Dr. White when he said "I was dissappointed"....Ya know..knowing what I know and what has been shown in testimony..I have to think (since the question was asked by Chernoff..NOT just thrown into it by Shafer)..Memories of "YOU cant STAND the Truth" comes to mind...:floorlaugh:
Demo by Shafer appears to be a very accurate rendition of just Murray was doing..thus Murray's physical reactions...IF it was not close to truth..why the heck did Murray lose all colour in his face?? and appear to want to get outa ther??
I would love if someone with the knowhow could setup a vote thread to see just where peeps are viewing this??..
White better come across credibile and clear in whatever he says..Sure hope Chernoff asked proper questions..or else :banghead:
LyndyLoo
10-22-2011, 06:41 PM
Whoopsey..Just noted alot more have come onto thread..only Ocean was here when I started typings...Howdy ya all :seeya:
oceanblueeyes
10-22-2011, 06:44 PM
My father was a great defense attorney. And he made it his mission to try and discredit the state's expert witnesses too. But he did not act snarky or contemptuous or rude towards them. He acted more like their friend, just asking them more and more about their expertise, then kindly 'catching them' in their errors or mistakes. " Oh, excuse me, but didn't you say that A was correct, because if I am not mistaken, you are now telling us that B is correct." He was able to allow them to discredit themselves, without being a jerk himself.
I am sure your father was a great defense lawyer. Some of my friends are defense lawyers who excel in their duties.
I really enjoy those who have honed their craft.
They don't have to be bullies or jerks.... they just have to know how to be great cross examiners. Being a juror 5 times myself, I know I listen intently to a defense attorney that comes across as if they were respectfully deligently doing their duties. I do not like a screaming accuser that gets nothing but repeated objections... sustained...sustained...sustained. It grates on ones nerves after awhile.
That is why I think the south has some of the best defense attorneys. They are affable with that southern charm but they are also sly as a fox. Imo if the attorney connects with the jury then will keep their minds open and will be more trusting of what the defense attorneys have to say.
I think it is just a human nature thing. Honey vs. vinegar etc.:crazy:
IMO.
LyndyLoo
10-22-2011, 06:49 PM
I am sure your father was a great defense lawyer. Some of my friends are defense lawyers who excel in their duties.
I really enjoy those who have honed their craft.
They don't have to be bullies or jerks.... they just have to know how to be great cross examiners. Being a juror 5 times myself, I know I listen intently to a defense attorney that comes across as if they were respectfully deligently doing their duties. I do not like a screaming accuser that gets nothing but repeated objections... sustained...sustained...sustained. It grates on ones nerves after awhile.
That is why I think the south has some of the best defense attorneys. They are affable with that southern charm but they are also sly as a fox. Imo if the attorney connects with the jury then will keep their minds open and will be more trusting of what the defense attorneys have to say.
I think it is just a human nature thing. Honey vs. vinegar etc.:crazy:
IMO.
BBM
I have always loved this phrase and its true...Some think Shafer appears uncomfortable...What I see is a witness trying to listen to questions or scenerio closely and trying very very hard to follow the logic..and gets lost in the garbage within all the words...Who wouldnt look confused or taken aback?? I know i would :waitasec:
katydid23
10-22-2011, 06:51 PM
I am hoping the attorneys are working with Shafer this weekend so he can be more confident in this last part of the cross examination. He needs to be able to stand up for himself without seeming too defensive or Chernoff will succeed in making it look like he is hiding something, imo.
oceanblueeyes
10-22-2011, 06:53 PM
Ocean..R U still here??..I just read thru this thread and could see the confusions going on as the testimony and Dr. Shafer's demeanor and Chernoff's questions... I sort of wonder why many are even thinkng about Klein and just what he has to do with MJ's actual death??..Talk about confusions..
Chernoff is upset and trying to shame Shafer for demeaning their expert Dr. White when he said "I was dissappointed"....Ya know..knowing what I know and what has been shown in testimony..I have to think (since the question was asked by Chernoff..NOT just thrown into it by Shafer)..Memories of "YOU cant STAND the Truth" comes to mind...:floorlaugh:
Demo by Shafer appears to be a very accurate rendition of just Murray was doing..thus Murray's physical reactions...IF it was not close to truth..why the heck did Murray lose all colour in his face?? and appear to want to get outa ther??
I would love if someone with the knowhow could setup a vote thread to see just where peeps are viewing this??..
White better come across credibile and clear in whatever he says..Sure hope Chernoff asked proper questions..or else :banghead:
Hey Lyndy!
Well I guess Dr. Shafer could have said what he probably was really thinking.:floorlaugh:
'ITS OUTRAGEOUS I TELL YA! JUST OUTRAGEOUS! HE KNOWS BETTER THAN THAT FOOLISHNESS!':floorlaugh::floorlaugh:
I know and it didnt take him but a second or two to put that bottle in the saline bag to show just how it would work. Outstanding! Such a great visual!
IMO
oceanblueeyes
10-22-2011, 06:59 PM
I am hoping the attorneys are working with Shafer this weekend so he can be more confident in this last part of the cross examination. He needs to be able to stand up for himself without seeming too defensive or Chernoff will succeed in making it look like he is hiding something, imo.
Poor Dr. Shafer it is obvious that he is not a rent-a-hired-gun and has no clue attorneys can be so snarky and downright condescending.
Once ......IF:banghead: the cross examination ever ends I think Walgren will rehabilitate him rather quickly. I have noticed how well he is with his re-directs. He is really masterful imo.
But I hope he does talk with DS this weekend and tells him not to let Cher get under his skin.
IMO
LyndyLoo
10-22-2011, 07:04 PM
I am hoping the attorneys are working with Shafer this weekend so he can be more confident in this last part of the cross examination. He needs to be able to stand up for himself without seeming too defensive or Chernoff will succeed in making it look like he is hiding something, imo.
