People vs Conrad Murray - Day 19

Today we entered day 19 of the People vs. Conrad Murray trial. There are reportedly only two defence witnesses left to take to the stand.

Dr Robert Waldman

The first testimony of the day came from Dr Robert Waldman, an addiction specialist. One of the defence’s main arguments is that Michael Jackson was addicted to Demerol that had been administered by dermatologist Dr Arnold Klein.

Waldman stated that in the months leading up to Jackson’s death he had been regularly visiting Dr Arnold Klein for Botox and Restylane treatments. During these relatively painless treatments Jackson was receiving “unusually large” quantities of Demerol. It was revealed from Dr Klein’s medical records that in March 2009 Jackson was receiving 200mg of Demerol. By May 2009 it had increased to 300mg. The reports showed that in one sitting Michael received 375 mg; a typical dose would be 50 mg.

Waldman told the court that the amounts of Demerol that Dr Klein was administering to Jackson would have left him “sleepy, lethargic, possibly difficult to arouse, possibly unresponsive.”

A symptom of withdrawing from Demerol is insomnia. The defence believe that it was the withdrawing from this drug that caused Jackson to not be able to sleep and eventually lead to him administering Propofol to himself.

Dr Waldman stated he believes that Jackson had become dependent on the drug. Waldman told the court “I believe there’s evidence he was dependent on Demerol.” When asked if he believed Jackson was addicted Dr Waldman replied “possibly.” The difference between a dependency and an addiction is that a dependency is a physical need for a drug. An addiction is more serious as it involves destructive behaviours and continuing use of a substance despite bad consequences.

Waldman told the court that had had no expertise in dermatology, but had consulted doctors in the field.

Cross-examination

On cross-examination prosecution lawyer David Walgren implied that Dr Waldman’s conclusions were irrelevant and that the defence were seeking to confuse the jury by passing the blame on to someone else. Walgren asked “you understand there is no Demerol in the toxicology findings?” Waldman stated this was correct.

Walgren also questioned Waldman about how he concluded that Jackson was dependent and possibly addicted to Demerol. Waldman stated that he had not just looked at Dr Klein’s medical records, he had also formed his opinion based on “what’s known about his [Michael Jackson’s] public behavior.” Walgren then asked “would you diagnose Michael Jackson as addicted to Demerol based strictly on the documents in my hand?” Waldman stated “probably not.”

Waldman also acknowledged that he was not officially certified as an addiction specialist.

Dr Paul White

The second testimony of the day, and the final defence witness, Dr Paul White, a Propofol expert, then took to the stand.

Dr White tried to dismiss the prosecutions claims that Murray was reckless by combining a number of sedatives when treating Michael Jackson. White stated "in anaesthesiology, it's what we do every day… We're polypharmacists. We combine drugs to achieve better effect, with less medication."

Dr White also told the court that it would be unusual for Jackson to have been able to have died from the dose that Murray gave him. Murray told the police that he had administered 25 mg of Propofol to Jackson. White stated that this was a relatively small dose.

The court was then adjourned for the day.

Summery

It is certain that Dr White’s testimony is going to shake the case up. It will be interesting to hear if the prosecution pick up on the point that Dr White thinks the dose Dr Murray stated he administered, 25 mg, was too small to kill him. The toxicology reports prove that Murray had lied to the police as far higher doses of Propofol were found in Jackson’s body. If White is basing his testimony on what Murray told police it seems his testimony will be filled with inaccuracies. It will be interesting to see what Dr White believes the toxicology report findings prove.

I thought it was highly surprising that Dr Waldman was not actually an addiction specialist. I also thought that it was not right that his decision was informed by here say about Jackson’s public persona. In a court only fact really matters and opinions that are not supported by evidence or fact are completely irrelevant and invalid.

It seems the witnesses that the defence have called so far have either been irrelevant to the case, such as the former patients, or under qualified to be experts on their subjects such as Dr Waldman and Michael Henson from Pacific Toxicology. The only witness that seems to have any relevance is Dr White, whose testimony is not only key to the defence’s argument but also to the case.

It does seem unfortunate that the ultimate decider of how the case goes is in the testimonies of the two key witnesses, the Propofol experts Dr Shafer and Dr White, who are holding their own battle as they were former colleagues and are now rivals.

In a court of law I always feel that witnesses should be as balanced and unbiased as they can, particularly expert witnesses. It seems very few of the witnesses in this trial have been. Combined this with an incompetent defence team I do not feel this is a fair trial, either to Dr Murray or to Michael Jackson.

The trial continues tomorrow with the most important, and final testimony, from Dr White.

Sophie Dewing

http://exploredreamdiscoverblog.blogspot.com/

People vs Conrad Murray - Day 18

The People vs. Conrad Murray trial has now entered day 18. Today the defence kept calling their witnesses.

Gerry Causey

The first person to testify today was Gerry Causey, a patient for Dr Murray who had known him for 11 years. Causey met Murray after he had suffered a heart attack.

Causey told the court that Murray was not a greedy man and that Murray had not charged him deductibles (the amount of money that is not covered by the patient’s medical insurance). Causey also stated that Dr Murray was his best friend.

When hearing Mr Causey’s testimony Conrad Murray became emotional and began crying.

Mr Causey was then asked about his treatment. He stated that before the procedure he had to sign his consent for the treatment. There were also four other medical staff present in the hospital room.

Causey was also asked about interviews he had conducted with the media. Causey stated he was not paid for the interview and he did them "to help my friend... I know his love, compassion, his feeling for his patients. He's the best doctor I've ever been to.”

On the cross-examination the prosecution made the point that even if Murray was grossly negligent that Causey would still be a character witness for Murray.

On the way out Mr Causey angered Judge Pastor by kissing Conrad Murray on the head and shaking his hand.

                                                                                                      

Andrew Guest

The second person to testify was Andrew Guest, another former patient of Dr Murray. Guest stated that Murray was the best doctor he had ever seen and he was alive today because of Murray. Guest said “he's a great guy, he follows up with everything, makes sure everything's explained.”

