Der Murray Prozess - News & Infos (keine Diskussion)

[Lena]

Sony hat am Freitag einen Antrag eingereicht, dass der Antrag abgewiesen werden soll TII-Material beim Prozess zu zeigen. In ihrem Antrag führt Sony die Zitate von Flanagan an "dass Jackson keinerlei Anzeichen einer Gesundheitsbeeinträchtigung zeigt, dass das Material irrelevant für den Prozess ist und das es eine große Verschwendung von Zeit ist".
Sony schreibt weiter im Brief "Wenn das Unternehmen eine Verschwendung von Zeit ist, so das Gericht hat bestätigt, dass es wenig Zeit zu verschwenden hat"
Richter Pastor hat seine Pläne gecancelt das Material über das Wochenende zu sehen (obwohl ja am Montag die Anhörung zur Entscheidung über das Material angesetzt ist). In einem Schreiben bestätigt er, dass er etwas von den 16 Stunden gesehen aber nicht am Wochenende zu Sony fahren wird zur weiteren Betrachtung am Samstag und Sonntag.


Sony wants subpoena for Jackson footage quashed
By ANTHONY McCARTNEY, AP Entertainment Writer
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Sony studios on Friday asked the judge hearing Michael Jackson's manslaughter trial to throw out a subpoena for footage of the singer's final rehearsals after a defense attorney said earlier this week that reviewing them was "a big waste of time."
Attorneys for Sony Pictures Entertainment, which has footage from the "This Is It" film depicting Jackson's last rehearsals, argue in a motion that neither prosecutors nor defense attorneys should be able to show the footage during the trial.
Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor is scheduled to consider the request on Monday, but canceled plans to review the outtakes over the weekend. In a ruling, he stated that he had watched some of the 16 hours that attorneys were considering presenting to jurors, but that he would not travel to Sony studios for additional viewings on Saturday and Sunday.
The studio based its motion on quotes defense attorney J. Michael Flanagan made after a hearing Wednesday in which he said the footage doesn't show the singer was in poor health in the days before he died. Flanagan represents Dr. Conrad Murray, who has pleaded not guilty to an involuntary manslaughter charge related to Jackson's death.
"We believe his health is somewhat compromised, but he's not displaying it," Flanagan told reporters, including The Associated Press. He added that he thought the footage was irrelevant to the trial.
"I really think it's a big waste of time," he said.
Sony seized on the statement in its motion, writing, "If the enterprise is a waste of time, the court has stated that it has little time to be wasted."
Flanagan did not immediately return a phone message Friday afternoon.
Defense attorneys had been hoping the unseen footage from "This Is It" would support their contention that Jackson was frail in the days before his June 25 death.
Prosecutors found the footage helpful to their case, and asked Pastor to allow them to use up to 12 hours of raw footage. Murray's team wanted to show up to four hours from the rehearsals.
Jury selection in Murray's trial is scheduled to begin on Sept. 8.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...0b43be9b7cd842

[Lena]

Prozess wird kein unveröffentlichtes Material von den Jackson-Proben zeigen

Die Juroren im Michael Jackson-Tötungs-Prozess werden nicht bisher unveröffentlichtes Material vom Sänger in seinen letzten Tagen zu sehen bekomen um den Gesundheitszustand vor seinem Tod zu bewerten hat das Gericht am Montag entschieden.
Der Richter Michael Pastor stimmte mit der Bewertung des Verteidigers von Dr. Conrad Murray überein, dass die mehr als 100 Probenstunden von TII den Sänger nicht in schlechter Gesundheit zeigen.
Pastor stimmte zudem mit Sony Pictures Entertainment überein, dass die Clips einen erheblichen Wert haben und der Öffentlichkeit nicht ohne Grund gezeigt werden sollten.
"Da ist absolut nichts im Material das für die Verteidigung eine Assistenz sein kann" sagt Pastor.
Das Gericht hat sich einige Stunden von dem Material letzte Woche angesehen und cancelte Pläne über das Wochenende den Rest zu sehen.
Sony füllte am Freitag einen Antrag aus mit Zitaten von J. Michael Flanagan der die Ansicht äußerte das das Material "eine große Verschwendung von Zeit" sei.
Murray`s Anwälte wollten 4 Stunden, die Staatsanwaltschaft über 12 Stunden zeigen.
Staatsanwalt David Walagran sagte das das Material "demonstrierte das Michael Jackson optimistisch, engagiert, zufrieden und bei guter köprerlicher Verfassung war"
Pastor der entschieden hatte das snippets von der Filmversion "This is it" im Prozess gezeigt werden können, sagt, dass es unnöitg ist andere Clips zu zeigen.
"Da ist Material das ich gesehen haben was ich als extremst wertvoll für Sony ansehe", sagte der Richter. "Das Material kann genutzt werden für weitere spätere ausgedehnte Versionen von "This is it"."
Pastor warnte Flanagan davor öffentlich über den Fall zu sprechen, schimpfte das der Veteran Anwalt über Beweise während eines Radio Interviews sprach das nicht den Juroren präsentiert wird. Die Auswahl der Geschworenen soll am 8. September beginnen.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5izv2H3Wkc32erAH9z82zlNV3jopw?docId=90419aef2db14f8cb382713517500050

[Lena]

Und für den Info-Thread:

Hier auch das Protokoll der Anhörung vom 25.07.:

http://teammichaeljackson.com/people-v-conrad-murray-7-25-11

Es geht ziemlich deutlich hervor das die Verteidigung verhindern will das jegliches Material von TII gezeigt wird und da ist auch der Versuch hier nochmals auf die frühere Entscheidung des Gerichtes hinzuwirken wo das Gericht ja der Staatsanwaltschaft bereits genehmigt hatte Probenmaterial vom 23. und 24. aus dem Film zu zeigen. Und die Argumentation der Verteidigung wird schon ziemlich wirr. Also es soll kein TII-Material gezeigt, weder Film noch unveröffentlicht, aber wenn denn Film genehmigt dann auch unveröffentlicht, weil mit dem unveröffentlichten können sie ja zeigen wann MJ nicht bei den Proben war und da war er ja schlecht.

