Michael Jackson's dad Joseph says accused doctor Conrad is 'a scapegoat' for Jackson's 'close circle' by Piers Eady, Sunday Mirror 20/03/2011
Michael Jackson’s dad yesterday claimed he has proof members of his son’s “close circle” were involved in the star’s death.
Joseph Jackson, 82, also believes that Dr Conrad Murray, who denies illegally giving Jackson a fatal dose of propofol, is “an underling, a scapegoat”.
He added: “That’s why I want a federal investigation to get the others. I have evidence. I can’t say names, but it’s his close circle.”
Mr Jackson said his son felt his life was in danger.
He claimed the signature on Jackson's will – which he was written out of – was a fake and denied accusations that he beat his children.
He alleged: “I was strict, but I never hit them. If they ever took a slap, it was from my wife... not me.”
Read more: http://www.mirror.co.uk/celebs/news/2011/03/20/michael-jackson-s-dad-joseph-says-accused-doctor-conrad-is-a-scapegoat-for-jacko-s-close-circle-115875-23001252/#ixzz1H67bLaW3
Last Edited by on Mar 19, 2011 6:12 PM
Isn't it possible that Murray was wearing gloves when handling the syringe for sanitary purposes? I have no idea if that's necessary, but if so, there would be no CM prints of course.
As for Joe Jackson, he's seems to tell the truth about many things, however selective amnesia consistantly takes over on the topic of the child beatings.
I tend to think Conrad Murray is more than just "a scapegoat." I think he was part of the murdering "dream team."
The Los Angeles medical examiner testified that in his professional opinion Murray is guilty of Murder. Murray had the very drugs Michael was addicted to in the room with easy access to the drugs for Michael, then left the room. Murray also lied and hides the truth from police, investigators, the media, the doctors in the hospital, and most importantly, the paramedics that first showed up at the scene that could have possibly saved Michael Jackson if they had the correct information. Murray lied over, and over and over again. Murray concealed evidence concerning the place he was obtaining the Proposal and the fact that he was sending it to his girlfriend’s house. WHAT KIND OF SCAPEGOAT GETS ONE OF THE BODY GUARDS TO PICK UP SELECTED SYRINGES AND OTHER MEDICINES AND DISPOSE/CONCEAL THEM?
Kenny Ortega testified that MJ was fine before Murray began drugging him. Ortega testified that Dr. Murray said "terrible things," at a meeting he and others had with Michael, showing a lack of concern and respect for MJ.
Whose fingerprints where on those syringes and medicine bottles that Murray told the body guard to hide? Where is that evidence? Murray knew everything he was doing was very unethical and potentially lethal from the start. Otherwise he would not have fled the hospital when he should have been there. Involuntary manslaughter is the LEST he should get. I feel the media is starting to get way to lenient on Murray. He had a BIG part in Michael’s death. Let’s face it. If Murray wasn’t his doctor would Michael still be alive? I think so. Murray could have taken Michaels hand when he was unconscious or dead and put the fingerprints on a syringe or anything else himself. Murray had to be wearing gloves.
If Murray could do all that, he is not only much more than a scapegoat, he is a murder.
There are many other arguments I could sight, but you get the idea. :o)
March 22. 9 a.m. CIVIC CENTER - A pretrial hearing is scheduled in the case of Dr. Conrad Murray, who is charged with involuntary manslaughter in pop singer Michael Jackson's June 2009 death.
Location: Dept. 107, Criminal Courts Building, 210 W. Temple St., Civic Center
Please do keep in mind that there is much manipulation going on around this case. The estate, the media and the fan base are major tools in this.
Personally I believe Murray's primary motive here is money. It has been sporadically reported that he has financial difficulties. Also from my point of view Murray has some major character flaws, especially when it comes to women. And so far, at least in public, he expressed no remorse over the fact that Michael died on his watch. This too speaks to his character. Makes you wonder if he ever did take that Hippocratic Oath and whether he remembers what it stands for. And so he is a perfect choice to be a pawn in this.
Now depending on what he has been promised, he may feel that he will get out of this easy, or could be feeling that he is too far in and that he can not back out.
His demeanor and the actions of his counsel so far tell me the former and not the latter.
I just do not know how Murray can face himself in the mirror.
To add to what Bonnie already posted above this article seems to have quoted Joe verbatim:
"I want to get the other people that's involved, not just Dr Murray. That's why I'm trying to get a federal investigation, so they can grab them all," Jackson said.
He characterised Murray as "just the fall guy", but declined to say who else he thought might be to blame for the death of his superstar son.
"I'm not calling names, but they know who they are," said the patriarch of the family of Jackson singers who helped define the Motown sound.