Ohh katy..I dont believe Shafer is trying to hide anything..only trying to answer stupid questions..so the questioner understands..I happen to believe Shafer is so above intellectually ..Its difficult to deal with Attny who goes on and on about something he (Chernof) know nothing about what he is talking about...This all must be very trying for S. Shafer :innocent::twocents:
BTW..IF Shafer had any skeletons in his closet or something to hide..dont ya think Chernoff would have thrown it out there initially??..There's nuttin..IMO
katydid23
10-22-2011, 07:09 PM
Ohh katy..I dont believe Shafer is trying to hide anything..only trying to answer stupid questions..so the questioner understands..I happen to believe Shafer is so above intellectually ..Its difficult to deal with Attny who goes on and on about something he (Chernof) know nothing about what he is talking about...This all must be very trying for S. Shafer :innocent::twocents:
BTW..IF Shafer had any skeletons in his closet or something to hide..dont ya think Chernoff would have thrown it out there initially??..There's nuttin..IMO
I personally don't think he is trying to hide anything either. But his demeanor is making him look pretty nervous because he is not used to being called out so rudely like this. And i hope the jury does not buy what Chernoff is selling.
Like that one line, when Chernoff is busting Shafers chops for doing that chilean 2 month Propofol study. Chernoff ends it by saying something like " wouldn't ANY first year medical student know that was prepostorous?"
And Dr Schafer answers '"YES." That got the defense some points, imo.
oceanblueeyes
10-22-2011, 07:26 PM
I personally don't think he is trying to hide anything either. But his demeanor is making him look pretty nervous because he is not used to being called out so rudely like this. And i hope the jury does not buy what Chernoff is selling.
Like that one line, when Chernoff is busting Shafers chops for doing that chilean 2 month Propofol study. Chernoff ends it by saying something like " wouldn't ANY first year medical student know that was preposterous?"
And Dr Schafer answers '"YES." That got the defense some points, imo.
But wouldn't that also reflect on White who thought drinking the propofol was a possibility?
imo
Talina
10-22-2011, 08:43 PM
I think what is being lost here is the main reason Dr. Shafer said this study was done (the oral ingestion of propofol). It was said so quick on direct and then just moved on, that I hope Walgren clears it up on cross.
He said that the FDA was making noises about making propofol a controlled substance and that the medical profession did not want that to happen. It would make it a lot more difficult for doctors to easily get it when they need it to be available quickly. There's more hoops to jump through and procedures to follow it is a controlled substance. The study proved that oral consumption is not dangerous (i.e. instant death as the defense was saying for awhile and the media was running with that as a viable defense theory - it was getting the FDA all up in arms saying why isn't this a controlled substance) which would be the main method of a lay person using it on their own.
So, yes any first year medical student would have known about the liver taking 95% of the drug out first run (or whatever it is called) and so this study would normally be a waste of time and money; however, given the publicity of this trial, no previous studies done on humans, but only done on other mammals, we should probably go through this exercise and prove it is not dangerous to humans to get the FDA off their path of making it a controlled substance. A lot easier to argue with the FDA with that actual study in hand than it is to say "well what are the odds given the other studies of oral consumption done on animals?".
Therein lies the basis for him being disappointed in Dr. White even putting that possibility in his report. He should have known that is not a viable possibility given his expertise in the field and him being primarily a researcher. He knew full well of the other animal oral consumption studies. So now, with the esteemed Dr. White having that in his report to the defense, the media making hayday out of it, the FDA steps up and says oh wait...we should make that a controlled substance. Yes, Dr. Shafer had every reason to be disappointed in someone as well known in the field as Dr. White is to be making that sort of representation in his report. It had other far reaching consequences to their field of medicine than just this trial.
IMO
katydid23
10-22-2011, 09:10 PM
But wouldn't that also reflect on White who thought drinking the propofol was a possibility?
imo
I would think so. I think it depends upon how White comes across next week. They have that new study they are going to bring out that shows that Pr0pofol was used SUCCESSFULLY for insomnia. That is going to hurt, imo.
And he may have some kind of data that backs up his statement. We do not know yet. But White is a pretty major authority. So he must have some reason to think he can pull this off, imo.
borndem
10-22-2011, 09:18 PM
Whoopsey..Just noted alot more have come onto thread..only Ocean was here when I started typings...Howdy ya all :seeya:
:wave: Hi back to ya, Lindy Loo! Yes, we come & go, but we're a good bunch -- not a big, big crowd of folks -- which is nice, I think -- but a faithful and attentive bunch we are indeed.
It's good to see you're on here with us!
We'll all just hang on and see where this goes. We've got an extra-good judge, IMO, and he seems very fair & he is not letting either the DT or the PT get away with any sobbing or shouting or over-acting or reacting. No dramatics allowed. Save it for the soaps.
And to oceanblueeyes, if you're out there, I hope you and your ribs are feeling better today, but it's a long, painful haul. Thinking good thoughts that you can get a good night's sleep. Just remember not to move very often & you'll feel better soon!!!http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon12.gif
borndem
10-22-2011, 09:30 PM
I personally don't think he is trying to hide anything either. But his demeanor is making him look pretty nervous because he is not used to being called out so rudely like this. And i hope the jury does not buy what Chernoff is selling.
Like that one line, when Chernoff is busting Shafers chops for doing that chilean 2 month Propofol study. Chernoff ends it by saying something like " wouldn't ANY first year medical student know that was prepostorous?"
And Dr Schafer answers '"YES." That got the defense some points, imo.
I dunno... My impression of that exchange was a bit different -- in my mind, Cher's question could also have applied to his own witness, White, when he postulated that drinking propofol could be effective and therefore, deadly. Any first year med student would know that, too. I thought it was a bad idea for him to bring it up again. But that's just me and MO. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon5.gif:waitasec:
borndem
10-22-2011, 09:44 PM
I think what is being lost here is the main reason Dr. Shafer said this study was done (the oral ingestion of propofol). It was said so quick on direct and then just moved on, that I hope Walgren clears it up on cross.
He said that the FDA was making noises about making propofol a controlled substance and that the medical profession did not want that to happen. It would make it a lot more difficult for doctors to easily get it when they need it to be available quickly. There's more hoops to jump through and procedures to follow it is a controlled substance. The study proved that oral consumption is not dangerous (i.e. instant death as the defense was saying for awhile and the media was running with that as a viable defense theory - it was getting the FDA all up in arms saying why isn't this a controlled substance) which would be the main method of a lay person using it on their own.
So, yes any first year medical student would have known about the liver taking 95% of the drug out first run (or whatever it is called) and so this study would normally be a waste of time and money; however, given the publicity of this trial, no previous studies done on humans, but only done on other mammals, we should probably go through this exercise and prove it is not dangerous to humans to get the FDA off their path of making it a controlled substance. A lot easier to argue with the FDA with that actual study in hand than it is to say "well what are the odds given the other studies of oral consumption done on animals?".