Mal ein paar Auszüge:
Flanagan wiederholt vorab auch seine Aussagen das MJ sehr talentiert ist, wirklich gut etc...............

Flanagan: Das Material zeigt die Tage an denen er nicht da war.

Court: Das ganze Material zeigt die Tage an denen er nicht da war? Wie wollen Sie beweisen wenn da nichts von diesen Tagen ist.

Flanagan. Weil wir nur die Abwesenheit demonstrieren wollen.

Court: Das Probenmaterial vom 23. und 24. ist einfach das. Es ist Probenmaterial. Gibt es irgendetwas in dem Probenmaterial im Vergleich zum editierten Film wo Sie glauben, dass es Michael Jackson in einem negativen Licht zeigt?

Flanagan: Nein

Court: Ich kann Ihre Postion dann nicht verstehen.

Flanagn: Wenn das Gericht weiterhin erlaubt Filmaterial zu zeigen dann muss das ganze Material gezeigt werden.

Court: Was zeigt das ganze Probenmaterial was der Fim nicht zeigt?

Mr. Flanagan: Was das ganze Probenmaterial zeigt sind die Tage wo er nicht da war.

Court: Das ganze Probenmaterial zeigt die Tage wo er nicht da war? Wie wollen Sie das negative zeigen, wenn es nichts gibt von diesen Tagen?

Flanagan: Flanagan führt den 19. auf wo er nach Hause geschickt worden wäre, er wäre mit Decke zu sehen und dann die Tage wo er nicht geprobt 20, 21, 22, und es kein Material gibt................
und das Probenmaterial vom 23. und 24. ist irrelevant.

Court: Sicher ist Mr. Jackson`s Performance, seine Präsenz am 23. und 24. bedeutend wenn Mr. Jackson einige Stunden später verstorben ist.

Flanagen: Am 24. ist er bezugnehmend auf die Voranhörungen um 1.30 Uhr nach Hause gegangen und er war unfähig zu schlafen. Für 9 Stunden trotz des Faktes das er Valium hatte, das er Midozolan hatte, das er Lorazepan hatte. Neun Stunden war er nicht fähig zu schlafen. Das ist etwas seltsam. Ihm wurde kein Propofol bis 9.30 Uhr gegeben. Wir haben 9 Stunden.

Court: Nun, Sie wissen das ist Ihre Aufgabe in den Beweisen. Darum geht es in diesem Prozess........
People möchten Sie gehört werden?


Walagran: Ja…….
Bezugnehmend auf die Position der Staatsanwaltschaft wollte die Staatsanwaltschaft Material vom 23. und 24. zeigen. Es war die Meinung der Staatsanwaltschaft damals wie heute das das Material einen optimistischen, kompetenten, in physisch guter Verfassung, einen auf der Bühne tanzenden Michael Jackson zeigte mit Tänzern, die wahrscheinlich halb so alt sind wie er mit ihnen mithaltend, sie übertraf. Es ist wirklich ein mächtiger und wirklicher Beweis von MJ`s Verfassung an diesen Tagen zu zeigen ohne eine Interpretation von Zeugen. Das aktuelle Material zu zeigen von ihm tanzend, ihn diskutierend über Bühnenpositionen, Licht, voll einbezogen in die Produktion zu sehen, jedes Zeichen gebend das er die geplante Tour durchführen will, das er den Wunsch hat diese Tour so erfolgreich wie möglich zu machen, das er die Absicht hat mit dieser Tour durch London zu gehen und sie zu einem großen Erfolg zu machen.
Nachdem wir nun das weitere Material angesehen haben das wir raw footage nennen können wir nur sagen, dass es übereinstimmt mit dem was wir schon wussten und was dieses raw footage zeigt ist nicht nur das sein Befinden am 23. und 24. gut war sondern wir sehen es an den verschiedenen Tagen durch die Proben hindurch. Das er voll im Prozess ist. Er ist im Dialog mit den Tänzern, mit den Kameraleuten, mit verschiedenen Assistenten, mit Kenny Ortega. Er sagt wo die Tänzer zu stehen haben wie zu performen haben. Er gibt den Tänzern Ermutigungen, sagt Dinge wie „Darum proben wir. Wir kriegen es hin.“
Es zeigt ihn komplett einbezogen, engagiert und augenscheinlich immer noch auf der Höhe seiner Möglichkeiten als Performer, als Tänzer und als Mensch. So dieses raw footage hat die Postion der Staatsanwaltschaft bestätigt, die wir schon hatten. Und mehr noch es stimmt mit den Aussagen von Kenny Ortega überein.

Dann führt er fort, da sie inzwischen die Aussagen von Flanagan gehört hatten, dass er nicht nach Material zeigen will und ist daher über das Wochendende nochmals durch die Notizen hindurchgegangen um ihre Anforderungen im Hinblick auf Kosten etwas zu reduzieren....