"Michael knew that something was going to happen to him before it happened," said Jackson."
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/news/Michael-Jackson39s-father-calls-for.6737087.jp
Last Edited by on Mar 22, 2011 10:50 AM
I am not surprised by this in the least bit. Don't think anyone is. Klein was very prominently present on the scene during the last months and days of Michael's life. Lets see how he is going to squirm his way out of this one.
Personally I do not like him mostly based on his WORDS! ( he's really put his foot in his mouth there) after Michael has passed. His actions have been questionable as well. Lets see how much more is revealed in court.
Last Edited by on Mar 23, 2011 9:00 AM
Note: You may recall the judge was very clear about the jury questions not being leaked to the media. It took less than 24 hours for TMZ to post some of them. ______________________________
Dr. Murray Targeting Jurors Who Take Responsibility 3/23/2011 3:05 PM PDT by TMZ Staff
With jury selection beginning tomorrow in the manslaughter case involving Michael Jackson's death .... TMZ has learned ... Dr. Conrad Murray is targeting 12 men and/or women who take responsibility for their actions ... this according to sources who have seen the jury questionnaire.
One of the more revealing questions: "Do you believe patients have the responsibility to tell their doctors about their complete past and current social habits, including use of drugs, alcohol and prescription medications?"
A central part of Dr. Murray's defense is that Michael Jackson was a hard-core Propofol addict who hid his drug dependence from the doc ... thus Murray wasn't operating with full knowledge.
Other questions laser in on what people think of the case, with a heavy emphasis on social media.
-- Do you have a blog? If so, describe.
-- Are you active on social networks. If so, which?
The answers will lead Murray's lawyers to spontaneous comments of prospective jurors that could be more revealing than answers they give in court.
And the questionnaire asks: "Do you financially support others outside your immediate family?"
Dr. Murray has had money troubles that could make him sympathetic to certain jurors.
Other questions include: "At what age should a person be held accountable for their decisions, actions and consequences."
The defense is looking for people who believe in personal responsibility, such as small business owners.
I would like to know who is leaking information and steering TMZ into reporting this?
"...Dr. Murray's defense is that Michael Jackson was a hard-core Propofol addict..." And who is telling him this? By all accounts he did not know Michael for very long to make this kind of statement.
On the other hand Arnie Klein has certainly fueled that debate with his statements to Larry King and TMZ. Now where does he get off calling himself Michael's "friend"? If this is a friend who needs enemies?
Last Edited by on Mar 24, 2011 9:54 AM
Michael Jackson case: Judge seals jury questionnaire after blasting ‘bogus’ information
March 24, 2011 | 9:38 am
The judge presiding over the trial of Michael Jackson's personal physician blasted a website Thursday for posting what he described as "bogus" information about a questionnaire prospective jurors are filling out.
In an apparent reference to a TMZ.com article that purported to detail questions proposed by Dr. Conrad Murray's defense, Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor said, "Not one of the questions from that questionnaire posted online is part of this court's questionnaire."
The judge has ordered the questionnaire sealed until after the entire jury pool completes it, and said he was worried that the TMZ story and a "tongue-in-cheek" questionnaire posted on a second website might affect the answers prospective panelists provide.
About 160 potential jurors were sworn in Thursday morning, marking the official start of Murray's trial. The cardiologist is accused of involuntary manslaughter for allegedly giving the pop star a fatal dose of the surgical anesthetic propofol. Murray's defense contends that Jackson administered the drug himself.
Testimony in the case is scheduled to get underway next month.
-- Harriet Ryan at Los Angeles County Superior Court
Irina and Bonnie, you're both 'reading my mind,' if you'll pardon the pun. I couldn't agree with both of you any more than I already do. With 'friends' like Klein (who had the nerve to issue a statement today about Elizabeth and Michael dancing together in Heaven and what dear friends they were to him), who needs enemies?
And I also find it fascinating that Murray has a publicist. Since when do doctors require publicists? And how on earth can he afford one when he can't afford his child support payments and has requested a speedy trial due to financial difficulties???
And I LOVE the fact that yet again TMZ is ridiculed and blasted by Judge Pastor. There was mockery of TMZ last summer when I sat inside the court room, and this just proves that TMZ does NOT check their facts or do any REAL research or function as LEGITIMATE journalism. If they don't watch their step, they're going to cross a line and ruin everything for the rest of the MSM that may wish to cover this trial in some way or another. Even though the trial will be televised, I tend to think the MSM will still be present and will still want any and all access privileges, which will come with definite stipulations and rules.