Therein lies the basis for him being disappointed in Dr. White even putting that possibility in his report. He should have known that is not a viable possibility given his expertise in the field and him being primarily a researcher. He knew full well of the other animal oral consumption studies. So now, with the esteemed Dr. White having that in his report to the defense, the media making hayday out of it, the FDA steps up and says oh wait...we should make that a controlled substance. Yes, Dr. Shafer had every reason to be disappointed in someone as well known in the field as Dr. White is to be making that sort of representation in his report. It had other far reaching consequences to their field of medicine than just this trial.
IMO
Good post, Talina! I was gonna post on that same thing, but you so eloquently beat me to it! Thanks for bringing us back to the point of it.
Dr. Shafer in that study was defending propofol in one more way with human ingestion, which he knew would not be harmful in any way. He early on stated what a good & reliable anesthetic it is...
And this same drug getting such a bad rap because of MJ's death was one of the main reasons he is in that courtroom to begin with.
oceanblueeyes
10-22-2011, 10:00 PM
Now if you want to read something that is very very impressive just read Dr. Shafer's CV.:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:
It's 36 pages long.
http://anesthksu.com/speakers_CV/shafer_cv.pdf
oceanblueeyes
10-22-2011, 10:05 PM
Is Paul White really the 'father' of propofol or the leading expert?
Even Flanagan doesnt think so.
“We are not going to assert at any point in this trial that Michael Jackson at any time orally ingested propofol,” said Flanagan, who revealed he had commissioned a study that concluded propofol would not be absorbed into the body when ingested.
But he did not say when the study had been done.
Prosecutors and the judge appeared stunned at the announcement
At Friday’s hearing, on a day when testimony was not heard, Deputy District Attorney David Walgren told the judge, “We are dealing with an ever-changing defense. It was just a couple of days ago they abandoned oral propofol.”
“Oh, your honor, that is not correct,” Flanagan said.
“No?’ Walgren asked incredulously.
“We abandoned oral propofol months ago,” said Flanagan, saying they were swayed by a report from the leading expert on the drug, who is expected to testify for the prosecution next week.
He said Dr. Steven Shafer had questioned “the bioavailability of oral propofol,” meaning whether it would be absorbed into the body if swallowed.
Flanagan said the defense decided to have its own study conducted and, “We determined back in May that bioavailability of oral propofol was not feasible.”
http://www.thereviewhunter.com/lawyer-for-jackson-doctor-says-key-tactic-dropped/
LyndyLoo
10-22-2011, 10:07 PM
Ya know..I would think the juror would wonder..since its a NO BRAINER..why the prosecution would even address this factoid in their CIC..and even tho Defense has backtracked on that claim...I have to LOL that testimony showed clearly just why..Hummm ..Dr. White suggested it as a possibility..LOL even though he SHOULD HAVE KNOWN it was Impossible..as Dr. Shafer said..What a silly dilly thing to even say or suggest..
Course so far everything Defense is trying to suggest is fantasyland and built on lies by Conrat...Wooo Is the person who believes LIES..as they are DOOMED to be exposed!!...
BTW..Dont Def. Atny's always say..DONT LIE TO ME.. DONT have to tell me if you did it or not..BUT JUST DONT LIE to me??...:rocker: IT must be very difficult to give a good defense to someone who just isnt telling the TROOT to anybody including himself :floorlaugh:
Talina
10-22-2011, 10:11 PM
I'm going to see if I can find the testimony from the witness that owned he pharmaceutical company that was selling CM all these drugs and supplies. A big deal seemed to be made by Chernoff yesterday about that invoice Dr. Shafer was quoting saying "1" vented tube. I recall a lot of the quantities on those invoices being "1" but it was "1" box not "1" single item.
LyndyLoo
10-22-2011, 10:22 PM
I'm going to see if I can find the testimony from the witness that owned he pharmaceutical company that was selling CM all these drugs and supplies. A big deal seemed to be made by Chernoff yesterday about that invoice Dr. Shafer was quoting saying "1" vented tube. I recall a lot of the quantities on those invoices being "1" but it was "1" box not "1" single item.
:waitasec::floorlaugh:..I can only say from experience..You just cant order on "Set" of anything..always has to be a unit value..such as box..carton..or tray of sumptin...So I have to suggest CM ordering Vented Spiked IV tubing ordered BY CM for his clinic..was a bogus item..NO WAY no How..does this guy perform anything invasive in his clinics..HIS staff consist of NON-medical personale..Not a one RN or Resgistered anything to start IV's or monitor drugs, treatments...
FYI//Vented spike IV sets are only used exclusively for specifics infusions..and its alwasy to do with any Bottle drug format (Propofol/Nitroglycerine) and MUST have Appropriate staff to doo such things..CM was such a clueless..That order to his clinic screams volumes to Shafer..as HE KNOWS that little thing..and White does too..But wont admit it.. Defense appears to be floundering right now..and have no idea just how they will ever undo what Shafer did (and other witnesses)..CM is cooked like a goose at Christmas..:floorlaugh::woohoo:
Talina
10-22-2011, 10:36 PM
:waitasec::floorlaugh:..I can only say from experience..You just cant order on "Set" of anything..always has to be a unit value..such as box..carton..or tray of sumptin...So I have to suggest CM ordering Vented Spiked IV tubing ordered BY CM for his clinic..was a bogus item..NO WAY no How..does this guy perform anything invasive in his clinics..HIS staff consist of NON-medical personale..Not a one RN or Resgistered anything to start IV's or monitor drugs, treatments...
FYI//Vented spike IV sets are only used exclusively for specifics infusions..and its alwasy to do with any Bottle drug format (Propofol/Nitroglycerine) and MUST have Appropriate staff to doo such things..CM was such a clueless..That order to his clinic screams volumes to Shafer..as HE KNOWS that little thing..and White does too..But wont admit it.. Defense appears to be floundering right now..and have no idea just how they will ever undo what Shafer did (and other witnesses)..CM is cooked like a goose at Christmas..:floorlaugh::woohoo:
You know, people (including me) keep saying what on earth was he thinking to not be monitoring while giving this type of sedation to MJ. I'd completely forgotten his lack of trained and certified medical personnel even in his own clinics. I'm now thinking his lack of detail and diligence with MJ was nothing new for him. That is the way he ran his clinics as well. He's darn lucky nothing awful has already happened his patients while being treated by him. He's been playing Russian Roulette for quite some time it seems to me.