Es erfolgt eine Reihe von Aufzählung DVD-Nummer was sie zeigen wollen mit Matrial vom 16.06. bis 24.06 Zudem die Anmerkung von Walagran, dass Flanagan`s Anmerkung, die er vorhin machte nicht stimmt, dass Michael am 19.06. mit Decke zu sehen ist.


Court:Sony positionierte sich vor diesem Antrag das es eine Fischexpediton ist. Ich stimme überein und ich möchte das es nicht weiter fort dauert. Bezugenehmend auf die Verteidigungspostion. Ich verstehe die Art der Verteidigungsargumente nicht, die von Zeit zu Zeit widersprüchlich sind. Aber was ich weiß, dass da Material ist das ich als extremst wertvoll für Sony bewerten würde, Material das ich sah das nicht in der Produktion enthalten ist. Ich denke es hat einen bedeutenden Wert für Sony und ich lasse diesen nicht außer Acht. Ich berücksichtige sicherlich die Interessen der Verteidigung und Staatsanwaltschaft, aber ich bin nicht unverantwortlich bezüglich der Interessen von Sony.
Ich sah das Material vom 23. und 24. und es gibt absolut nichts was eine Assistenz für die Verteidigung sein könnte. Genau das Gegenteil. Ich kann verstehen warum die Staatsanwaltschaft das Material möchte. Ich kann verstehen warum die Staatsanswaltschaft das Material von vorherigen Proben möchte aber ich weise darauf hin, das dieser Fall fokussierend auf die Anklage beahndelt was in der kurzen Periode vorher passiert ist und nicht was eine Woche vorher war oder noch früher passiert ist.
Dann kommen weitere Hinweise auf den Wert des Materailes, die Verluste die Sony hätte, die Sicherheitsmaßnahmen .....................und daher wird kein raw footage zu sehen sein.

[TrueCrypt]

June 25, 2011 11:29 AM
PRINT TEXT
Jackson family's angst over Conrad Murray trial
93 Comments
Have Your Say
Email Story
Send to a Friend
Share This
Tell Your Friends
Tweet This
Tweet This
More
Share It
Dr. Conrad Murray at his arraignment in January, at Superior Court in Los Angeles.*(IFRAN KAHN/AFP/Getty Images)
(CBS News)* Two years ago Saturday, at age 50, Michael Jackson died suddenly from an overdose of the powerful sedative Propofol.
His personal physician, Dr. Conrad Murray, faces manslaughter charges. The trail gets under way in September.

What's taking so long?

"Justice grinds slowly in America, and especially in Hollywood when there's a celebrity attached," says Diane Dimond, author of "Be Careful Who You Love" and a Daily Beast contributor. "The state took a long time to try to find a number of medical experts who were willing to talk about Propofol, its use and misuse, that wanted to be involved in a high-celebrity case like this. They didn't want National Enquirer reporters in their lobby, so it took them quite a while to get up the medical experts they thought was necessary. The judge finally said, 'Let's postpone this until everybody really gets ready."'

Photos: Michael Jackson 1958-2009
Jackson Memorial highlights
CBS News videos of Michael Jackson
Coverage from one year anniversary of Jackson's death

Dimond told "Early Show on Saturday Morning" co-anchor Russ Mitchell she thinks Murray has been "kind of struggling to figure out how to pay his bills. He not only has a wife and a home in Las Vegas, but he also has some other children and other families that he needs to take care of."

Jackson biographer and CBS News consultant J. Randy Taraborrelli told correspondent Priya David-Clemens, "The family is totally united in that they all agree Conrad Murray is responsible for Michael Jackson's death. ... It's tough. They really lost the heart and soul of the family."

But at trial, says CBS News legal analyst Trent Copeland, "Dr. Murray is going to go after Michael Jackson, his lifestyle, his history, every piece of evidence the prosecution presents."

Dimond says she's not so sure Murray will hammer away at Jackson, telling Mitchell. "They are going to of course going to talk about his past substance abuse. (It) came up during the criminal trial -- what he has done to his body, what he did to his body during life, not only cosmetically, but he was awfully thin, and he was dependent on drugs, and I think that will come up.

"But I think what they will try to do is say something like, 'Michael Jackson was gonna get this drug anyway. And Conrad Murray was there to help wean him off of it.' That was his very first early defense. I think they will paint Michael Jackson as someone who did this to himself, and Dr. Murray was there to try to help him. Of course, you don't help someone by using an illegal drug in an illegal way in an illegal location, in a private home."

Asked by Mitchell whether the family is concerned about the emotional toll the trial could take, if Jackson's name is dragged through the mud, Jackson family friend Brian Oxman replied, "You betcha. There's autopsy photographs which are going to be shown to the jury. Those are likely to come out in the public. It bothers Mrs. Jackson just terribly. It's very upsetting.

"Also, the attacks which are gonna happen to Michael -- they're gonna be very, very upsetting. One of the things we see in this trial is, 'Oh, well, Conrad Murray is on trial.' It is upsetting to this family that the rest of the people who are responsible for Michael's death -- and make no mistake, there are others -- the producers of this show (the tour Jackson was preparing for when he died) had Dr. Murray involved in it. They were pulling the strings, causing to happen what happened. And yet, nobody is interested in going after them. They're very upset about the entire process."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/06/25/earlyshow/saturday/main20074369.shtml

....laut Dimond mahlen die Mühlen der Gerechtigkeit langsam in Hollywood, besonders bei Berümhtheiten....
Die Suche nach geeigneten Experten der Medizin, bereit auch Aussagen zu treffen über Propofol - Nutzung und Missbrauch bei so einen Prominenten Prozess kostet die Zeit.....Der Richter sagt " Lasst Uns dieses verschieben, bis Alle bereit sind.....