~Carmen~
Edited to Add: I do acknowledge that TMZ does get SOME facts straight and does provide SOME documentation, but I reserve the right to question the documentation they provide and to question any and every story they release. They mix truth with lies, bits of accuracy with half-truths, and wrap it all up with a bow called 'Sensationalism.'
Last Edited by on Mar 24, 2011 8:21 PM
Michael Jackson's Doctor Due in Court for Pretrial Hearing Prospective jurors are being asked to fill out an extended questionnaire about the case. Watch Eric Spillman's Report KTLA News 11:53 a.m. EDT, March 28, 2011
LOS ANGELES (KTLA) -- Michael Jackson's physician, Dr. Conrad Murray, will be back in court Monday for a pretrial hearing. He is charged with involuntary manslaughter in connection with Jackson's death.
A new pool of potential jurors will be summoned to court on April 7.
Last week, 147 potential jurors -- less than half of an initial jury pool of 340 -- said they had time to be on a two-month trial.
Of those who were willing to serve, the judge said many would probably have to be sent home because of their views on the case.
All potential jurors are being asked to complete an extended questionnaire about their knowledge in the case.
Only three of the people screened so far indicated they didn't know anything about the case.
In-person jury selection is scheduled to begin on May 4.
Meantime, Murray fired his publicist last Thursday, after she acknowledged she released a copy of the questionnaire given to jurors in his case.
Judge Michael Pastor had ordered that the questions included in the 27-page questionnaire be kept confidential, and was notified of the posting in his chambers by defense attorneys.
Murray's media team reportedly released six suggested questions, none of which ended up in the final questionnaire.
After Thursday's hearing, Murray's attorney Ed Chernoff confirmed that Houston-based publicist Miranda Sevcik was responsible for the leak.
According to the L.A. Times, Sevcik was hired by Murray's team two days after Jackson's death.
Pastor has been taking measures to shield potential jurors from outside influences, even catering lunch for the groups last week.
He also blasted questions posted by a website that were supposedly from the questionnaire as "bogus" -- an apparent reference to a TMZ.com article.
Murray is accused of involuntary manslaughter in the June 2009 death of Jackson.
Opening statements in the trial are expected to begin May 9, and the judge has ruled that cameras will be allowed in the courtroom.
Prosecutors contended the Houston-based cardiologist was on the phone and distracted after administering a powerful anesthetic to Jackson.
They also believe the singer was dead by the time Murray summoned help.
Murray is accused of giving Jackson a lethal dose of propofol mixed with other sedatives.
He has pleaded not guilty.
At a preliminary hearing in January, a security guard testified he was told to place vials of medicine in bags before calling 911.
Alberto Alvarez was the first security guard to reach the bedroom where Jackson lapsed into unconsciousness.
Alvarez said he was frozen at the sight of Jackson on the bed with his eyes and mouth wide open.
He testified that Murray was using one hand to pump on the singer's chest as he lay on the bed. Prosecutors say CPR should be done on a hard surface, not a bed.
Alvarez says Murray ordered him to place pill bottles, an IV and vials into a brown bag before he was told to call 911.
"He just grabbed a handful of bottles, or vials, and he instructed me to put them in a bag," Alvarez said.
While waiting for paramedics to arrive, Alvarez says, Murray asked if anyone knew CPR and admitted that he had never performed the life-saving procedure before.
A paramedic sent to Jackson's rented mansion testified that he saw Murray scoop up three bottles of lidocaine from the floor and place the vials in a bag during efforts to revive the pop star.
Martin Blount testified that he was surprised to see the bottles since the doctor told paramedics he hadn't given Jackson any drugs.
Blount says Murray at one point also wanted to use a hypodermic needle on the King of Pop, which he and fellow paramedics refused.
Dr. Richelle Cooper said Jackson was dead long before he was wheeled into the emergency room at Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center.
Cooper testified she authorized paramedics to pronounce Jackson dead at 12:57 p.m., but they declined at Murray's request and because of the singer's celebrity.
After an ambulance ride trailed by paparazzi and more than an hour of efforts in the ER, Cooper officially pronounced Jackson dead at 2:26 p.m. on June 25, 2009.
The defense did not call any witnesses at the hearing.
Yes, same here. And additional thank you!!! for all of the updates Bonnie.
This just stinks! Yes, why would Murray need a publicist? Maybe because this is all one grandiose and rotten to the core theatrical production....? And Murray is the "star"? He needs to build an image of innocence and concern, doesn't he?
I still need to read the last update. Does it say anywhere that the judge penalized the defense team for leaking the jury questions? If he has not he is being too lenient...already.
Last Edited by on Mar 28, 2011 1:06 PM
Thank you for posting all the recent updates, Bonnie - not just in this thread but in the Japanese tsunami/earthquake thread as well. I still haven't read the most recent updates in that thread yet.