Guest had to visit Murray in a hospital environment for treatment. A team were present to back Murray up. The prosecution used this account to state that every patient deserves that level of care. That administering Propofol in a bedroom without a team to back Murray up was not acceptable.

Guest also spoke about how four of the witnesses today had become friends. Guest had also conducted an interview with CNN. Guest stated he did this because he believed Murray was not getting a “fair shake.”

Walgren then stated that nothing would change Guest’s opinion of Murray. Guest stated this was correct.

Lunette Sampson

The third testimony of the day came from Lunette Sampson. Ms Sampson became a patient of Murray after she suffered three heart attacks. Ms Sampson stated that when other doctor’s could not find out what was wrong with her Dr Murray managed to diagnose her. Sampson believes she had never had a doctor more caring than Murray. She stated that Dr Murray is very careful and 'is not the type to rush through procedures'.

Sampson went on to say that Murray was not greedy or money hungry, he had often helped patients who did not have enough money for medication. Sampson stated 'he helps anyone who needs help'.

Dennis Hix

The fourth witness was Dennis Hix, a former patient of Dr Murray. Hix stated he has visited a lot of doctors in his life but had never received the care that he had from Dr Murray. As Mr Hix did not have good health care insurance Murray treated him for free.

Hix told the court that he had received the ‘sabbatical’ letter from Murray but had no idea he was going to be Michael Jackson’s doctor.

Since Murray treated Hix they have kept in contact as Murray children live next door to Mr Hix.

Dr Hix had previous given an interview to CNN regarding Dr Murray.

Ruby Mosley

The final testimony of the day came from Ruby Mosley, another patient of Murray’s. Ms Mosley was another patient to testify that Conrad Murray is not a greedy man.

Ms Mosley lives in a socially deprived area of Houston, Texas. Murray’s father was a doctor in this area and Ms Mosley stated that Murray made a commitment to open a clinic in the area to honour his father’s memory. Mosley stated if Murray was a greedy man he would never have gone to a community such as hers.

Mosley also told the court that Murray was a “very informed doctor” and was able to remember patient details. He took time to explain any details with her “to the extreme”

Ms Mosley is another patient who has spoken to the media regarding Conrad Murray.

The court was then adjourned due to scheduling issues.

Summery

Today all the testimonies were from former patient of Dr Murray and were for character reference purposes. The point of the testimonies were to show Dr Murray’s human side, what he is like as a doctor and as a man. The question is will this sway to jury at all? By all accounts (apart from the patient the prosecution called – where the patient said he felt abandoned by Murray) Murray’s patients believe him to be an excellent doctor that goes beyond his duties.  To me this still does not change the fact he was administering a dangerous drug with no training, no appropriate equipment and not in a clinical setting. All of the patients who testified today were treated in a hospital setting, with monitoring equipment and other medical staff present. I believe after having such a damning trial so far that these witnesses will have little effect on the verdict. It doesn’t change the fact that in regards to Michael Jackson his care was not to standard.

After watching the trial for 5 weeks I still personally believe that Murray did not intend to kill Michael Jackson. He was offered the opportunity of a lifetime and took it even though he knew he was under qualified and ill-equipped. What he did was reckless and dangerous and his actions did cause Michael to die (this is my opinion from what we have heard so far. Of course the defence may still have something significant to present). But I do not believe he ever intended to harm Jackson in any way.

We must bear in mind that Michael repeatedly asked for Propofol from a number of doctors. He was also manipulative and blamed people if rehearsals would not be able to go ahead if he had not slept. This does put pressure on people and by being such a huge star people would feel a need to do what he asked. But in my mind a doctor is there to treat people. Conducting treatments that are not needed, with any training and not in a suitable environment is never acceptable. Just because a patient asks for something does not mean a doctor should do it. As Dr Shafer testified Murray acted like a member of Jackson’s staff and not a doctor.

Today’s witnesses are not necessarily reliable as they have shown they are biased as they stated that nothing would change their opinion of Murray. Guest stated he spoke to the media as he believed Murray was not getting a “fair shake”. This is very damaging as it shows he had come into court with a point of making Murray look good. We must remember that some of the prosecution witnesses would also have been biased towards Michael Jackson. For example it was obvious Kai Chase wanted to paint Jackson in the best possible light and to make Murray look bad.

The most valuable testimonies are from people who are external to the case, such as medical experts and pathologists. They have no reason to state anything apart from fact, which makes their testimonies far more reliable.

The big question now is will Conrad Murray take to the stand to testify? He is not on the defence witness list at present but the defence are keeping coy as to whether he will testify. The jury, and the rest of the world, would like to hear Murray’s personal account of that day. But I believe it would be a catastrophe to do so. Not only would the prosecution be able to rip his account apart with the evidence they have produced so far, I also believe the defence is so bad that they would ask questions that would further prove Murray is accountable. Remember that a few of the defence witnesses, in particular Dr Metzger, were there is help the defence’s case but instead stated they believed Murray was in the wrong.

The trial continues tomorrow.

Sophie Dewing

http://exploredreamdiscoverblog.blogspot.com/

People vs. Conrad Murray - Day 17

Today was day 17 of the People vs. Conrad Murray trial and the second day of defence witnesses.

Cherilyn Lee

The first witness on the stand was Cherilyn Lee, a holistic nurse. Early on in her testimony the court was adjourned as Ms Lee was very emotional and felt unwell. She told the court "this is very sensitive for me". When court resumed Lee testified about the time Jackson had asked for her Diprovan (the brand name for Propofol).

Ms Lee had previously testified that she had tried to use holistic methods to help Michael sleep. Today she stated when Michael first asked her for Diprovan she did not know what it was. Lee was concerned that Michael had a familiarity with Diprovan. Lee consulted a doctor about the drug and the settings under which it should be used. The doctor stated Propofol is not appropriate to be used in a home setting.

When Ms Lee conveyed this to Michael he stated that doctor’s had told him it was safe to use as long as he was monitored. At this point Jackson told Lee that he had used Propofol before but only for surgery, but he knew it would “knock him right out”.