IMO
LyndyLoo
10-22-2011, 10:43 PM
You know, people (including me) keep saying what on earth was he thinking to not be monitoring while giving this type of sedation to MJ. I'd completely forgotten his lack of trained and certified medical personnel even in his own clinics. I'm now thinking his lack of detail and diligence with MJ was nothing new for him. That is he way he ran his clinics as well. He's darn lucky nothing awful has already happened to him. He's been playing Russian Roulette for quite some time it seems to me.
IMO
He's got horseshoes up "U" "NO" Where..as it appears there was Nothing in his clinics to prepare for emergencies..and relied on OTHERS to call 911 ..and YEP I would bet he would have blamed anyone or everyone IF something happened..
He is so unprofessional and unethical I do think he doesnt even know what the definition of "Protocol" is or what it means!..Whomever passed him to give him a license should be held to answer for their passing of such an incompetent!!
Surely he didnt forget everything he learned?? Ohh wait..Maybe he didnt care & understood all the BENEIFITS of his license!!..
Im sorry this case makes me infuriated by such unethical behaviors!!:furious::furious::maddening:
Talina
10-22-2011, 10:46 PM
He's horseshoes U N Where..as it appears therewa Nothing in his clinics to prepare for emergencies..and relied on OTHERS tocall 911 ..and YEP I would bet he would have blamed anyone or everyone IF something happened..
He is so unprofessional and unethica I do think he doesnt even know what the definition of "Protocol" is or means!..Whomever passed him to give him a license should be held to answer for their passing of such an incompetent!!
Surely he didnt forget everything he learned?? Ohh wait..Maybe he didnt care understood all the BENEIFITS of his license!!..
Im sorry this case makes me infuriated by such unethical behaviors!!:furious::furious::maddening:
I'd love for the jury to hear testimony somehow of how his malpractice insurance carrier denied his claim for help with legal expenses for this trial since his coverage doesn't cover anesthesiology as that is not what he is licensed to do. At least that is what I understood their position to be from articles I read some time ago.
IMO
LyndyLoo
10-22-2011, 11:01 PM
I love for the jury to hear testimony somehow of how his malpractice insurance carrier denied his claim for help with legal expenses for this trial since his coverage doesn't cover anesthesiology as that is not what he is licensed to do. At least that is what I understood their position to be from articles I read some time ago.
IMO
BBM
Doesnt that say it all..This quack practiced things he had no privelge to do and ignored the possibilities..All he did was bloviate his knowledge and capabilities..and unfortunately 1 too many bought it!!..All those patients who worship this guy only feel that way because NOTHING happened to them and felt cared about because he held their hand, or patted them on shoulder..or spewed some sort of crap to them..Fortunately for them nothing happened..but UNFORTUNATELY CM killed MJ with his unethical attitudes about his profession...DT is truly getting an eye opener..BUT to save face..They wont admit it!!:blushing::great:
Sedonia Sunset
10-23-2011, 01:21 AM
But this was 14 or 15 years ago. I don't think Dr Klein seemed to be unhealthy at that time. And I do not think Prince looks ANYTHING like MJ. Not one bit. And I don't take away anything from his being the true father to all 3 of his children. But he is not the bio dad, imo.
I don't think MJ was the bio-dad of Prince or Paris, but the more I see Blanket, the more I think HE might be MJ's biological child.
CarolinaMoon
10-23-2011, 06:51 AM
Thanks button to all of your comments! I missed all the main testimony and you all sure filled me in. I'm looking forward to Mondy with a much better-informed view of what happened.
I am voting for Walgren on re-direct to put lie to all the nonsense by Chernoff. That's why he and his side are taking copious notes throughout the cross. Too bad Dr. Murray, among many other things, did not do the same.
One thing I hope runs through the jurors minds is the fact that CM did not have a single trained, certified person working in his clinic. If I had been a patient and learned that my post-surgical therapy was conducted by a volunteer worker, I would have sued the pants off him. This fact makes me wonder if the prosecution will make a big deal of it, considering his LV clinic was his cash cow.
oceanblueeyes
10-23-2011, 10:31 AM
Good morning everyone!:seeya:
I believe Chernoff's sole purpose in his crosses are to confuse the jury. At times he even appears to be confused by the questions he asked. They aren't nearly as clear and concise as Walgren does his direct/redirects.
He made a big issue that the tubing wasnt the same since the tubing was never found at the scene and I am thinking "hello, what are you thinking?" :waitasec: because that just draws more attention to the fact that it is missing. DS order the same line from the same company CM did and even matched the code of the item.
Then he makes a big deal out of DS using a 20cc syringe instead of a 10cc and to me that was insulting to the jury's intelligence. It is easy to understand that no matter how big the syringe used DS only pulled in 25 mg of propofol. He probably used a larger syringe thinking the jury could see it better. If I put a teaspoon of water in a cup or a large bowl I still only have one teaspoon of water.:floorlaugh:
The first part of the cross was bullying DS because he put Dr. White in a bad light. But it wasnt DS who said the theory of drinking propofol was a possibility. It was White. So EC tried to slam a renowned researcher/anesthesiologist for having his own opinions who happened to not agree with ECs expert.
Imo, tomorrow we will see more questions asked hoping to leave the jurors confused.
If and when this cross ever ends we will then see Walgren get back up and put the facts in evidence back in and on track again. Until then we are going to see EC on the attack not only trying to confuse the jury but DS as well.
DS is use to being asked very clear questions about things he knows or about things he is to find out and solve. Not some mixed up mumbo jumbo.
IMO
oceanblueeyes
10-23-2011, 11:28 AM
I would think so. I think it depends upon how White comes across next week. They have that new study they are going to bring out that shows that Pr0pofol was used SUCCESSFULLY for insomnia. That is going to hurt, imo.
And he may have some kind of data that backs up his statement. We do not know yet. But White is a pretty major authority. So he must have some reason to think he can pull this off, imo.
What I didn't understand is EC saying a first year med student would know that because that means then someone of White's experience and knowledge would have certainly known it.
DS knew it wasnt going to harm the volunteers and himself when he did it but White should have known it too and ruled out that possibility from the get go if he is the expert the DT says he is.