The one mistake that stands out quite noticeably in the CNN article is the statement that Thome-Thome was Michael's business manager at the time of his death. Frank Delio was Michael's manager at the time of his death, having been hired by AEG (or AEG LIVE!, if attorneys wish to quibble over such distinctions), after which John Branca was brought back into Michael's life. Delio was Michael's manager and should be cited as such and subpoenaed as such. Both Thome-Thome and Delio should be subpoenaed in my opinion.
Arnold Klein should also be questioned, as there are fan eye witness accounts in which it was observed that Michael's behavior or mental state changed or was affected after his visits to Klein's office. Those fans are not being questioned or interviewed or subpoenaed (at this time, and they may never be), but Klein played a role in the mental and/or physical weakening of Michael Jackson prior to his death, in my personal opinion. I'm not excusing Murray, but there are most definitely other players in this production.
My feeling is the same. I feel that Klein contributed to hindering normal functioning of Michael's emotional and mental state by medicating him. It is just a thought but perhaps if he was not in the picture Michael would have been able to react to certain events in his environment differently.
I actually feel that the defense could on a certain level benefit from bringing the fans in. I am not so sure about this. It may be a double edged sword in that they may corroborate the defense's claims against others, Klein included, but at the same time may reveal other facts which may or may not be favorable toward Murray.
I actually hope the Prosecutor brings the fans in. I feel it is their call, if they want to get a better sense of the goings on around Michael. Question is - will the truth be exposed in this exercise at all?
As for DiLeo - where is he in all of this? That whole "group" is laying lower than worms.
Klein hindered Michael's PHYSICAL STATE as well, with whatever he was giving him during those fan-observed 'office visits.'
Many of Michael's loving, loyal, passionate and well meaning fans and supporters will NOT want certain forms of testimony that would be given by certain other fans who witnessed with their own eyes and ears certain goings on in the months, weeks and days prior to Michael's death. If any evidence or eye witness accounts do not pin the blame on Murray neatly, concisely and precisely, many fans will not want such evidence or testimony admitted into court. Such fans have decided that it's all Murray's fault, and maybe AEG's fault, but they don't want any other pieces of information that might clutter up or interfere with the clean, crisp and clear cut picture they personally 'see.'
The truth, as I must continue to repeat, will not necessarily be ONLY what Murray's critics want to see and hear, and it will not be ONLY what Michael Jackson's critics want to see and hear. It's going to involve and encompass many things and many people, in my opinion, should it ever actually come to light.
Not everyone really wants the truth. Some people want their own comfortable (and convenient) version of it.
As I noted in a separate thread and topic, Frank Dileo has been hospitalized and is suffering from complications due to his heart bypass surgery. I do find the timing of this very odd, as well as the referencing of Thome-Thome as Michael's business manager at the time of his death, June 2009, when it was Frank Dileo who was Michael's manager at that time. Thome-Thome publicly called himself Michael's manager at the time of his death and stood by Jermaine Jackson to issue public statements at the hospital, if I recall correctly, but Frank Dileo claimed that he himself was representing Michael Jackson.
Once again, we have an extremely odd situation with extremely odd timing. Maybe it's coincidence, but this is a mighty odd set of circumstances.
Hi Carmen, I agree the plant of this story is interesting. For now, I am unable to verify it, so in my mind it stands as a tabloid rumor until such times as another source comes forward that is considered reliable. Even TMZ is not reporting this. Hmmmm
Yes, I agree with your additional point about Klein. He is in my opinion, although most likely indirectly, a strong contributing factor to what transpired.
Perhaps all the "blabbering" he has done has been a form of feeling some sort of guilt somewhere deep down on a soul level and this has been his way of dealing with it and obviously trying to extricate himself from the situation.
As far as the fans go and which version of the truth some maybe interested in, is more I think a matter of not being in the loop of all, and for some not being able to comprehend the depths, of what is truly behind all this.
So yes, it is that comfort level you speak of which relates to the latter example.
Warmly, Irina
Last Edited by on Mar 31, 2011 9:10 AM
Wanted to make sure people saw these videos. Bonnie I hope I am not posting them twice but I didn't see them. Thank goodness for Aphrodite Jones and her willingness to search for the truth and for Patrick Treacy to come forward and speak openly about his experiences with Michael.
Hi Irina. Klein's conduct has been so highly unprofessional and inexcusable that I cannot find any means of rationalizing, justifying or explaining his behavior - except to acknowledge that he may have been panicking and/or have been paid off to spout what he's been spouting. Too bad his possible feelings of guilt have not inspired or encouraged him to conduct himself with class, dignity and medical professionalism - i.e. Dr. Patrick Treacy.
