Conrad Murray trial -Day nine.

Thanks all, for keeping me up to date. I managed to watch the cross of Mr. Anderson yesterday and it was so clear that he was trying to confuse the jury. The equilibrium of distribution of the medications was a bunch of bunk, IMHO. I'm no science whiz, but, having seen a whole lot of trials, I'm pretty sure that the body metabolizes them in different ways in different organs at different times.

I think I heard it on HLN where somebody called it an "OJ". In that case, the subject of confusion was DNA which wasn't well understood by your average juror back then.

I hope the re-direct today clears it up a lot better than what happened to the coroner's investigator. Of course, Flannagan didn't give her a chance to say she made some errors, but hyped it up to MANY ERRORS with y/n questions.

Looking forward to Day 9 to see how this ends up. At least the DA had time last night to come up with his re-direct questions!
 
I am reposting my post because I always seem to start out on the wrong thread!:floorlaugh:

Good Morning Everyone!:seeya:

One thing was loud and clear to me with yesterday's testimony. Something does not make sense.

The defense would have the jury believe that MJ was this rapid drug addict but frankly the evidence entered doesn't show that at all.

I think just like everything to do with MJ it was blown way out of proportion. A full blown addict will take everything and anything they can get their hands on especially if it is right there in their home for the taking. So him being a drug addict at the time is a bunch of baloney, imo. I don't think he even wanted the other drug cocktail that Murray decided to give him. He just only wanted the propofol so he could think he had slept, imo.

Bottle after bottle of drugs were found in abundance at the Holmby Mansion and so many of them had quite a few pills in the bottle. Some meds were over a year old or more. What addict leaves the drugs alone that they supposedly crave?

Sometimes I think it gets lost that MJ was a 50 year old man who would have aches and pains and medical problems just like any person his age would. I imagine some of our medicine chests are also filled with drugs we may have needed for some kind of illness or sickness. But if MJ has it then of course it is spun the only reason for it is to feed the drug addiction. It seems some expect MJ to have been totally healthy without ever needing a real doctors care for certain medically necessary things.

Why would a saline bag have a slit (cut) in it if not to place something inside of it? That bottle has CMs fingerprint. That is the bottle of propofol CM gave him and is the homicide weapon.

So while the defense is all about getting the jurors distracted with insignificant things I certainly hope the real evidence is not getting lost in the smoke and mirrors of the defense.

IMO
 
In my 26 years as an RN, I have never heard of anyone ever cutting open a saline bag or any other IV fluid bag for that matter. Absurd to think a medical person would use the cut bag to place trash inside it - that is waaaaaay too much trouble. A medical person would have that empty bag in their hands when empty about 3 - 5 seconds, pole to trash. I must give Conrad an "A" for creativity. Just with he would have used his creativity in another way, not to harm/cause death to another.
 
IS discussing 'shoddy' investigative work, however no one mentions that this was NOT a crime scene at the time. I'm sure there is a different approach once a crime has been classed a homicide.
 
In my 26 years as an RN, I have never heard of anyone ever cutting open a saline bag or any other IV fluid bag for that matter. Absurd to think a medical person would use the cut bag to place trash inside it - that is waaaaaay too much trouble. A medical person would have that empty bag in their hands when empty about 3 - 5 seconds, pole to trash. I must give Conrad an "A" for creativity. Just with he would have used his creativity in another way, not to harm/cause death to another.

Why was the bag cut?
 
And a Great Friday Morning to Everyone!
TGIF, Long week.

After I sat through and listened to the full recording yesterday, I had to walk away from the computer.
I came back to the posts on and off, listened to bits of testimony but geeze, that whole recording felt like I had been hit in the gut and the wind was knocked out of me.

While cooking dinner, eating dinner, watching TV, cleaning up the kitchen; family members kept asking me if something was wrong.
I didn't think I was acting any differently but obviously hearing that full recording really impacted me more than I realized.

I'm in some sort of funk, I guess, and I'm hoping HOPING the Pros have had the whole night to come up with a way to combat the cross yesterday.

The Anthony case really left a bad taste in my mouth and I keep thinking all jurors are going to hear just a little bit of negative and take it to mean "We couldn't convict cuz we just didn't know how it happened" ala Anthony case.

In any case..... Teeth brushed-Check
Hair brushed - Check
Full pot of coffee brewed less the cup I'm sipping on now -Check
Fed parents breakfast - Check
Cleaned up kitchen - Check
Night clothes changed -- Ooopsy! OK, I'll be back. :)
 
Thanks all, for keeping me up to date. I managed to watch the cross of Mr. Anderson yesterday and it was so clear that he was trying to confuse the jury. The equilibrium of distribution of the medications was a bunch of bunk, IMHO. I'm no science whiz, but, having seen a whole lot of trials, I'm pretty sure that the body metabolizes them in different ways in different organs at different times.

I think I heard it on HLN where somebody called it an "OJ". In that case, the subject of confusion was DNA which wasn't well understood by your average juror back then.

I hope the re-direct today clears it up a lot better than what happened to the coroner's investigator. Of course, Flannagan didn't give her a chance to say she made some errors, but hyped it up to MANY ERRORS with y/n questions.

Looking forward to Day 9 to see how this ends up. At least the DA had time last night to come up with his re-direct questions!

One person can only do so much when they work on their own, the Coronor's Office should assign two people to a case. It is not Elissa's fault she makes mistakes. Like the toxicologist stated yesterday, he works along with his staff and checks their work to ensure it is accurate etc. jmo
 
Oh yes court is in session. Defense is trying to get the toxicology expert to testify about pharmacology topics. Witness stated he is not comfortable testifying to those things.
 
Defense is talking about post mortem redistribution, trying to explain how the propofol got into the stomach. Witness is trying not to discuss this topic. Ion trapping is also being discussed. I like how this witness is handling this line of questioning.
 
Witness just told defense he was getting out of the area of his expertise and would like to stay out. Defense is just keeping up the questions. Witness just keeps saying that is out of my area of expertise.
 
Witness: you cannot relate urine values to blood values.

Defense showing graph of drugs from the autopsy report. Witness just said: I don't know.

Defense asked several more questions and then witness; out of my area of expertise again.
 
Witness: propofol is important in any case we handle.

Defense is trying to get the witness confused and make him sound like he does not know his stuff. I do not think it will work. This is not going as good for the defense as yesterday's cross went.
 
I agree, cross not getting what they want out of this witness. It is still hard for me to understand.
 
was there any testimony about how "old" the urine sample from the scene was? What I mean is unless CM tells us, who knows how long that had been sitting there. Icky sorry.
 
Defense is trying their hardest here. Ask a couple of questions about one particular drug in one area and then switch out to a different drug hoping the witness doesn't change drug names in his brain and answers for the first drug which would be wrong for the second drug. Good try defense.
 
If he developes a hearing problem ala C. Mason I think I will scream!
 
was there any testimony about how "old" the urine sample from the scene was? What I mean is unless CM tells us, who knows how long that had been sitting there. Icky sorry.


I didn't catch if they said how old the urine from the scene was. But I would imagine they could test to see how old it was before running tests on it, couldn't they?
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
111
Guests online
1,615
Total visitors
1,726

Forum statistics

Threads
589,179
Messages
17,915,161
Members
227,745
Latest member
branditau.wareham72@gmail
Back
Top