Lee states that the next day Jackson was a “tad upset” that she did not help him receive Diprovan to sleep. Jackson stated that by not sleeping it would “mess up my performance”. This would be the last time Ms Lee saw Michael.

21^st June 2009

Ms Lee told the court that on the 21^st June 2009 she received a phone call from one of Jackson’s bodyguards stating that Michael wanted to see her. Ms Lee was in Florida at the time so told the bodyguard it would not be possible. Lee told the court she could hear Michael in the background saying “tell her what is wrong. One half of my body is hot; one half of it is cold.” Lee believed this could be a symptom of Propofol use and told the bodyguard to take Jackson to the hospital immediately.

The prosecution then cross-examined Ms Lee. As Ms Lee had brought all of her medical notes regarding her treatments and consultations with Jackson the prosecution used this as an opportunity to again reiterate the importance of keeping medical records, (and highlighting the fact the Dr Murray had no notes at all).

Ms Lee had previous testified that Jackson would drink a lot of highly caffeinated drinks such as Red Bull, leave lights on and play music and movie and she believed this was the reason he could not sleep. She recommended turning the music and movies off, turning the lights down and drinking soothing drinks to help with sleep. All of her suggestions were written in her notes.

As MJ had asked Lee about Diprovan she consulted a doctor and researched the side effects of Propofol. She notes that she informed Jackson of these side effects which include dizziness, agitation, chills and delirium. Another symptom is memory loss. Lee told the court that she asked Michael “what if you forget your lines?’. Michael responded “I would never forget my lines.” Lee then said to Michael that she knew he wanted to be knocked out but what if he was to never wake up. Jackson told her as long as he was monitored he would be OK. Ms Lee then told Michael “no one who cared or had your best interest at heart would give you this.”

Ms Lee was very emotional during her testimony.

Amir Dan Rubin

The second testimony came from Amir Dan Rubin, the former chief operating office of UCLA Medical Centre. Rubin helped write the press release announcing to the world that Michael Jackson was dead.

 Rubin testified that a meeting was held in a conference room in UCLA hospital with Jermaine Jackson, AEG and a UCLA PR representative to write the press release. Rubin said that he remembers seeing Murray there in retrospect. Murray appeared distressed but this was the mood for everyone involved. Murray told the group that the cause of death was not known at the time. Rubin seemed to imply that Murray had a lot less to the with the press release than what Dr Murray told the police in his interview.

Rubin also told the court that he was present when Katherine Jackson, Michael’s mother, was informed he was dead. Rubin’s stated he heard the “anguish of a mother who had lost a son”.

Randy Phillips

The third testimony of the day came from Randy Phillips, the chief executive of AEG Live. Earlier Judge Pastor had stated that Jackson’s contract with AEG Live could not be admitted as evidence. This may have had an impact on what questions could be asked to Phillips. Phillips told the court that he had never discussed money with Jackson, the meetings they had were purely creative.

Phillips told the court about his company and Michael Jackson. Phillips stated AEG’s role is to show the greatest artists and best talent. He went on to say that Michael Jackson was the greatest star in contemporary music. He stated that London is probably the biggest concert market in the world, bigger than New York and Toronto combined. Phillips said that the residency at the O2 area was called a “mountain to Mohammad” by those involved and would only be possible with a star as famous as Michael Jackson.

Phillips also testified that Michael was motivated, energised and receptive to the idea. MJ was keen to be able to settle down and have a good home for his children so they could stop living like vagabonds. Phillips stated that Jackson got emotional when speaking about his motivations for the gigs and they both cried.

Phillips then told the conditions Jackson laid out if he were to perform. He stated he did not want to live in London; instead he wanted a 16 acre estate outside London. He also wanted the Guinness Book of Records to be present, as no other star would do a residency with that many dates ever again. Jackson agreed to do 31 dates, which was 10 more than Prince had done at his residency at the O2. Phillips stated AEG wanted more than 31 dates as all of those tickets would have sold out in the presales.

Throughout this testimony the defence repeatedly tried to comment about Jackson’s financial situation (most probably to show that Jackson was in financial crisis which could have caused him to feel suicidal). The judge repeatedly sustained objections over these questions as he had specified before that financial matters are irrelevant to the case.

Jackson also stated he wanted his own physician who would be available 24/7.  Phillips stated that they wanted Jackson to have a doctor from London but Jackson wanted Conrad Murray. Paul Gongaware then went on to discuss a contract and terms with Dr Murray. During meetings with AEG Murray stated he was going to ensure Michael had a proper diet, including high nutrient shakes, and that Michael was in great health.  Phillips told the court that it was obvious there was a good friendship between Jackson and Murray and that Murray wanted to help MJ. Michael had great trust in Dr Murray.

Phillips then told the court that in the second week of June Kenny Ortega raised concerns about MJ. He was worried about the rehearsals Michael was missing and believed that Michael was not as engaged and focused on the production as he should have been. It was also vital for Michael to attend rehearsals as the musicians needed to ‘key off’ of him. Ortega sent an email voicing his concerns and stated that they needed to show MJ “tough love” and talk about “pulling the plug” on the show. Ortega also mentioned about Michael appearing ill and having to send him home on the 19^th June.

Phillips told the court that AEG never considered “pulling the plug” but did believe they may have to postpone the show. (Incidentally the production was postponed for a week but this was not to do with Michael’s health.)

Crisis meeting

A meeting was called at MJ’s house on the 20^th June 2009. Those present were Michael Jackson, Conrad Murray, Randy Phillips and Kenny Ortega. The meeting was to discuss both MJ’s health and the production. Phillips stated that in production meetings Jackson was always laser focused and that Jackson was a perfectionist, apart from one meeting. Dr Murray told Phillips that the day before Jackson had visited Dr Arnold Klein’s office. Phillips voiced his concern and told Jackson that he needed to focus and pay attention to the production. The production was having huge technical issues with a 3D suit that MJ was meant to fly in. Michael did not respond to the discussion immediately and Dr Murray spoke for Jackson.