Many fans are in a state of denial about some things, in my personal opinion, and I'm going to leave it at that. The only other thing for me to say here is in regards to conflicting stories and theories: Each person sees the world, a situation or an individual with his or her own eyes and personal bias or personal perspective. We each bring to our encounters of life's situations and people our own individual backgrounds and personal experiences.
As an example, I know of two particular tailors who have worked with and personally met and saw Michael Jackson. One of them worked with Michael or, shall we say more specifically, worked on Michael Jackson's costumes and clothes since the late 1980s or early 1990s. He told me Michael's chest and waist measurements, and that Michael was always very slim. He did not find Michael too thin or painfully thin when he last saw him for a fitting for "This Is It." That observation contrasts quite starkly with the head tailor's observations and opinion, in which Michael was considered painfully thin. So you see, we have here a very interesting case of two men, both of whom are highly experienced tailors and who have worked with and known Michael Jackson professionally speaking in terms of tailoring, for many years. Each tailor has his own opinion and perspective.
Dr. Patrick Treacy says Michael was not addicted to any medications or pain killers, and he speaks of the time he knew Michael. Dr. Deepak Chopra contradicts this and tells a very different story about his own interaction with Michael. Is one of these men lying? Maybe. Or, it could be each doctor is telling the truth in terms of his own personal experience and relationship with Michael. Two doctors are in disagreement just as two extremely talented, skilled and experienced tailors are in disagreement.
IT IS THIS TYPE OF CONFLICTING INFORMATION THAT PRESENTS A REAL CHALLENGE IN TERMS OF FINDING OUT THE TRUTH. I'm not surprised, however, that we are getting conflicting information by the media and various sources. Confusion serves a very valuable purpose for some.
Regarding the anomalies (plural), they look like a floating dandelion or exotic flying creature - too large to be a speck of dust. In the first video posted by Bonnie and posted again by Jane/Roxy, we can see it at the 1:43 mark. In the second video (the first one posted by Jane/Roxy), another one floats by camera right, meaning away from Aphrodite to her left, at the 2:05 mark. It happens very, very quickly as we cut from Treacy to Jones.
Michael Jackson's friend and dermatologist Dr. Arnold Klein was forced to turn over medical records today from the final months of Michael's life ... TMZ has learned.
Dr. Klein and his attorney handed over the documents during a pretrial hearing in Dr. Conrad Murray's manslaughter case.
Murray's team wants the paperwork to determine exactly what drugs Klein used to treat MJ. As TMZ reported ... Klein's medical records show he injected Michael with Demerol 51 times in the three months before he died.
Last month, Dr. Klein asked the judge to quash the subpoena for his records. Fail.
Thank you for the updates, Bonnie. I'm glad to see Judge Pastor defining some limits and putting his foot down periodically.
Regarding Klein, my hope is that he is forced to give testimony and to explain his actions as a medical professional. I hope he is forced to publicly explain and justify EVERYTHING he put into Michael's system, as well as how he obtained those medications.
It seems like the May 9th date is holding firm, in which case I will try to get that day off from work so I can cover this.
After spending about an hour and half searching online using Google and going back to their archives from 2005-2008, I can only say that even with the Internet reports here and there in which Michael's alleged whereabouts at the time may have been mentioned, he was very difficult to pin down. I tend to think he wanted it that way after I found an article in which Ramone Bain, a former publicist of his, outright states that Michael Jackson's actual location is no ones business.
When Muzicfactory2 makes his/her videos, he/she really would help in the credibility department if he/she would cite the sources of information used. I don't know where or how he/she is getting his/her information, but I do know if Murray has documentation of what he was prescribing to Michael Jackson, the court will examine the document(s) for validity and verification. If Murray met Michael at a certain time and place, witnesses will most likely be called forward to verify this information if it proves crucial for the defense and/or the prosecution.
Michael, from what I have just gathered after researching online, left the United States for Bahrain some time after June 2005 and was definitely there by August 2005. It would take access to airline records or access to his former body guards and attorneys to get more precise than that, in my opinion. According to a Fox News article from September 28, 2006, Michael was "officially out of Bahrain and has been since May"and was "sequestered in Ireland." According to a Fox News article from July 2007, Michael was stationed in Northern Virginia at that time and was staying with Ramone Bain. I'll try to find those links and upload them here.
All that's left to do, is to pin a halo on Murray. Sounds like the defense team is not far from that.
Why don't they just ask the judge to set Dr. Murray free. Seems as if all the pertinent evidence will taint their delicate client. So why have a trial altogether?