Ferner sagt Dimond in der Early Show der Co Moderatorin Mitchell .... "Murray wird kämpfen....Er hat nicht nur eine Frau, Haus in Las Vegas.....Da gibt es noch mehr an Familie mit Kindern die Ihn brauchen".....

Taraborelli zu David Clemens " Die Familie ist sich einig darüber Murray ist Schuld an den Tod von Michael Jackson....
Sie verloren das Herz und die Seele der Familie.... "

Der Rechtliche Analyst Mitchell denkt das Murray dagegenhält.....Mit der Lebensweise von Michael Jackson und seiner Geschichte.....
Dimond gibt gegenüber Mitchell zwar zu, das Sie über Lebensweise,Drogenmissbrauch, auch über Schönheitsoperationen und was Michael seinen Körper an tat, doch Murray würde darauf nicht hämmern??
Abhängig von Drogen und Murray wollte helfen, natürlich kann man Ihm so nicht helfen...illegale Drogen in Illegaler Weise in einer illegalen Lage, Privathaus...

Brian Oxmann Freund der Familie sagt Mitchell ....die Familie denkt das Autopsie Bilder im Prozess gezeigt werden, das wäre nicht gut wenn diese an die Öffentlichkeit kommen .....Mrs. Jackson beunruhigt das sehr
Auch die Angriffe die gegen Michael geschehen sind beunruhigt Sie....
Sie sagt auch das Murray vor Gericht ist, doch wo wäre der Rest der Verantwortlichen......Produzenten der Show, die Show in Vorbereitung in der Michael starb und an der Murray beteiligt war? Diese zogen die Fäden....
Geschehen ist Geschehen, doch Niemand ist daran interessiert an der Jagd nach Ihnen.....

[geli2709]

Tuesday, August 2, 2011

Martin Blount's Hearing Testimony--01/06/11

January 6th, 2011




MARTIN BLOUNT-- L.A. FIREFIGHTER/PARAMEDIC


Mr. Blount has been a firefighter for 20 years and a paramedic for 11 years.

DIRECT EXAMINATION: MR. WALGREN

Blount and the rest of his team were escorted through the gate at Carolwood. They subsequently drove around the pond to the front doors of the residence. Blount and his team went through the front doors of the residence--they were then directed to go upstairs. Blount was towards the back of the team when entering the bedroom. He and his team entered into a foyer area and then into the bedroom. The following is Blount's recollection of what he saw once entering the bedroom:

Blount: I OBSERVED A MALE LYING ON THE BED VERY PALE, VERY THIN AND AT THAT TIME, THE NEXT TIME I SAW HIM WAS WHEN THE GUYS IN FRONT OF ME GOT HIM OFF THE BED AND PUT HIM ON THE FLOOR.

Walgren: OKAY. WELL, WHEN YOU SAW THE PATIENT, WAS HE ON THE FLOOR?

Blount: NO, SIR. HE WAS IN THE BED.

Blount remarks that besides his team being in the room he also saw Conrad Murray.

Blount: HE WAS SWEATING PROFUSELY AND HE WAS VERY ANIMATED. HE WAS LIKE, "HEY, YOU NEED TO HELP HIM. HE'S NOT BREATHING."

Walgren: AND YOU NOTICED THAT HE WAS SWEATING PROFUSELY AT THAT TIME?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Walgren: WHEN YOU WERE INTERVIEWED BY THE POLICE, DID YOU TELL THEM THAT YOU'D OBSERVED THE PATIENT ACTUALLY BEING ON THE FLOOR AT THE TIME YOU ENTERED THE ROOM?

Blount: YES, I PROBABLY DID BECAUSE ONCE I ENTERED THE ROOM, THE GUYS ALREADY PUT HIM ON THE BED -- PUT HIM ON THE FLOOR. I'M SORRY.

Walgren: THAT IS MY QUESTION.

Blount: YES.

Blount agrees that once he entered the room Michael was on the floor. Previously he stated that the "guys in front of him got him off the bed and put him on the floor." This contradicts that earlier testimony that Michael's security had moved Michael to the floor before paramedics had arrived.

Blount recalls that the IV stand was "over on my left-hand side of the room, on my left-hand side when I walked in".

Michael was moved to the foot of the bed onto the floor.

Blount states that he is the driver and also considered a "patient person" meaning he is hands-on with the patient once he gets to the scene. He also states that he is typically one of the last ones to get to the scene because he has to open the back of the gurney, grab the gurney, grab his monitor and trauma box which contains things like needles and drugs. The monitor is called a "Life Pack 12" and is a defibrillator.

Blount then states that his position requires him to be at the head of the patient--which he assumed once in the room.

Walgren: DO YOU HEAR THE DEFENDANT, DOCTOR MURRAY, BEING ASKED IF ANY DRUGS HAD BEEN GIVEN?

Blount: YES. WE ASKED HIM, HAS THE PATIENT, IS HE ON ANY MEDICATIONS, HE TOOK ANY RECREATIONAL DRUGS AND THE ANSWER WAS NO.

Walgren: WHAT YOU HEARD WAS NO?

Blount: YES.

Walgren: AND WAS THERE ANY MENTION BY THE DEFENDANT REGARDING A SALINE I.V. BAG OR TREATMENT WITH AN I.V. BAG?