Again, I don't see that helping the defense but hurting them. First it is not been accepted in the medical community. It is just one study. As we know for something to be approved many many studies must be preformed and peer reviewed by many experts before it can happen.
But also what was done in that study is counter opposing to what CM did. All the patients were in a hospital or clinical setting where appropriate measures were in place and they were constantly monitoring their vitals.
All of that is something CM didn't do.:waitasec:
borndem
10-23-2011, 11:34 AM
Now if you want to read something that is very very impressive just read Dr. Shafer's CV.:woohoo::woohoo::woohoo:
It's 36 pages long.
http://anesthksu.com/speakers_CV/shafer_cv.pdf
One note about CV's from medical researchers, physicians and university profs, etc. -- A Curriculum Vitae -- literally "course of (one's) life" -- sometimes it is thought to be the same as a resume, but really it isn't.
A CV is literally what it says it is: education, publications (the holy grail of especially big-time universities and medical institutions -- and, among the names listed on a publication, the first name and the last name are the most important names of the pub: that's just how it is. We've all heard, "publish or perish" .... there's a lot of pressure at any institution to publish, publish, publish) -- residencies, fellowships, appointments, positions (head-this, chief-that), awards, honors, etc. So don't be put off by the length of it -- Shafer's CV is as it should be - complete and all-inclusive.
My DH is a research and data manager at Duke Univ. Med. Center , and that's how one would write a CV. Shafer's is way up there...
Just a bit of info for those unfamiliar, if there are any...http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif
borndem
10-23-2011, 12:14 PM
And Good Morning to you, ocean! :wave:
Good post, thanks!
I also wanna say that I hope you and your ribs are feeling better and that you will :getwell: !
Yeppers, it's the old Baffle them with Bull**** routine which is weak, weak, weak, IMO, but it sometimes works. I'm sure some of the jurors were thinking, "What???"
And poor Shafer -- he and his colleague White do have lives after this trial -- I'm sure Shafer does not want to hurt White any more than he may have to. But he knew the situation and he decided to testify, I think, due to principles of good, sound medicine.
But Walgren will straighten it out on this re-direct and the others AND he will straighten it all out at closing. The PT will have the last word. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif
borndem
10-23-2011, 12:32 PM
And one more thang about CV's: I have read Shafer's, of course, and it was amazing but not surprising. This guy is a Physician among physicians -- very impressive.
I would love to see CM's CV. Where is it?? Any MD worth his salt has one....:dunno:
borndem
10-23-2011, 01:57 PM
:waitasec::floorlaugh:..I can only say from experience..You just cant order on "Set" of anything..always has to be a unit value..such as box..carton..or tray of sumptin...So I have to suggest CM ordering Vented Spiked IV tubing ordered BY CM for his clinic..was a bogus item..NO WAY no How..does this guy perform anything invasive in his clinics..HIS staff consist of NON-medical personale..Not a one RN or Resgistered anything to start IV's or monitor drugs, treatments...
FYI//Vented spike IV sets are only used exclusively for specifics infusions..and its alwasy to do with any Bottle drug format (Propofol/Nitroglycerine) and MUST have Appropriate staff to doo such things..CM was such a clueless..That order to his clinic screams volumes to Shafer..as HE KNOWS that little thing..and White does too..But wont admit it.. Defense appears to be floundering right now..and have no idea just how they will ever undo what Shafer did (and other witnesses)..CM is cooked like a goose at Christmas..:floorlaugh::woohoo:
BBM
We know that CM played it fast & loose with MJ at his home -- alone. And altho they apparently (as far as we know, at least) were not certified or registered or professionally trained assistants/volunteers at his LV office, what was to keep him from training them himself to assist him in his office? He was a practicing cardiologist with patients -- cardiologists do procedures other than ECG's -- what would stop him? Just sayin' ....:waitasec:
Bluesky#1
10-23-2011, 03:14 PM
And one more thang about CV's: I have read Shafer's, of course, and it was amazing but not surprising. This guy is a Physician among physicians -- very impressive.
I would love to see CM's CV. Where is it?? Any MD worth his salt has one....:dunno:
It's not clear if Murray will take the stand in his defense, but the evidence so far does not bode well for the Caribbean national.
He never met his father Rawle Andrews, a doctor in Houston Texas, until he came to the U.S. in 1978. He enrolled at Texas Southern University in 1980, where he graduated magna cum laude in three years. His father was beloved in his community for providing medical aid to the poor. Murray followed his footsteps, attending his father's alma mater, Meharry Medical College, in Nashville, Tennessee.
Murray continued his training at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and finished his residency at Loma Linda University Medical Center in California. After specializing in cardiology at University of Arizona, he returned to California and became Associate Director for the international cardiology training program at Sharp Memorial Hospital. In 2000 Murray began his private practice, Global Cardiovascular Associates, in Las Vegas. In honor of his father's charitable example, Murray later opened a clinic in Houston, the Acres Homes Heart and Vascular Institute, to provide care to a poor and predominately African-American community.Perhaps Jackson, a renowned philanthropist himself, was drawn to Murray's philanthropic nature; or could it be that he needed a doctor who would treat him without question.The jury is still out on that one. Whatever the reason, Jackson chose Dr. Murray, who despite his professional success, was drowning in debt.
Murray had numerous tax liens, mortgage debt, lawsuits, and unpaid child support payments for children from extramarital relationships. He owed more than $400,000 in court decisions alone against his Las Vegas practice.
At $150,000 a month, overseeing Jackson's health would give Murray the financial lifeboat he needed. In June 2009, after working with Jackson for a month, Murray closed his Las Vegas practice.
"Because of a once in a lifetime opportunity, I had to make a most difficult decision to cease [the] practice of medicine indefinitely," he wrote his patients, unaware that just 10 days later he would be standing at the bedside of a dead Michael Jackson and subsequently dealing with the repercussions.
What seemed to have been Murray's big break ended in a most catastrophic situation, with Jackson dead and Murray now fighting to clear his name.