Lets see what this judge is made of. So far the indicators are weak. At least to my mind. I feel he should have fined them for leaking the edited out jury questions.
Things just get more and more surreal as this case unfolds. (sigh)
But now we know more than before about Murray. All this has the faint odor of an admission of guilt.
Last Edited by on Apr 08, 2011 12:19 PM
I respect your feelings, Irina, but it's very important for us to remember that from a trial and juror perspective, Murray's sex life, marital life and financial affairs have nothing to do with his personal and professional responsibility for Michael Jackson as his patient.
As we can see, Judge Pastor has blocked the defense from going into great depth and detail regarding Michael Jackson's financial affairs, which the defense wants to use to prove Michael was financially desperate and accidentally took his own life. Judge Pastor is not allowing them to turn this trial into the 'financial life and times of Michael Jackson,' so to speak, and he also may not allow the prosecution to turn this trial into the 'sexual exploits and child support payment history of Conrad Murray.' Judge Pastor MUST stay FOCUSED ON THE KEY ISSUES OF THIS CASE AND WHAT REALLY IS PERTINENT FOR THE JURY TO SEE AND HEAR.
What matters most, in my personal opinion, is: 1) Did Conrad Murray provide substandard care for his patient, Michael Jackson? 2) Did Conrad Murray properly and professionally tend to his patient, and by that I mean did he follow normal and standard procedure in caring for this patient? If not, what are his reasons? 3) Did Conrad Murray attempt to conceal evidence from fellow medical professionals and law enforcement regarding the care of his patient? If so, why?
Michael Jackson's and Conrad Murray's financial affairs have no relevance in terms of Michael's death, in my opinion - not in terms of this particular trial. Both men had money troubles and their own motivations for getting into the professional and business circumstances they each got into. In Michael's case, I suspect he was pressured and duped or deceived into doing 50 concerts. In Murray's case, I suspect he was a patsy and the 'fall guy,' who also may have Freemason connections (which may have been instrumental or necessary for Michael's termination to be carried out).
The real questions here are about physician and patient responsibility, not about physician and patient financial stats, strip clubs, out-of-wedlock children, etc. That's what we have to keep in mind from a rational and unemotional point of view. If you were the judge or a juror, you would have to set aside your feelings and focus on the pertinent and relevant facts.
I do understand where you're coming from, Irina, and I know how you feel.
Thank you again, dearest Bonnie, for the updates.
Big hug, Carmen
Last Edited by on Apr 08, 2011 3:08 PM
This is my own opinion but if a person is a train reck with there personal life like Murray's that goes to tell you that his head isn't on straight because look what he did that day to Michael, That proves that Murray is a train wreck and doesn't have any morals, and I think they should look at his personal life.I know they will drag all of Michaels personal stuff up so they should defintantly bring Murray's up to.But This is supposed to be about what Murray did not what Michaels finances were like.
Sorry if I sound a little scrammbled in writing I am haveing a hard time getting out what I am meaning, I am just so upset.
Kristi, Thanks for your post. I strongly agree with you that patterns of behavior of both parties 'must' be taken into account; a no brainer in my opinion. We aren't hearing much about all that the prosecution has gathered, so it 'appears' to be one sided. I'm just hopeing they're doing their homework in depth, & have called all relevant witnesses to testify regarding CM's irresponsible behaviors.
I highlighted in the article above what I thought was the most important thing and that was the attempt to suppress hard evidence which is the autopsy photos.
If it is true that Conrad Murray was elsewhere when he should have been on duty at Michael's house his whereabouts are part of the case and should not be suppressed.
The defense is trying to throw out whatever they can to make this case go away. It is maddening and disturbing but somehow it seems the justice system is more about suppressing the truth than presenting it. Very sad!!
1) "This is a cocktail. . .a toxic cocktail" 2:22 mark 2) ". . .this idea of secrecy, that Dr. Murray didn't use his DEA number, drug enforcement agency number that doctors are supposed to use when they order meds. . ." 4:07 mark 3) "Under the law, we call that 'consciousness of guilt.' That's going to be a very bad factor for Dr. Murray." 4:36 mark
Michael has done nothing compared to what Murray has done, Murray killed someone even if he didn't mean to do it.Michael has done nothing that comes even close to that,and to tell the truth I really don't remember Michael being reckless.And any idiot knows that you don't use propafol in someones bed room. Murray just cared about the money and wasn't thinking clear or he wouldn't have given that medication to Michael in his home. Murray's girlfriend also said that Murray talked alot about the money he was making.Michael said follow the money. Money is very evil it cause people to do horrible things.Anyway this is my opinion and this is how I feel.