 Murray reassured Phillips that he could guarantee that Jackson would become engaged. He also stated that Michael had been working on the production at home with a choreographer. Phillips states that concerns were raised about Michael’s weight and nutrition. Murray stated that Michael was “in great health” and he would look after him. Phillips felt “very reassured” after this meeting.

During this meeting drug use was not brought up. Dr Murray told Kenny Ortega that he should leave Michael’s health to him.

Michael told Phillips “you got me here, now I’m ready. I can take it from here…you build the house and I’ll put on the door and paint it”. Kenny Ortega then responded “great. That’s all I want to hear from you.”

Phillips then attended rehearsals on the 23^rd and 24^th of June to ensure that the production was back on track. Phillips stated that on 24^th  June, Michael’s final rehearsal, that it was an “amazing rehearsal” and that he had “goose bumps.”

25^th June 2009

Phillips testified that on 25^th June he received a phone call around 10.30 – 11AM stating Michael was having breathing difficulty. Phillips then got into his car and rushed to Jackson’s house. When he arrived around 1PM the paramedics were leaving. Phillips then headed straight to UCLA hospital. Phillips saw Dr Murray at UCLA as he was part of the team that needed to draw up a press release. Phillips told the court that Conrad Murray was in “severe distress”.

“Michael Jackson was a genius”

Phillips then ended his testimony by speaking about Michael. He stated that Michael Jackson was a genius and there are no entertainers like him in the world. MJ was an “amazing performer” and his attention to detail was phenomenal “both musically and visually.”

Phillips finished his testimony by saying that Michael was a phenomenal father and his children were everything to him.

Michael Henson

The final witness of the day was Michael Henson, a technical operations officer as Pacific Toxicology. Henson had examined urine samples that he had received from the coroner’s office. Dr Shafer had stated in his testimony that the toxicology report from Pacific Toxicology was not accurate (as it had included Metabolites of Lorazepam as well as the drug itself. This therefore gives a higher reading of levels of Lorazepam).

It was quickly apparent during this testimony that Henson was not qualified to give answers on this topic. Henson was then abandoned as an expert.

                                                                                                                                                             

Summery

A few interesting points were raised in today’s testimonies. Ms Lee stated that Michael was told as long as he was monitored it would be safe to have Propofol. From all accounts so far it seems Murray was not correctly monitoring Jackson, he was lacking life monitoring equipment and he was out of the room for 46 minutes of the hour leading up to Michael’s death. Lee also told Michael that no one with his best interests at heart would give him Propofol. Both of these statements show Murray to be in the wrong. It seems the defence have yet again called a witness whose testimony works more in the prosecutions favour.

It was odd to hear Randy Phillips state he received a phone call to say Michael was having breathing around 10.30-11AM on the 25^th of June. We know that it was around noon that MJ stopped breathing. This may have just been an error on Phillips part but it was unusual.

I felt it was a nice touch by Phillips speaking about the Michael Jackson he knew. It reminded people that he was a human being. A court case can easily dehumanise someone and it almost becomes an abstract version of that person. By speaking about the “genius” of Michael Jackson the performer and the loving father that Michael Jackson the person was really brings home the fact that this case is about someone’s life and not just a celebrity and reports and medical facts.

The trial continues tomorrow. It is believed that the final two defence witnesses will be called to take the stand.

Sophie Dewing

http://exploredreamdiscoverblog.blogspot.com/

People vs. Conrad Murray - Day 16

We have now entered week 5 and are on day 16 of the People vs. Conrad Murray trial. The trial was originally due to last 5 weeks. At this juncture in the trial the prosecution finally close their case and the defence take the stand.

Dr Steven Shafer

Today Dr Steven Shafer was yet again on the stand to finish his testimony. This is the fifth day of Shafer’s testimony.

Dr Shafer was still being cross-examined by defence lawyer Ed Chernoff. The key comment that Dr Shafer stated today was that it was hard to determine the exact effect Propofol had on Michael Jackson has he had been given so much of the drug in the two months before his death. Shafer stated "there's very little, almost no precedent for this level of Propofol exposure."

During his testimony Dr Shafer stated that he believed Murray administered 40 times the amount of Propofol to Jackson than what he told police. Shafer also believed Murray had to have infused the drug even after Jackson’s heart stopped to be able to explain the levels of Propofol in Michael’s body.

There was more talk about the levels of Lorazepam in Michael’s stomach. The half-life of a Lorazepam tablet is 22 minutes (in 22 minutes half of the tablet would be dissolved into the stomach). It would take around 2 hours for the levels of Lorazepam in the body to peak.

The defence then asked Dr Shafer about the possibility of Michael taking the Lorazepam on his own accord. Shafer stated he could not discount the possibility that Jackson had swallowed the tablets himself. He stated this would have had to have occurred around 8AM with a quantity of 16mg.

During his testimony today Dr Shafer also told the jury that the American Society of Anaesthesiologists have a set of guidelines that state Propofol should not be used outside of a supervised medical setting. Murray clearly did not follow these guidelines.

The defence also wanted to discuss Dr Shafer’s demonstration of the IV set up again. The defence tried to put forward that the demonstration may not be valid as certain tests were not conducted. They also again at length discussed vented IV’s.

Shafer then discussed in detail the body’s response to remove Propofol from it, the urine sample results and Demerol. It seemed pointless to discuss Demerol as there were no traces of this in any of the toxicology results. It seems the defence are still pressing forward with trying to shift the blame to Dr Arnold Klein, who gave Jackson Demerol regularly.

The prosecution got to redress cross-examine Dr Shafer and were keen to point out that the IV Murray used was indeed a vented IV, such as the one that was used in Dr Shafer’s demonstration. They also stated that self-injection simulations rely on information about dose and time of administration. As Murray had kept no medical notes whatsoever all of Shafer’s work had to be calculated of estimations.

The prosecution then revealed that they had conducted new tests regarding the Lorazepam in MJ’s stomach and the results show it was actually the equivalent of 1/250^th of a tablet. There is a possibility that Dan Anderson, the toxicologist, may need to be recalled to the stand to confirm these findings.