Reports say Jackson did not sign the contract with Murray before he died, leaving Murray unpaid for his work.Murray's defense says it was his philanthropic nature why he was subservient to Jackson's addiction. "His one big fault is that he could never turn down someone who needed his services," said his lawyer Ed Chernoff.
http://www.cnweeklynews.com/news/us-news/2970-dr-who
Bluesky#1
10-23-2011, 03:16 PM
Cross-examination of Dr. Shafer by Defense Counsel on Friday, October 21, 2011Conrad Murray-Trial - Day 15-Session 2 - YouTube
Bluesky#1
10-23-2011, 05:50 PM
“”Whereas sedative hypnotics gradually repress central nervous system and brain to make a person fall asleep, Propofol is a much more powerful and fast-acting anesthetic attaching to brain receptors more rapidly and slowing down signals to the heart and lungs at a much more extreme rate.””
( 1:06:00 mm)
Chernoff: I am not asking about your simulations. I am asking what did the Coroner say was Michael Jackson’s brain propofol level?
Dr. Shafer: I do not find a measurement of the Propofol level in the brain in the Coroner’s Report. (After this testimony by Dr. Shafer, Court was adjourned 'til Monday morning at 8:45 am PDT.)
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/02/09/mj_autopsy.pdf
A) Propofol, lorazepam, midazolam, lidocaine, diazepam and nordiazepam identified in blood samples (see toxicology report for details).
B) Propofol, midazolam, lidocaine and ephedrine identified in urine.
C) Propofol and lidocaine identified in liver tissue.
D) Propofol identified in vitreous humor.
E) Lidocaine and propofol identified in stomach contents.
Mild diffuse brain swelling without herniation swelling.
I couldn’t paste the Summary of Positive Toxicological Findings chart that’s included in the autopsy report but it neither gives MJ’s propofol level in the brain.
oceanblueeyes
10-23-2011, 07:47 PM
And Good Morning to you, ocean! :wave:
Good post, thanks!
I also wanna say that I hope you and your ribs are feeling better and that you will :getwell: !
Yeppers, it's the old Baffle them with Bull**** routine which is weak, weak, weak, IMO, but it sometimes works. I'm sure some of the jurors were thinking, "What???"
And poor Shafer -- he and his colleague White do have lives after this trial -- I'm sure Shafer does not want to hurt White any more than he may have to. But he knew the situation and he decided to testify, I think, due to principles of good, sound medicine.
But Walgren will straighten it out on this re-direct and the others AND he will straighten it all out at closing. The PT will have the last word. http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif
Thankfully for the first time since Tuesday I was able to get some sleep last night and only woke up a couple of times when I got in the wrong position that compromised my rib area. So I AM improving. Thank you for your concern Borndem.
I no more believe there is a rift between Dr. Shafer and Dr. White. Both of them are too professional for that and it seems even the DT asked for DSs assistance which he gladly gave. White was to have called Walgren..the s...bag which is unprofessional because he should know that everyone has a job to do.
I do agree whatever is said during cross will be cleared up when the state stands back up again and uses the facts in evidence to do so.
IMO
oceanblueeyes
10-23-2011, 07:54 PM
“”Whereas sedative hypnotics gradually repress central nervous system and brain to make a person fall asleep, Propofol is a much more powerful and fast-acting anesthetic attaching to brain receptors more rapidly and slowing down signals to the heart and lungs at a much more extreme rate.””
( 1:06:00 mm)
Chernoff: I am not asking about your simulations. I am asking what did the Coroner say was Michael Jackson’s brain propofol level?
Dr. Shafer: I do not find a measurement of the Propofol level in the brain in the Coroner’s Report. (After this testimony by Dr. Shafer, Court was adjourned 'til Monday morning at 8:45 am PDT.)
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2010/images/02/09/mj_autopsy.pdf
A) Propofol, lorazepam, midazolam, lidocaine, diazepam and nordiazepam identified in blood samples (see toxicology report for details).
B) Propofol, midazolam, lidocaine and ephedrine identified in urine.
C) Propofol and lidocaine identified in liver tissue.
D) Propofol identified in vitreous humor.
E) Lidocaine and propofol identified in stomach contents.
Mild diffuse brain swelling without herniation swelling.
I couldn’t paste the Summary of Positive Toxicological Findings chart that’s included in the autopsy report but it neither gives MJ’s propofol level in the brain.
Thanks for the link Blue.
I will be very interested in what DS says about the brain not being checked for propofol although at that time I am sure they had no clue propofol would be the main COD. instead they were most likely looking for other medications he may have had in his system.
DS did say he did not need to know the amount to ascertain what it would have been. He said he can obtain that by the amount found else where at time of autopsy. If EC doesn't let him address this again I am sure Walgren will when he gets back up on direct.
IMO
TxLady2
10-23-2011, 08:02 PM
I'd love for the jury to hear testimony somehow of how his malpractice insurance carrier denied his claim for help with legal expenses for this trial since his coverage doesn't cover anesthesiology as that is not what he is licensed to do. At least that is what I understood their position to be from articles I read some time ago.
IMO
Good post, well said. I'd love to see that too. He never should have been giving Michael anesthesia in the first place, and certainly not in a home setting. I hope this jury has heard enough from the 3 doctors who have testified that what Murray did was wrong on so many levels. They all 3 have stressed the point that you do not EVER leave a patient while they are getting anesthesia, you watch them every second. SO MANY things can go wrong.
oceanblueeyes
10-23-2011, 08:08 PM
It's not clear if Murray will take the stand in his defense, but the evidence so far does not bode well for the Caribbean national.
He never met his father Rawle Andrews, a doctor in Houston Texas, until he came to the U.S. in 1978. He enrolled at Texas Southern University in 1980, where he graduated magna cum laude in three years. His father was beloved in his community for providing medical aid to the poor. Murray followed his footsteps, attending his father's alma mater, Meharry Medical College, in Nashville, Tennessee.
Murray continued his training at the Mayo Clinic in Minnesota and finished his residency at Loma Linda University Medical Center in California. After specializing in cardiology at University of Arizona, he returned to California and became Associate Director for the international cardiology training program at Sharp Memorial Hospital. In 2000 Murray began his private practice, Global Cardiovascular Associates, in Las Vegas. In honor of his father's charitable example, Murray later opened a clinic in Houston, the Acres Homes Heart and Vascular Institute, to provide care to a poor and predominately African-American community.Perhaps Jackson, a renowned philanthropist himself, was drawn to Murray's philanthropic nature; or could it be that he needed a doctor who would treat him without question.The jury is still out on that one. Whatever the reason, Jackson chose Dr. Murray, who despite his professional success, was drowning in debt.