Hi Bonnie, I agree with your comment above. Yes that is precisely it. The defense is trying to make the case go away. It is very upsetting to see the extent of the manipulation and overwhelmingly blatant attempts to trivialize all pertinent evidence related to what transpired when Michael passed. All possible efforts have been made to make it appear like an open-and-shut case. I think most everyone here will agree that it is extremely painful and frustrating to observe all of this knowing that the truth is something very much different than what is being presented to the world.
Last Edited by on Apr 10, 2011 10:56 PM
Nice to know attorneys read message boards. ;) My post from April 9th at 2:18 PM seems to have meant something to someone somewhere: "Murray's sex life does not pertain to this case, unless we bring up his physical absence in regards to his care of Michael. Now, if THAT is the position that attorney's are going to take, then I can understand bringing up Murray's personal life and affairs with women. If the prosecution is making the case that Murray's sex life was interfering with his professional duties and responsibilities to his patient, Michael Jackson, then THAT makes sense and I can buy that."
Okay, so the prosecution has decided to go in that direction. Now we get to wait and see if Judge Pastor allows it.
My personal experience as a juror has taught me some rather strange things. The best way to succinctly explain it is to say that both the defense and the prosecution must try to find jurors who are neutral, unbiased, and not too well informed of the specifics of a case or some of the key elements that may go into a case. If a juror is too well educated or well informed in a certain area that pertains to the case, he or she will most likely be eliminated due to being considered prejudiced or likely to influence other jurors unfairly. No one juror, from my experience, is to be so well informed, so experienced or so knowledgeable about a case or its specific elements that he or she might influence the thinking of other jurors.
The questions presented will have been chosen and agreed upon by BOTH sets of attorneys, with neutrality and the ability to think freely and without bias or prejudice as being near the top of the list of key qualifications for someone to be selected. It was the same for Michael's trial in 2005. Think about it for a few minutes. It's not that stupid or ignorant people are wanted for jury duty. I have sat among fellow jurors. We are not and were not stupid people. We came from all walks of life and all nationalities. Oddly enough, and it has taken me years to understand this, the less informed and knowledgeable I am about something pertaining to a trial, the better my chances are of being chosen as a juror. I can bring no bias or prejudice in the court room with me - bias and prejudice that comes from knowledge, experience, understanding a certain industry or how a certain profession works, etc.
Both sides have to be happy with the final selection of jurors. Nothing can begin until that process has been completed and both sides have reached an agreement regarding the jury.
This most likely isn't going to help much, Irina, but it's my personal experience, so I thought I'd share it. For years, I would enter jury pools for criminal cases, but eventually someone somewhere got smart and figured out that I have been a victim of crime, and therefore will most likely not be selected by either set of attorneys for criminal cases. So, now I get interviewed for civil cases. I actually was chosen as a juror in June or July 2008. It was a civil case. I'll never forget my shock at actually having been chosen. I felt ignorant and totally uninformed about the issues of the case, with the exception of verbal agreements and verbal contracts. Despite my personal experience in that area, I was selected. I had no strong feelings or opinions on things one way or another as they pertained to that case. I couldn't understand why they would want me. After all, I knew little or nothing about the key issues and elements of the case. Those jurors who DID know things that might have been meaningful or helpful (or influential) to the rest of us were excused.
Get the picture? A neutral, blank, unbiased and uninformed slate is what is wanted, but that slate must be able to think and reason.
Much love, The SourPuss, Carmen :)
Last Edited by on Apr 14, 2011 10:52 PM
In my opinion Murray's personal life indirectly speaks to his character. So that on one hand it may have had an effect on his care of Michael; and on the other hand it may also offer the prosecution a chance to paint him as an adept liar. Some may question what sort of quality of a doctor is Murray if he does not project high moral standards. We innately expect more noble qualities from people who chose to be a physician in care of other human beings.
And yes, I see the same picture you are seeing when it comes to potential level of jurors sought in this case. This will not be a small job.
Prosecutors try to bar 2 expert witnesses for Conrad Murray's defense By the CNN Wire Staff April 18, 2011 10:53 p.m. EDT
Prosecutors in the Conrad Murray case file a motion Monday in a California court. They want a judge to prevent two defense witnesses from testifying in next month's trial Murray has claimed Michael Jackson gave himself propofol before his death, to get sleep.
(CNN) -- Prosecutors filed a motion Monday that could prevent two expert defense witnesses from testifying in the upcoming trial of the doctor accused of fatally drugging pop star Michael Jackson.
Judge Michael Pastor, a California Superior Court judge in Los Angeles County, will now consider the request as it relates to the upcoming trial of Dr. Conrad Murray.
Murray was charged with involuntary manslaughter, after authorities allege that he gave Jackson the propofol that the Los Angeles County coroner ruled caused the singer's death on June 25, 2009.