Blount: NO. IT WAS NOT MENTIONED UNTIL WE ASKED.

Walgren: OKAY. AND WHAT WERE YOU TOLD?

Blount: HE SAID THAT THE REASON WHY THE PATIENT HAD THE I.V. BAG ATTACHED TO HIS LEG WAS BECAUSE HE REHEARSALED THE NIGHT BEFORE. HE WAS EXHAUSTED.

Blount also states that Murray said that Michael was also dehydrated.

Walgren then asks Blount if he heard Murray say how long rehearsals had been the previous day. Blount says he cannot recall. Walgren then asks if he recalls telling police he had heard "16 hours" from Murray. The defense objects based on recollection and leading and the objection is sustained. Blount also cannot recall if someone asked about the health of the patient.

Walgren: WERE YOU EVER TOLD ANYTHING BY DOCTOR MURRAY REGARDING THE PATIENT HAVING RECEIVED A PHYSICAL?

Blount: YES, I REMEMBER.

Walgren: WHAT DID HE TELL YOU IN THAT REGARD?

Blount: THAT THE PATIENT HAS GONE TO HIS PRIVATE PHYSICIAN PROBABLY LIKE A WEEK PRIOR TO THIS EPISODE.

(Side note--who was this physician and why did Michael see him?)

Walgren: NOW WERE YOU PRESENT WHEN DOCTOR MURRAY WAS ASKED HOW LONG THE PATIENT HAD BEEN DOWN?

Blount: YES, SIR, I WAS PRESENT.

Walgren: AND WHAT DID YOU HEAR DOCTOR MURRAY SAY IN RESPONSE?

Blount: HE SAID, DOWN FOR ABOUT A MINUTE PRIOR TO CALLING 911.

Walgren: OTHER THAN THE I.V. STAND, DO YOU RECALL SEEING ANY MEDICAL EQUIPMENT UPON YOUR ENTRY INTO THE ROOM?

Blount: YES. I SAW AN O2 (oxygen) CYLINDER ON THE STAND.

Walgren: ANY TYPE OF HEART MONITORS? ANYTHING OF THAT NATURE?

Blount: NO, SIR. THAT IS THE ONLY THING I SAW.

Blount saw no pulse oximeter or EKG monitoring device. He recalls a nasal cannula being attached to Michael's face, to his nose. He states that when a patient has on a full mask they get more oxygen, however with a smaller device like a nasal cannula the patient may get "maybe like 2 milliliters of air going inside".

Walgren: DID YOU NOTICE ANYTHING, ANY OTHER, ANY TYPE OF MECHANICAL VENTILATORS, ENDOTRACHEAL TUBING, ANYTHING ON THE FINGERS, ANYTHING AT ALL AS FAR AS MEDICAL EQUIPMENT THAT YOU OBSERVED?

Blount: NO, SIR.

Blount's primary duty is to try and establish an airway in the patient. Blount was able to place an endotracheal tube down Michael's trachea. He said it took him about 20-30 seconds to intubate Michael. Once the endotracheal tube is placed air was then delivered to Michael via a physical hand pump. Blount says other team members are doing compressions, looking for IV access, etc.

Blount then remarks that he and his team see the IV in the leg and notice it is "not patent, it was not flowing properly". Paramedic Mark Goodwin begins looking for an IV site in Michael's arms. Blount states Goodwin was having a hard time finding an IV site which resulted in multiple punctures. Walgren then asks Blount if he was able to feel the temperature of Michael's skin. Blount did and remarks he was "cool" and states that to him this means "it seemed like he's been down for awhile". Blount remarks that the entire time his team was there Michael had no viable heart rhythm, that Michael was "asystole the whole time".

Blount is then asked if while he was intubating the patient if rounds of drugs were being given him at that time. He states they were not at that time. He states he first began providing air to Michael once he got the endotracheal tube secured while his team was looking for an IV port. Once they found the one in the leg and saw it was not patent he began to debate on administering drugs down the endotracheal tube which is an approved method of administration in emergency situations. However, paramedic Senneff was able to get a good stick in the jugular which was then used for drug administration. Senneff remarked in his testimony that he did give two rounds of atropine and epinephrine to Michael through the IV in the leg.

Blount remarks that the patient's eyes were fixed and dilated. He said to him this means the patient "had been down for quite awhile".

Blount then states that in his opinion Michael was dead despite his treatment efforts.

Walgren: NOW AT SOME POINT PRIOR TO PARAMEDIC SENNEFF FINDING AN I.V. SITE IN THE JUGULAR, DID DOCTOR MURRAY HOLD UP A NEEDLE OR SOMETHING THAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Walgren: CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT WAS SAID AND WHAT DOCTOR MURRAY DID AT THAT POINT?

Blount: IT WAS, I THINK IT WAS A HYPODERMIC NEEDLE HE CAME OUT WITH, AND IT WAS LIKE A BLUE COLOR. AND HE SAID, "YOU SHOULD BE ABLE TO USE THIS HERE." AND I THINK WE ALL SAID, NO, THAT IS OKAY.

Walgren: OKAY. AND WAS THERE SOMETHING ABOUT THAT THAT STRUCK YOU AS ODD?

Blount: YEAH. I THOUGHT IT WAS ODD BECAUSE, LIKE I SAID BEFORE, WE ASKED HIM HAS HE BEEN USING ANY DRUGS OR HAVE YOU GIVEN ANY DRUGS. AND HE SAID NO. OKAY. AND SO THE FACT THAT HE THEN PULLED OUT A HYPODERMIC NEEDLE WAS ODD TO YOU?