Murray had numerous tax liens, mortgage debt, lawsuits, and unpaid child support payments for children from extramarital relationships. He owed more than $400,000 in court decisions alone against his Las Vegas practice.
At $150,000 a month, overseeing Jackson's health would give Murray the financial lifeboat he needed. In June 2009, after working with Jackson for a month, Murray closed his Las Vegas practice.
"Because of a once in a lifetime opportunity, I had to make a most difficult decision to cease [the] practice of medicine indefinitely," he wrote his patients, unaware that just 10 days later he would be standing at the bedside of a dead Michael Jackson and subsequently dealing with the repercussions.
What seemed to have been Murray's big break ended in a most catastrophic situation, with Jackson dead and Murray now fighting to clear his name.
Reports say Jackson did not sign the contract with Murray before he died, leaving Murray unpaid for his work.Murray's defense says it was his philanthropic nature why he was subservient to Jackson's addiction. "His one big fault is that he could never turn down someone who needed his services," said his lawyer Ed Chernoff.
http://www.cnweeklynews.com/news/us-news/2970-dr-who
BBM
I find that quote alarming because what it is really saying CM will do anything even if it is unethical, grossly reckless or grossly negligent or very risky if a patient just asks.
That reminds me of Dr. Adams' attorney's statement where he said CM had been trying to get doctors in LV to administer propofol to MJ since 2007. That is a Dr. Feel Good kind of doctor that accommodates a patient instead of keeping their best interest in mind at all times.
The patient is not the one that is expected to adhere to the standard of care. Patients just cant ask doctors for something/anything and expect the doctors to cave.
Imo, that means CM should have never been a doctor in the first place if he is so weak he does what the patient wants done. That is more like a drug pusher to me who gives the person what they want regardless if it does them grave harm.
But nevertheless it was Murray's direct actions or inactions that day that caused MJs untimely death.
IMO
TxLady2
10-23-2011, 08:10 PM
Thankfully for the first time since Tuesday I was able to get some sleep last night and only woke up a couple of times when I got in the wrong position that compromised my rib area. So I AM improving. Thank you for your concern Borndem.
I no more believe there is a rift between Dr. Shafer and Dr. White. Both of them are too professional for that and it seems even the DT asked for DSs assistance which he gladly gave. White was to have called Walgren..the s...bag which is unprofessional because he should know that everyone has a job to do.
I do agree whatever is said during cross will be cleared up when the state stands back up again and uses the facts in evidence to do so.
IMO
I, too, hope you are on the mend, Ocean!!
I personally think the prosecution has done a terrific job, and the defense is really floundering. I was a little miffed at some of the questions Chernoff was asking Dr. Shafer... it's plain that he was out of his league.
borndem
10-23-2011, 08:14 PM
He's got horseshoes up "U" "NO" Where..as it appears there was Nothing in his clinics to prepare for emergencies..and relied on OTHERS to call 911 ..and YEP I would bet he would have blamed anyone or everyone IF something happened..
He is so unprofessional and unethical I do think he doesnt even know what the definition of "Protocol" is or what it means!..Whomever passed him to give him a license should be held to answer for their passing of such an incompetent!!
Surely he didnt forget everything he learned?? Ohh wait..Maybe he didnt care & understood all the BENEIFITS of his license!!..
Im sorry this case makes me infuriated by such unethical behaviors!!:furious::furious::maddening:
And of course it calls the question, "How many other incompetents are out there, meaning to do well, some of them, certainly; others merely wanting to be well-to-do. An operation or a procedure on me, my DH, my son, his wife, my next-door-neighbor, etc., etc.
Certainly, we now know, if we didn't before, to make sure the MD is board certified -- they do post their pedigrees in a noticeable place. And I'm a strong believer in recommendations from friends, and from an RN or two who shouldn't but will tell me about Dr. So & So. And a frank talk with the MD him/herself.
You medical professionals out there: Any other suggestions?
oceanblueeyes
10-23-2011, 08:17 PM
Good post, well said. I'd love to see that too. He never should have been giving Michael anesthesia in the first place, and certainly not in a home setting. I hope this jury has heard enough from the 3 doctors who have testified that what Murray did was wrong on so many levels. They all 3 have stressed the point that you do not EVER leave a patient while they are getting anesthesia, you watch them every second. SO MANY things can go wrong.
I think one thing they have learned very clearly is a person can stop breathing when under propofol. DS said it happens almost every time and he does the patients breathing for them.
That will drive it home for the jury, imo. They will think about themselves or loved ones and they will know why they have to be monitored at all times or something can go terribly wrong. They will never agree that it was acceptable for the patient to be left completely alone, imo.
IMO
borndem
10-23-2011, 08:21 PM
I'd love for the jury to hear testimony somehow of how his malpractice insurance carrier denied his claim for help with legal expenses for this trial since his coverage doesn't cover anesthesiology as that is not what he is licensed to do. At least that is what I understood their position to be from articles I read some time ago.
IMO
Wowie, Zowie, Talina! First time I'm hearing this...any tips on where I can look for those articles? I'd like to find 'em for us. Google what? if no other ideas. I'm gonna start diggin'....
Thanks!
peace9274
10-23-2011, 08:50 PM
BBM
We know that CM played it fast & loose with MJ at his home -- alone. And altho they apparently (as far as we know, at least) were not certified or registered or professionally trained assistants/volunteers at his LV office, what was to keep him from training them himself to assist him in his office? He was a practicing cardiologist with patients -- cardiologists do procedures other than ECG's -- what would stop him? Just sayin' ....:waitasec:
I'm sure CM trained his "medical staff" to the procedures & routine the way he wanted everything done.
But because they weren't trained in an accredited school of nursing, they would not question him, as to
whether things were done correctly.
Plus, they did not have the fear of losing a nurses license if they did an unethical nursing procedure.
They just needed to do as CM said to do.
oceanblueeyes
10-23-2011, 09:16 PM
Wowie, Zowie, Talina! First time I'm hearing this...any tips on where I can look for those articles? I'd like to find 'em for us. Google what? if no other ideas. I'm gonna start diggin'....
Thanks!
HOUSTON (AP) -- An insurer for the doctor charged in Michael Jackson's death has asked a judge to rule that it is not responsible for the physician's legal bills in two high-profile court cases and fights to retain his medical license.