During today’s testimony it was also noted that Dr Shafer has special expertise in mathematical modelling and his computer programs are now the default standard within this line of work. It is an interesting fact that Dr White will rely on Dr Shafer for the mathematical elements of his testimony.

Dr White was not present in court today, the first time during Dr Shafer’s testimony. This may be due to the fact that Dr White is facing a contempt of court hearing in November due to comments he made in court regarding Dr Shafer.

Today Dr Shafer also told the court for his reason for absence last week due to the death of his father. As the jury cannot view media, TV or Internet reports during the trial they were unaware of the circumstances.

Prosecution case closed

After five weeks and thirty three witnesses the prosecution then closed their case.

The defence then opened their case and their first witness, Dona Norris, took to the stand.

Dona Norris

The first witness was Dona Norris, a Beverly Hills police department communications and property evidence manager.

Norris’s testimony was discussing the timescale of the 911 call made regarding Michael Jackson. No new information was presented during this testimony.

Alexander Supall

The second witness was Alexander Supall, a surveillance specialist with the LAPD. His role is to collect footage from surveillance cameras for the police. On the 25^th June 2009 Supall went to Jackson’s house to retrieve footage from the cameras there.

The court was shown footage from the CCTV camera that was at the front of the house. The footage showed cars arriving at the property.

A BMW (Murray’s car) arrived at the property at 00:50. Six minutes later a convoy of cars arrived containing Jackson and his entourage.

The defence asked why more footage was not collected by Supall. He stated at the time the only evidence the police needed was who arrived at the house. Supall also pointed out that surveillance cameras record for 24 hours. They then overwrite the previous footage to record the next 24 hours. There is no longer any other footage from that night from these surveillance cameras. The defence stated their annoyance of not being able to see all the footage as it may show if any evidence was tampered with or if the scene was disturbed.

Dan Myers

The third testimony came from Detective Dan Myers, an LAPD homicide detective. Detective Myers had interviewed Alberto Alverez in August 2009. The main questions in court were about when Alverez first mentioned that he was requested to put certain items into a bag by Murray. The defence are trying to argue that at first Alverez did not mention Propofol being in the bag.

The defence are also trying to allege that Alberto Alverez and Faheem Mohammad were influenced by Michael Amir Williams.

The jury were also once again shown drawings Alberto Alverez drew of items such as the Propofol bottle inside a saline bag and a pulse oximeter. The drawings were provided two months after Michael died and four days after the coroner announced that Propofol was the cause of death.

Orlando Martinez

The fourth testimony came from Detective Orlando Martinez, an LAPD detective who helped conduct the police interview with Conrad Murray with Detective Scott Smith (who was a prosecution witness).

Martinez stated that in his interview with Alberto Alverez it was never mentioned that Murray asked Alverez to hide Propofol vials or that he saw a Propofol bottle in an IV bag. Martinez claims that during this interview Alverez drew an empty saline bag.

Dr Allan Metzger

The fifth testimony was from Dr Allan Metzger. Dr Metzger was Jackson’s primary physician and friend for 15 – 20 years. Metzger testified that he wanted Michael to know that he was always there for him.

Over the years Metzger spoke to MJ about his health and wellbeing. The main problems Michael had were stress, skin problems and sleep issues. Metzger told the court that he had worked with another doctor to help Jackson with pain management, especially back pain. (I would assume this would be from the back injury that Michael obtain through a stage prop accident which occurred in 1999). Dr Metzger also testified that he had wanted Jackson to see Dr Arnold Klein about a skin condition.

Metzger told the court that he received a phone call from Michael in February 2009. In April 2009 Metzger visited Michael at home as Michael wanted to discuss some things. Michael confided in Metzger that he was excited about the tour but also fearful as he did not want to not do a good job with the 50 shows in London. Michael was worried about his nutritional state, hydration and how to keep healthy during the tour.

MJ told Metzger that after a show he would have trouble coming down and being able to sleep. Michael asked Dr Metzger about intravenous sleep medicines as he claimed that other sleep medicines did not work for him. Michael wanted some form of anaesthetic. Dr Metzger told Jackson that using intravenous sleep medicine was 'dangerous, life-threatening, and should not be done outside of hospital'.

The prosecution asked Dr Metzger if any amount of money would persuade him to give Propofol. Metzger replied no.

Cherilyn Lee

The sixth testimony of the day came from Cherilyn Lee, a holistic nurse. Lee started working for Michael in February 2009 to help Jackson with tiredness and anaemia. Michael asked Lee to join him on the This Is It tour saying “I am feeling so great with the therapies you have rendered me that I would love for you to go with me.”

Lee would regularly administer vitamins to MJ intravenously, as well as recommending herbal teas to help him sleep.

Lee believed one of Michael’s problems with sleep was caused by him drinking many Red Bull drinks, which are high in caffeine.

Court was then adjourned for the day. Lee will continue her testimony tomorrow.

Summery

After five days on the stand Dr Steven Shafer was finally allowed to step down. Dr Shafer’s testimony was the most key, and most scathing of Murray, so it is no surprise how lengthy Shafer’s testimony was.

After five weeks the defence finally took to the stand. The prosecution had 33 witnesses but it is reported the defence will only have 15. It has been speculated that by the end of the week the defence may rest their case.

The first two defence witnesses were purely just to show the timeline of events and were seemingly irrelevant. No new information emerged.

The third and fourth witnesses, Detective Myers and Detective Martinez, were to show the inaccuracies in Alberto Alverez’s account. It is interesting as to why Alverez did not mention being asked about putting vials in a bag or the Propofol in the saline bag during his initial interview. It may be because beforehand he did not want to implicate himself or Murray but once a homicide investigation was announced he wanted to try and make sure he was not indicated. Or it could be that there is an ulterior motive. It should be remembered that this is not the first time in the trial that Alverez’s account differs to other witnesses. The paramedic’s account of 25^th June differs to Alverez’s.