Prosecutors contend that Dr. Paul White, an anesthesiologist and expert on the drug propofol, and Dr. Joseph Haraszti, a Pasadena-based psychiatrist, should not be able to testify in the trial unless and until Murray takes the stand.
The motion claims that White met and spoke with Murray, after which the anesthesiologist penned a report that included information that the defendant had never given police. Another analysis done by Haraszti also "references new information, apparently obtained from Conrad Murray," prosecutors contend.
Los Angeles County District Attorney Steve Cooley and his deputies claim that it would be unfair to have these experts present analyses that use information from Murray that investigators never received -- unless the primary source of that information, Murray, is first compelled to answer questions.
"This is simply a backdoor attempt to introduce the defendant's new, self-serving statements without being subject to cross-examination," the prosecutors write in Monday's court filing. "Further, such expert opinions are unreliable and lack foundation, since they are based on untested hearsay."
Jury selection in Conrad's trial began last month and will continue into early May. Opening statements and testimony are scheduled to begin May 9.
The defense has argued that Jackson self-administered the propofol in a desperate attempt to get sleep before a rehearsal.
Murray told investigators he was trying to wean Jackson off propofol in the last days of his life, but that he used it in combination with other drugs to help the pop star sleep that last morning.
The defense claims that the singer's dermatologist, Dr. Arnold Klein, injected Jackson with powerful painkillers dozens of times in the last months of his life, unknown to Murray.
The Medical Board of California and Los Angeles County coroner investigated Klein after Jackson's death, but he was never charged, and no action was taken to revoke his medical license.
Monday April 18th, 2011 12:48 Doc Murray trial: was a third person involved?
There were new revelations in the tabloids this weekend regards the upcoming Conrad Murray trial, with further claims that the accused medic did not actually administer the shot of propofol that killed Michael Jackson back in June 2009. As much previously reported, Murray is accused of manslaughter through negligence, and will stand trial for killing the late king of pop next month.
We already knew that Murray’s defence team planned to claim that the doc didn’t actually give Jackson the fatal dose of the anaesthetic propofol. The medic’s lawyers initially indicated they would say Jackson himself administered a second shot of the drug, either in a desperate bid to bring on sleep, or perhaps with suicidal intent. But reports suggest that new evidence has surfaced that indicates a third person may have been involved.
According to the News Of The World, Murray’s lawyer asked to see the coroner’s evidence in relation to Jackson’s death, and he says his team found fingerprints on the crucial syringe that were neither Murray’s nor the pop star’s.
Commenting on that revelation, the Mirror this morning quotes a source as saying: “The mystery fingerprints are the biggest breakthrough for Murray so far. If it is handled right it would mean a jury cannot convict him. Murray and Michael were the only ones supposedly at the house and all the syringes were vacuum-packed and sterile before use. The fingerprints point to someone else using the fatal syringe”.
This new conspiracy theory comes with some other allegations too. The defence team had already complained that they had only received a few minutes of CCTV footage from the security cameras at the house where Jackson was living, and it now seems other such footage has been lost, which Team Murray presumably find suspicious now there is the possibility of a third person being involved. There have also been allegations, though I’m not sure where these come from, that a large amount of money may also have gone missing shortly after Jackson died.
Quite which of these rumours will be formally presented in court next month remains to be seen, though insiders say Murray’s lawyer Ed Chernoff plans to rely greatly on the fingerprints on the syringe, telling the jury: “If the print doesn’t fit, you must acquit”.
In related news, it is thought Murray himself hopes to avoid having to testify during the upcoming trial. According to the tabs, his lawyers will instead read a simple statement to the court, which will read: “I didn’t do it and I don’t know how it happened. I am deeply sorry for Michael’s death. I never wanted him to die – he was my friend”.
---------- "...be alive, be free, feel consciousness, subsciousness, being GOD..." MJ
Dr. Arnold Klein -- the dermatologist who loomed large in Michael Jackson's life -- has now changed his story and says his good friend and office manager -- Jason Pfeiffer -- did NOT have an affair with Michael Jackson.
Klein had told TMZ Jason was "the love of [Michael's] life."
But now on his Facebook page, Klein says "Allegations about ... Jason being Michael Jackson's lover are ridiculous. That story was made up ... "
Last Edited by on Apr 22, 2011 9:51 AM
Thank you, dear Bonnie, for posting that lovely interview with Katherine. She said what needed to be said, and she said it with dignity, intelligence, her own special grace, and with love for her son.
How lucky Michael was to have her for a mother. She's beautiful, inside and out. When God made her, He smiled. She's a human flower.