Blount: IT WAS KIND OF ODD, YES, SIR.

Blount says that the blue color means that it was a small-gauge needle--22 gauge (the larger the number the smaller the gauge).

Blount recalls seeing 3 small bottles of lidocaine on the floor. He states that lidocaine is an anti-arrhythmic drug that is no longer used by paramedics. Walgren asks if it also an anesthetic--Blount says yes. Blount remarks that seeing the lidocaine struck him as odd because they had asked Murray if he had given any drugs and his reply was no. Though Blount observed the bottles of lidocaine he did not stop treatment.

Blount affirms he was aware UCLA had assigned authority and care over to Murray. Blount states that during treatment, before and after Murray assumed care, that he never felt a pulse on the patient and never saw a viable heart rhythm on the monitor.

Walgren: DO YOU RECALL AT ONE POINT THE DOCTOR, DOCTOR MURRAY INDICATING HE FELT A FEMORAL PULSE?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Walgren: OKAY. AND WHEN HE FELT THAT, WHEN HE TOLD YOU THAT HE FELT A PULSE, WERE YOU OBSERVING THE DEFENDANT DOCTOR MURRAY?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Blount recalls seeing a condom catheter on Michael. Blount agrees with Walgren that these are commonly used in surgical proceedings when a patient is unconscious. I personally have only heard of indwelling (internal) urinary catheters used during surgery.

Blount recalls that while preparing for transport to UCLA he saw Murray scoop the three lidocaine bottles off the floor and place them into a black bag. He never saw those bottles again.

Blount recalls that while on the way to UCLA Murray took out his cell phone and made a telephone call. The call was to Nicole Alvarez, the mistress which Murray was staying with in LA.

Once they arrived at UCLA Blount saw at least 9-10 doctors working on Michael--including Murray.

CROSS-EXAMINATION: MR. LOW:

Blount is asked if it is common for paramedics to attempt to get some type of medical history--he says yes and agrees it is to try and help decide what should be done to try and help the patient.

Low: OKAY. SO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU RECALL DOCTOR MURRAY BEING ASKED WAS ABOUT HOW LONG HAD THE PATIENT BEEN DOWN LIKE THIS?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Low: AND YOU RECALL THE ANSWER BEING ABOUT ONE MINUTE BEFORE 911 WAS CALLED?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Low: OKAY. AND WHEN YOU FIRST SAW THE PATIENT, HE WAS ALREADY ON THE GROUND?

Blount: NO. WHEN I FIRST SAW THE PATIENT, WHEN I LOOKED -- LIKE I SAID BEFORE, I WAS LIKE THE FIFTH PERSON IN LINE. AND WHEN I SAW, LOOKED OVER BEFORE THE GUYS PUT HIM ON THE FLOOR, I SAW THE PATIENT IN BED.

Low asks how long Blount thought Michael had been dead and he says his reply was "for awhile". He further clarifies that by "for awhile" he means about 20-30 minutes.

Blount recalls that he spoke with LAPD about Michael's death. He states it was some time in the end of June. He also states that his statement was recorded and notes were taken.

Low: NOW AT SOME POINT, WERE YOU ABLE TO SEE PARAMEDIC SENNEFF FOLLOW PROCEDURE AND GET ON THE PHONE AND CALL THE HOSPITAL?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Low: OKAY. AND AT SOME POINT DURING THAT CONVERSATION WITH THE HOSPITAL, THE DAY AT -- UCLA HOSPITAL SAID THAT HE SHOULD CALL IT?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Low: BUT IN RESPONSE TO THAT, IS IT TRUE THAT DOCTOR MURRAY SAID, "NO, NO, I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT?"

Blount: YES, SIR.

Low: IN FACT, HE WAS EMPHATIC. HE SAID, "NOT ONLY DO I NOT WANT TO STOP, I WANT TO TAKE OVER?"

Blount: YES, SIR.

(I find it intriguing Murray wanted to take over aid when paramedics arrived yet before their arrival he half-assed not only botched CPR but seriously delayed all efforts from even occurring by refusing to call or have someone call 911. What a sudden change in his demeanor.)

Low asks Blount if he personally asked Murray if the patient had taken any recreational drugs. Walgren objects on behalf of misstating the testimony. The court overrules the objection and Blount replies that he did not ask Murray, one of his team members asked Murray. Low restates the question and Blount repeats that Murray said Michael did not take any recreational drugs.

Low begins to question Blount about Goodwin's efforts to start an IV.

Low: DID HE HAVE TO ATTEMPT MORE THAN ONE TIME TO TRY AND FIND A VIABLE VEIN OR ARTERY OR SOMETHING IN ORDER TO PUT THAT LINE IN?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Low: TELL US WHAT YOU SAW, SIR, ABOUT THE NUMBER OF ATTEMPTS AND THE STRUGGLE -- I'M SORRY -- THE NUMBER OF ATTEMPTS THAT THIS PERSON WENT THROUGH TO TRY TO FIND THAT VIABLE LINE?

Blount: AT LEAST THREE TIMES, SIR.

Low: AND WHAT PART OF THE BODY DID YOU SEE THAT ATTEMPT BEING MADE ON?

Blount: HIS LEFT ARM, SIR, AND ALSO HIS RIGHT ARM.