I am quite surprised the defence called Dr Metzger as a witness. Metzger’s testimony worked in favour of the prosecution rather than the defence as he stated under no circumstance, and for no amount of money, would he ever have performed an anaesthetic on a patient as Murray did. It seemed the defence almost shot themselves in the foot by calling Metzger to testify.

Yet again the defence were a mess. It is interesting to follow some legal commentators of the case on Twitter as they seemed utterly shocked at just how the defence are presenting their case. As I have mentioned before I think the poor defence is highly damaging for Murray and if they do not start to act more professional the jury will soon lose faith in them. If this occurs Murray will not get a fair trial.

I had also previously mentioned how I felt it was odd that Dr White, a potential defence witness, and Dr Murray, the defendant, were allowed to speak in court. I consulted a barrister who is commentating on the Murray case as to why this is allowed to happen. I was informed that “Dr White is an expert witness. Experts are in a special category of witnesses. Indeed, experts are encouraged to talk to each other to agree things between them.”

The trial continues tomorrow.

Sophie Dewing

http://exploredreamdiscoverblog.blogspot.com/

People vs Conrad Murray - Day 15

We are now at the end of week 4 and on day 15 of the People vs. Conrad Murray trial, in relation to the death of Michael Jackson. Today the defence get to cross-examine Dr Steven Shafer, a Propofol expert, who is the 33^rd and final prosecution witness.


Dr Steven Shafer

Today it was the chance for Ed Chernoff to cross-examine Dr Shafer. Chernoff’s main questioning regarded the demonstration Dr Shafer conducted earlier in the week, on how he believes Conrad Murray administered Propofol to Michael Jackson. Dr Shafer’s theory was that Murray hooked up an IV drip to Michael’s leg which then continuously feed Propofol into Jackson’s body. As there was no regulatory equipment the dosage was not monitored and this contributed to Jackson dying of acute Propofol overdose. The type of IV bag Shafer believe Murray used was a vented IV bag, which allows air into the Propofol bottle, allowing the Propofol to drip out. Chernoff highlighted that no vented IV line was ever found at the scene. Shafer still stood by his theory as Murray had ordered vented IV’s in the past and the tubing is small enough to have been removed from the room.

Chernoff questioned Dr Shafer about his belief that the bottle of Propofol was put inside a cut saline bag. Shafer admitted that he had used Alberto Alverez’s account to draw this conclusion. The defence then stated that Alverez’s account may not be credible, as even though he stated he hid the Propofol bottle and cut saline bag his fingerprints were never found on these items.

Chernoff brought to Dr Shafer’s attention inaccuracies about his timeline of events. Shafer testified that he believed Murray gave ten 4mg doses of Lorazepam to Michael every ten minutes from midnight. Chernoff stated this theory cannot be plausible as Jackson did not arrive home until around 1AM on 25^th June 2009. Dr Shafer acknowledged this error.

Chernoff also quizzed Dr Shafer of the possibility that Jackson had killed himself. Shafer testified that it would have been possible for Michael to have awoken and released the clamp from the drip. Shafer then went on to say that even if this were the case it does not make Murray any less guilty, as he should not have left Jackson alone and used such a dangerous set up. Shafer said "if Michael Jackson had reached up, seeing the roller clamp, and opened [it] himself, this is a foreseeable consequence of setting up a dangerous way of giving drug [and] is in no way exculpatory for the fact that Dr Murray was not present and permitted this to happen."

Aggressive questioning

The tone in the courtroom became very tense when the defence’s questioning of Dr Shafer turned particularly aggressive. Dr Shafer’s testimony has been damning towards Murray and stated there were 17 egregious violations of standards of care and Murray actions contributed to the death of Michael Jackson. Chernoff asked Shafer if he knew the difference between opinion and fact. "Everything you said in the last two days was your opinion. You do understand that, right? Do you understand that?" Shafer then went on the defensive and replied, "I stated my name, which I think is a matter of fact."

Chernoff then repeated that would Shafer agree that everything else Shafer stated were his opinions. Shafer replied that they were his opinions as a physician and that "to say that one should not lie at UCLA Medical Center is my opinion." (This comment referenced the fact that Murray withheld information from both paramedics and emergency doctors at UCLA hospital when they were trying to save Jackson’s life.)

Chernoff also criticised Shafer for saying he was disappointed in Dr White, the anaesthesiologist the defence are set to call as a witness. Chernoff accused Dr Shafer of making “dismissive” comments about Dr White and stated Shafer “preferred to shove it down his professional throat.” Judge Pastor ruled this question out of order. The defence are keen to try and show there is a case of one-upmanship between Dr Shafer and Dr White, as Dr Shafer trained under Dr White.

Chernoff also tried to show that Dr Shafer was a bit of a wildcard as he admitted that in the lead up to this trial he himself drank Propofol to disprove Dr White’s report that an oral dose of Propofol can kill. Shafer stated he did this because he knew there were no adverse effects of drinking Propofol.

Contempt of court?

Aside from the main court case there could possibly be some further bad news for the defence. One of their key witnesses, Dr White the anaesthesiologist, could be charged with contempt of court.

During Dr Shafer’s testimony, when he was demonstrating how he believed Murray had administered Propofol to Jackson, Murray whispered to Dr White “can you believe that?” at which point Dr White replied “what a scumbag”. This was heard by reporters in the court room. Dr White has also been caught on camera in the courtroom rolling his eyes and reacting with facial expressions to what is being testified. Prosecution lawyer, David Walgren complained about this to Judge Pastor.

Judge Pastor had let medical experts into the courtroom so they could hear what was being said and how this might inform their testimonies. But this was under the agreement that they would not comment or react publically on what they had heard.

Dr White also spoke to an E! News reporter and told him his personal view of Dr Shafer had changed after hearing his testimony. E! News then wrote an article using quotes from Dr White where he said "I am going to take the high road not the low road with him…I was his teacher when he was a medical student. The truth will come out. It always does."