Medicus Insurance Co. argues that Dr. Conrad Murray's medical malpractice policy doesn't cover his defense costs because the cases stem from alleged criminal wrongdoing, according to documents filed Wednesday in state court in Houston. Murray's policy, which was purchased roughly a month before Jackson's death in June 2009, did not cover incidents involving general anesthesia, the company argues.
http://www.thegrio.com/entertainment/jackson-doctors-legal-bills-issue-in-texas-court.php
peace9274
10-23-2011, 09:16 PM
Thankfully for the first time since Tuesday I was able to get some sleep last night and only woke up a couple of times when I got in the wrong position that compromised my rib area. So I AM improving. Thank you for your concern Borndem.
Respectfully snipped and bolded by me.
Oceanblueeyes, It is so good to hear that you're feeling better and that your ribs are healing.
I hope you continue to still be with us as much as you've been during your healing time.
I love reading your many well written & informative opinions and facts re this trial!! :)
oceanblueeyes
10-23-2011, 09:28 PM
Respectfully snipped and bolded by me.
Oceanblueeyes, It is so good to hear that you're feeling better and that your ribs are healing.
I hope you continue to still be with us as much as you've been during your healing time.
I love reading your many well written & informative opinions and facts re this trial!! :)
Oh what a nice thing to say, Peace.:blushing: I sincerely thank you. Isn't it great to have so many posters who give such great opinions and helps us understand this case? We are fortunate that we have medical professionals here to assist us too but I think we have all learned so much about propofol.
LOL! Sometimes I think we know more about propofol and how it must be administered than Dr. Murray did.:floorlaugh:
I am on the mend but I know it will just take time and I have to accept that. I am not a clumsy person at all and this fall is so embarrassing to me.:blushing: The main thing it has done is limit what I can do and that is the part I hate. I had planned last week to do some trim painting and painting the walls in one of our guest bedrooms. LOL! Thats on hold for now!
IMO
borndem
10-23-2011, 09:34 PM
Here is one article I found re CM's malpractice insurer refusing to cover his defense costs.
If I find more that are also informative, I'll put the links out here, sports fans.
http://mymedicalmalpracticeinsurance.com/news/?p=1169
peace9274
10-23-2011, 09:49 PM
Oh what a nice thing to say, Peace.:blushing: I sincerely thank you. Isn't it great to have so many posters who give such great opinions and helps us understand this case? We are fortunate that we have medical professionals here to assist us too but I think we have all learned so much about propofol.
LOL! Sometimes I think we know more about propofol and how it must be administered than Dr. Murray did.:floorlaugh:
I am on the mend but I know it will just take time and I have to accept that. I am not a clumsy person at all and this fall is so embarrassing to me.:blushing: The main thing it has done is limit what I can do and that is the part I hate. I had planned last week to do some trim painting and painting the walls in one of our guest bedrooms. LOL! Thats on hold for now!
IMO
Well, we're the lucky ones, that your trim isn't getting done!
And yes, I agree that we do have so many well informed people here,
that also write so well to get their points across.
I'm amazed that more WSers haven't been as interested in this trial and posted here.
But, then it's made it easier for me to catch-up when I've been away for dentist & doctor
appointments. Everything else has taken the back burner until the trial is over.
Except for tomorrow at 10 am (AZ time), I have another appointment that I can't cancel!
GRRRR It's with my financial advisor to see how soon I can/should do a bank transfer.
borndem
10-23-2011, 10:05 PM
I'm sure CM trained his "medical staff" to the procedures & routine the way he wanted everything done.
But because they weren't trained in an accredited school of nursing, they would not question him, as to
whether things were done correctly.
Plus, they did not have the fear of losing a nurses license if they did an unethical nursing procedure.
They just needed to do as CM said to do.
I would think that since they did not have (as far as we know) proper registration or certification, they were probably called "assistants" but not "medical assistants" since I assume (I am not a med. professional, so forgive my huge ignorance) that title would imply and probably require some type of training/education. And surely, Shirley, even CM would not refer to them as "nurses." Who knoze?
And CM could always say, "Ms. Smith" or "Carol," etc. My internist simply calls his RN by her first name... but she does wear one of those usual name-tag things (please excuse that terminology, too) that says, Jane Doesmith, RN.
But also, it seems to me, the "assistants" could be sued or arrested or whatever the medical term for it is, if there is one, if anyone or any body of law or medical authority decided to do so. I don't see this happening, but wouldn't it be possible?
Oh, what a tangled web we weave. Just like any other lie, it just keeps snowballing and getting bigger, and more daring, and more dangerous, and more illegal, IMO. Mmmmmm. Bad, bad, bad.
oceanblueeyes
10-23-2011, 10:19 PM
Well, we're the lucky ones, that your trim isn't getting done!
And yes, I agree that we do have so many well informed people here,
that also write so well to get their points across.
I'm amazed that more WSers haven't been as interested in this trial and posted here.
But, then it's made it easier for me to catch-up when I've been away for dentist & doctor
appointments. Everything else has taken the back burner until the trial is over.
Except for tomorrow at 10 am (AZ time), I have another appointment that I can't cancel!
GRRRR It's with my financial adviser to see how soon I can/should do a bank transfer.
Good luck with your financial adviser tomorrow, Peace!
I believe the reason that more haven't posted is it is in the Hot Cases forum rather than in the Trials forum but this is just my opinion. In fact this is the first time I have seen that happen.
The Conrad Murray case is very active on other sites. One of the top discussed cases.
I haven't left the house in over a week but I must try to run errands for my hubby tomorrow. So I will also miss some of the testimony myself. I will probably be gone from 12-2 EST.
Hopefully Talina will post her great synopsis of what has been said and when I get back I can get caught up.
IMO
borndem
10-24-2011, 01:49 AM
G'night, all you good WS'ers. :websleuther:
Relaxed and smooth dreamland to you, ocean!:cloud9:
A kiss goodnight :heartbeat: to Dr S. from his WS groooopies! :blushing: :crush: :heart:
Rest your hard-keying fingers, Talina. :online: Anutter big day tomorrow. :pillowfight2:
To sleep, perchance to dream for us all! : http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon6.gif : http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif : http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon12.gif ::waitasec: : http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon11.gif : http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon10.gif : http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon8.gif : http://www.websleuths.com/forums/images/icons/icon9.gif : :great:::crazy:
And so to bed....:offtobed:
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
0