Low: OKAY. THAT WAS ABOUT THREE OR FOUR?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Low: AND SIR, DO YOU HAVE AN UNDERSTANDING AS TO WHY IT MAY HAVE BEEN DIFFICULT FOR THAT PERSON TO INSERT THAT LINE INTO THE PATIENT?

Blount: BECAUSE HIS VEIN HAD, HAD NO VEIN ACCESS. I MEAN, IT DIDN'T MATTER HOW WE TRIED, WE COULD NOT GET ANY VEIN ACCESS.

Low: PART OF THAT OR IS THAT BECAUSE, LIKE I, YOU SAID EARLIER, THE PATIENT AND HIS APPEARANCE WAS AS SKINNY AS HE WAS?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Low: AS UNDERWEIGHT AS HE WAS?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Low: SIR, IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, YOU HAVE BEEN DOING THIS FOR AWHILE. YOU ARE WELL-TRAINED FOR NINE YEARS, TEN YEARS AT THIS POINT; IS THAT RIGHT?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Low: AND YOUR EXPERIENCE IN THOSE TEN YEARS, IS IT TRUE THAT IT'S BEEN YOUR -- WELL, THAT WHEN YOU FIND PEOPLE WHO ARE UNDER STRESS WHO IT TURNS OUT THEY ARE DRUG ADDICTS BUT SOMETIMES IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO FIND A VEIN WITH WHICH TO PUT YOUR LINE INTO?

Blount: NOT REALLY.

Low: NO. IT'S EASY?

Blount: IT'S -- SITUATION WITH ME, I HAVE BEEN IN THIS SITUATIONS WHERE I'VE GONE ON DRUG ADDICTS AND EVEN KIDS AND I HAVE ALWAYS BEEN ABLE TO FIND A VEIN. THERE MAY HAVE BEEN A POINT WHERE I HAD ONE GUY WHO HAS BEEN A HEROIN USER FOR YEARS AND DOWN WITH TATTOOS, HAD THEM ALL UP AND DOWN HIS ARM. AND I WAS ABLE TO FIND A VEIN. SO.

Low: SURE. THERE ARE SOMETIMES IT IS EASY.

Low: BUT IS IT ALSO DIFFICULT SOMETIMES?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Low: AND IS IT A FAIR GENERALIZATION TO SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, WITH PEOPLE WHO ARE KNOWN DRUG ADDICTS THAT THEY CAN BE DIFFICULT TO FIND A VIABLE VEIN AND TRY TO PUT A NEEDLE IN IT?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Low then asks Blount why, if the patient appeared deceased, did he and his team try to revive Michael. Blount replies his team goes through a protocol which includes monitoring and the administration of medications. During that time of attempted resuscitation Senneff called UCLA to alert them of the situation, that the team wanted to call a time of death. Low again asks why Blount's team would even start to attempt to revive Michael--Blount replies that that is simply what he and his team do, they try their best to save a life. Blount goes on to state many times they have successfully resuscitated people who were not breathing and did not have proper cardiac function but knew that would not be possible in this situation.

REDIRECT EXAMINATION: MR. WALGREN:

Walgren: SIR, IF SOMEONE'S HAS NO VIABLE HEART RHYTHM, THE HEART IS NOT WORKING, THEN BLOOD WOULD NOT BE CIRCULATING PROPERLY THROUGH THE BODY; IS THAT RIGHT?

Blount: THAT IS TRUE.

Walgren: AND IF BLOOD IS NOT PROPERLY CIRCULATING THROUGH THE BODY, ONE RESULT OF THAT CAN BE THAT THE VEINS COLLAPSE MAKING IT DIFFICULT TO FIND AN I.V. SITE; ISN'T THAT TRUE?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Walgren: NOW AT THE TIME THAT PARAMEDIC GOODWIN WAS TRYING TO FIND AN I.V. SITE, WERE YOU CONTINUING WITH YOUR CARE OF THE PATIENT?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Walgren: OKAY. IS IT FAIR TO SAY YOU WERE NOT PRECISELY COUNTING HOW MANY SITES GOODWIN ATTEMPTED?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Walgren: OKAY. COULD IT HAVE BEEN MORE THAN THREE OR FOUR SITES?

Blount: FOR SURE, YES, SIR.

Walgren: OKAY. IN BOTH ARMS?

Blount: YES, SIR.

Walgren finishes and Low turns down his opportunity to recross-examine Blount.

http://gatorgirl277.blogspot.com/2011/08/martin-blounts-hearing-testimony-010611.html

[geli2709]

Thursday, August 4, 2011

Bridgette Morgan's Hearing Testimony--01/07/11

January 7th, 2011



BRIDGETTE MORGAN

Before Morgan is called to the stand the Court, Walgren, Brazil, Chernoff, Low and Flanagan are in chambers discussing a motion in limine concerning Morgan and her testimony. The defense has various objections to the relevance of her testimony. Walgren states that the purpose of placing Morgan on the stand is to attempt to establish the timeline of phone calls (there was a 7 second call from Morgan to Murray at 11:26 a.m. on June 25th, 2009) and preserve relevant testimony as it relates to some of the individuals who either placed calls or received calls from Murray on June 25th, 2009. Walgren continues that the prosecution wishes to briefly establish the nature and purpose of the phone call from Morgan to Murray and to determine whether it was professional or personal. Walgren states he wants Morgan under oath to confirm whether or not she was able to make contact with Murray. Walgren states that regarding the character evidence he does not understand the objection by the defense. He states the phone calls are relevant in the prosecution's theory and show a distinct pattern by Murray to carry on personal social business when his attention should be on his patient.