Judge Pastor was highly unimpressed with Dr White’s conduct stating "you have no business making those comments, Dr White." Judge Pastor went on to say "I don't want to harm Dr Murray or defence counsel in this case by excluding Dr White at this juncture if defence counsel still want him here, because I have to balance my concern about decorum with the defendant's right to a fair trial. But this may very well constitute a violation of the court's order." Judge Pastor then stated he was going to review Dr White’s conduct and see if he should be sanctioned in contempt of court. A hearing has been set for the 16^th November.

Summery

The trial today was certainly explosive but it did feel a bit uncomfortable to watch. Instead of viewing a court case it felt like a slanging match between Ed Chernoff and Dr Shafer. This certainly was not behaviour I feel is appropriate in a courtroom. 

I understand the defence need to use hard questioning to see if when put under pressure the witness’s story still measures up. But the level of aggression today seemed highly unnecessary. Instead of trying to disprove some of Shafer’s statements it seemed Chernoff went off on a personal attack. Chernoff seemed almost out of control at times.

Previously when questioned by the defence a few of the prosecution witness have answered in a defensive manner. I feel it is always better to try and have a measured response. But today I do feel that Shafer had somewhat of a reason to react to Chernoff’s chiding. Although childish sniping should never be present in a court.

For the beginning of the trial I always felt Chernoff came across as a poor choice of lawyer. He was often confused in his questioning and bumbled through his cross-examinations. But today I felt that Chernoff lost any reverence or authority that he may have had left. The defence were always going to have a tough time as there is a lot of evidence and testimonies that do not bode well for Murray. But it seems like the pressure has got to Chernoff. He knows it is almost certain Murray will get found guilty but instead of trying to find a reasonable alternative argument to present, the defence are breaking under the pressure and aren’t going to go down without a fight. This would be a good attitude to have if purveyed in a constructive way. Shouting at a witness is never going to help your argument.

I think Chernoff’s behaviour will not favour well with the jurors. Being that aggressive doesn't help highlight the weaknesses in the witness’s testimony; it simply makes the defence less likable and look incompetent. It is not professional to lose your cool when you are a lawyer. If I was a juror I would now believe Chernoff to be a bit of a wildcard and I would not necessarily trust his reliability. I think it comes across as Chernoff may be out of his depth.

It is wise to remember that Conrad Murray has nowhere near the amount of money that the Michael Jackson estate have, therefore he would not be able to hire the first class lawyers similar to what the prosecution have.

I think Murray’s defence team are highly damaging to his case. I feel a big problem with the defence is their behaviour means Murray will not get a fair trial. He will be judged by their actions and if they do not present themselves well it will impact on people’s view of Murray. Chernoff is making it easy for the prosecution because they do not even need to try to imply he is incompetent, he is prove that by himself. Flanagan is a far more competent lawyer, and although his questioning can be aggressive it is in line with what a lawyer should do. I am surprised that Chernoff has been the lead for the defence. I feel this could be a critical error.

As well as Chernoff’s behaviour another damaging aspect to the defence is the constant need of Judge Pastor to berate them for speaking publically about the case. Judge Pastor already had placed a gagging order on the defence team as they had spoken to the US media about the case. And now a key witness may be in contempt of court. This is a huge blow to the defence. It is clearly stated people cannot speak of the case outside the courtroom. I cannot understand why the defence would put themselves at risk of being discredited in such a difficult case.

I also cannot understand why Dr White was allowed to talk to Murray. Surely this is highly unethical? Again witnesses are told when on the stand that they may not speak to anyone else involved in the court case until after it has finished. By a witness being able to sit with the defence team and speak to the defendant seems highly inappropriate and completely against this court order.

I feel some of my views may just be a cultural difference as the rules of a court in the UK are far more stringent than in the US, so behaviour like this is completely unacceptable to me coming from a British perspective.  I believe that one of the problems with the courts being so open and allowing the case to be televised, especially in such a high profile case like this, is that a media circus is created. And when so many outside influences become involved a fair trial can never be achieved.

It will be interesting to see if the defence change their tact and how they conduct their questioning when they open their case next week.

The trial enters week 5 and resumes on Monday.

Sophie Dewing

http://exploredreamdiscoverblog.blogspot.com/

People vs. Conrad Murray - Day 14

Today was day 14 of the trial and the last prosecution witness, Dr Steven Shafer, continued his testimony.

Dr Steven Shafer

Dr Shafer, a Propofol expert, took to the stand yesterday to discuss the correct methods of how to administer Propofol and if Conrad Murray had adhered to these. Shafer’s account stated that Murray was not using Propofol in a safe, or an ethical, way. He also stated Murray was unprepared for a medical emergency. Shafer explicitly said Murray’s actions contributed to Michael Jackson’s death.

Self-administration

Dr Shafer continued today by completely debunking the prosecution's original claim that Jackson killed himself by drinking Propofol. Shafer stated this would not have been possible as the liver would have eliminated 99% of the Propofol before it got a chance to go into the bloodstream.

The defence’s new argument is that Jackson did still take a fatal dose of drugs that killed him, but this was not an oral dose of Propofol. Murray had admitted to police that he had previously used a drip to administer Propofol to Jackson but in the days leading up to Michael’s death he was trying to wean Michael off the drug, as he believed Jackson had developed a dependency. Murray told police on the 25^th June 2009 he put Jackson to sleep at around 10.40AM with a single injection of Propofol. The defence are now arguing that sometime later Michael awoke and injected himself with Propofol.

Shafer stated that this theory makes no sense. Shafer testified "people just don't wake up hell bent to grab the next dose in a syringe, draw it up and shove it in their IV again…it's just a crazy scenario." Dr Shafer went on to say that Jackson would not have had enough time to perform this without the doctor noticing. Even if he did, (bear in mind that Murray was out of the room for 46 minutes in the hour leading up to Jackson’s death), Michael would have had to of self-injected 6 shots of Propofol of more than 100ml to reach the level of Propofol that was found in his blood after he died.

Dr Shafer also dismissed the argument that the 8 Lorazepam tablets they claim Jackson swallowed were not enough to kill him. Shafer referred to the toxicology report that showed that the amount of Lorazepam in Michael’s stomach was trivial, the equivalent of only "1/43rd of a tablet.”

Anaesthetic research

Last week the defence stated they would no long contend that Jackson had drunk Propofol. The defence will call their own anesthesiologist to the stand in the coming weeks to testify. His name is Dr Paul White and the prosecution asked Dr Shafer about Dr White’s findings.

In March Dr White prepared a report that stated oral ingestion of Propofol could have killed Michael Jackson. Dr Shafer stated this was incorrect as it does not take into account the “first pass effect”. This effect discusses how the liver would filter the Propofol out of the digestive tract. Therefore only a very small percentage of Propofol would then reach the bloodstream. He stated that this is taught to first year medical students.

Dr Shafer cited tests that had been conducted on animals to see what the effect is when Propofol is taken orally. The results showed there were no negative effects, in fact there were no effects at all, not even sedation. A human study was also conducted, not only in preparation for this trial, but also as tighter restrictions may be placed on Propofol by the Drug Enforcement Agency. Shafer said this would be damaging as “anesthesiologists have to have ready access." Yesterday Shafer had testified that Murray had tarnished the public’s opinion of Propofol and it seems this case may have a wider knock-on effect on the use of Propofol.

Dr Shafer’s theory

Dr Shafer presented his theory as to what happened. Shafer stated that Murray would have started Jackson on a 100ml drip of Propofol at around 9AM. This then caused Jackson to die around noon. Dr Shafer testified that as Michael struggled to breath Propofol was still flowing into his body.

Dr Shafer believes that as Murray did not use an automated pump to regulate the dosage of the Propofol that was being administered, the IV could have infused the drug at a dangerous rate. Shafer stated "this is the only scenario that I could generate… this fits all of the data in this case and I am not aware of a single piece of data that is inconsistent with this explanation.” Shafer believe this is the only way such high levels of Propofol could have been in Jackson’s blood stream.

A number of possible theories had been tested out on a computer generated projection but this is the only one that fits.

Shafer then showed a demonstration of the IV set up that Murray used on Jackson. A 100ml Propofol vial was infused via a drip that attached to an IV stand. Tubing then attached the IV to Michael via the catheter that was in his leg. Without a regulatory pump the Propofol could have dripped rapidly into Jackson’s body.

Drug dose abnormalities

Dr Shafer also testified that he believed Murray gave Jackson larger dosages of the drugs he administered than he has admitted. As previous mentioned Shafer believes that only viable scenario was that Murray administered 100ml of Propofol, instead if the 25ml he told police.

Murray had also told the police he had given Jackson a total of 4mg of Lorazepam in two separate doses. The toxicology report indicated that there was 40mg of Lorazepam in Michael’s body, ten times the amount Murray had said.

Shafer testified that it was also unusual for Murray to quickly decide to give Michael the antidote drug Flumazenil to reverse the effects of Lorazepam if it was such a small dose. Shafer stated “it doesn’t fit.” Dr Shafer believes the only reason Murray would go straight for Flumazenil is that he knew he had given Jackson a large amount of Lorazepam.

Shafer said that Murray’s actions show that he had no real knowledge of the drugs and how they were to be used. Shafer told the court that when other drugs as used in conjunction with Propofol (for example Midazolam which is commonly used with Propofol) they are used in a way where it is safe and in a safe environment. If one drug is not working you do not keep giving more and more sedatives. Creating a cocktail of drugs is very dangerous. Shafer stated “in this setting there are so many variables that make it impossible to predict the response to a dose of Propofol that there is no safe dose.”

 

Summery

It seems the prosecution saved their strongest witness until last. Dr Shafer slayed Conrad Murray.

Dr Shafer was very good on the stand. He was informative, clear, concise but also very critical of Murray. It will be interested to see how Dr White, the anaesthesiologist that the defence will call to testify, will respond to some of Shafer’s arguments.

I found Dr Shafer’s testimony interesting as it touched upon many of the aspects of the case that I personally find important. Shafer touched upon how by agreeing to give Michael Propofol that it compromised medical integrity and reduced Murray to being a member of Jackson’s staff and not a doctor.

Shafer also touched up Jackson’s drug dependency and Murray’s inaction to resolve this. Instead Murray continued with treatments that he was under qualified and ill equipped to do. When discussing this subject Shafer stated “could the patient have tolerance to Propofol? It’s not well documented cause nobody does this.” This shows that Jackson may have become dependent on Propofol through years of use and administration by many different doctors but it is a unique case as it is the first of its kind to discuss Propofol bring used in such an unethical way.

Something that shocks me time and time again during this trial is the assertion by medical experts that if Murray had reacted different Michael Jackson would be alive today. Before the trial I had always believed that no matter what the Propofol overdose would have killed Jackson in any circumstance. I never realised there was a chance he may  have lived. Dr Shafer was yet another witness who confirmed this. Dr Shafer testified "had Conrad Murray been with Michael Jackson during this period of time, he would have seen the slowed breathing and the compromise in the flow of air into Michael Jackson's lungs, and he could have easily turned off the Propofol infusion." As Shafer testified yesterday if Murray had been present when Jackson stopped breathing Murray could have simply lifted Michael’s chin to open his airways. This could have been all it took to save Michael’s life.

I think one of the most important parts of Shafer’s testimony was when he discussed how from the day Murray first started working with Jackson until after Jackson had died Murray was looking out for his best interests and not Michael’s. “When Dr Murray agreed to treat insomnia with Propofol he put Dr Murray first, not Michael Jackson. When he showed up every night with bottles of Propofol and bags of saline he was not putting Michael Jackson first. He was putting Dr Murray first. In the emergency room at UCLA medical centre when he misrepresented the type of arrest that it had been and withheld information about the drugs that had been given he was not putting the patient first he was putting Conrad Murray first.”

The trial continues tomorrow where it is expected the prosecution will close their case. The defence will then call their witnesses to the stand. It will be very interesting to see how the trial develops and what key factors are brought up or are changed through the defence’s testimonies.

Sophie Dewing

http://exploredreamdiscoverblog.blogspot.com/