Low begins his arguments for the motion in limine. He states there are two sources, one being the police report done on Feburary 2nd, 2010 when Morgan was interviewed and a tape recorded interview. Low is concerned that Morgan and Murray's relationship will be revealed as personal and not professional contact. He is also concerned about how Murray and Morgan's relationship began and Morgan's history as an exotic dancer in Las Vegas 6 years prior to 2009.

Brazil states the prosecution does not intend to ask Morgan about her occupation. However, they do intend on asking how Morgan and Murray met, as was done with Sade Anding. They wish to establish their relationship as social. Chernoff pipes in the prosecution knows they met at a topless club and it is prejudicial. Low begins to argue about why it cannot be stated they met "out of town" or "in public" rather than a club. Low also comments that Morgan is studying to become a nurse and she herself does not want this information out because of her business working in a hospital.

Low continues on saying police promised if she told him the truth he would not let out her history of being an exotic dancer. Low states Morgan was lied to and it the situation is not fair.

Brazil disagrees with Low on his characterization of what has occurred regarding Morgan.

The Court states he does not need to know she was working at a club or the nature of the club for the purposes of the preliminary hearing.

Walgren states the prosecution will limit their relationship to beginning at a club and establishing it was a social relationship.

Flanagan states the prosecution knows the call from Morgan to Murray was not completed. He states the fact someone made a call to someone else on the phone who does not answer has no relevance, nor does her state of mind have relevance, either.

Walgren states as the defense has indicated she is not necessarily cooperative. He again states that under oath they want her testifying whether or not the call was completed and whether she left a voicemail or not. He states she has told police that it went to voicemail but she has not said that under oath or in the hearing. The prosecution wishes to preserve her testimony as a social relationship, the nature of the call and that the call was made at the particular time listed.

Chernoff states that the prosecution wants to preserve Morgan's evidence in front of the press and they could have had it preserved via the grand jury as was done with Nicole Alvarez.

The Court states testimony cannot be preserved at a grand jury because there is no confrontation right. He continues on stating he is aware of the issues and the scope of the preliminary hearing. He states the testimony is relevant under certain guidelines set forth for the preliminary hearing and the defense's motion in limine is overruled. However, the Court states this will be a tailored process and he does not want character issues inflaming the court.

Walgren asks if Brazil can be given leeway to lead so Morgan does not blurt out "something else". Chernoff states Brazil has shown an ability to lead into objectionable territory thus he objects to Walgren's request. Walgren states they will ask open-ended questions. Low states he trusts Brazil to be given some leeway without abusing the right to such.

The Court states he does not want to be in situation where the defense are embarrassed because Low has one theory/tactic and his team members (Chernoff, Flanagan) disagree with him.

Low states Chernoff will tell him if he is wrong.

The proceedings end and open court resumes.

DIRECT EXAMINATION: MS. BRAZIL

As with some previous witnesses, Morgan identifies Murray in court.

Morgan states she met Murray in 2003 at a club. She states after meeting Murray she developed a social relationship with him. Morgan confirms her cell phone number in 2009 was (310) ***-9566.

Morgan agrees she called Murray on June 25th, 2009. She states they were following up on a conversation they had had.

Brazil has no more questions but then corrects herself. She asks Morgan if she actually spoke to Murray. She states no. She is asked if she left a voicemail. She states she cannot remember. Brazil states she has nothing further.

Low declines the opportunity to cross examine the witness. Morgan is excused from the stand.


The transcripts used to create these summaries were lawfully
obtained from www.teammichaeljackson.com.

http://gatorgirl277.blogspot.com/2011/08/bridgette-morgans-hearing-testimony.html

[geli2709]

Thursday, August 4, 2011

Sade Anding's Hearing Testimony--01/07/11

January 7th, 2011




SADE ANDING

DIRECT EXAMINATION: MS. BRAZIL

Anding states in February of 2009 she was working as a cocktail waitress at Sullivan's Steakhouse in Houston, Texas, located off Highway 59 and Post Oak Blvd. She had been working there the previous 6-8 months since February 2009. (Her exact words were "I was there for 6, 6-8 months" which sounds more like her length of total employment rather than how long she had been working there before she met Murray.) She describes Sullivan's Steakhouse as having a dining room, a lounge/bar area and a club in the back were bands perform. Anding states she met Murray at Sullivan's Steakhouse. She claims to have initially met him before Valentine's Day, then after Valentine's Day, then states she cannot recall. She says all she can recall about initially meeting him is she had only been working at Sullivan's Steakhouse for 2 or 3 months. She agrees with Brazil that it was likely at the beginning of March.

(Notice that the timeline of when she met Murray and how long she had been working at Sullivan's Steakhouse do not completely add up. From my view it seems she meant she worked at Sullivan's Steakhouse for a total of 6-8 months rather than she had been working there for that duration before meeting Murray. If I am correct in my assumption this would mean she likely began working at Sullivan's Steakhouse sometime in December 2008 or January 2009, assuming she met Murray in March, and then no longer worked for Sullivan's Steakhouse beginning sometime between June and August 2009.)

Anding states when she first met Murray he stated he was working in Houston, at his clinic. She says he told her about his clinic. She recalled striking up a conversation with him and receiving a large tip the first time they met.

A discussion at the side bar begins. The prosecution, Court and defense begin arguing about the relevance of Anding and Murray's financial and romantic relationship. The Court then states for the purposes of this hearing that the relationship is not significant. The prosecution (Walgren) states the nature of their relationship highlights the placement of Murray's priorities, that his priority that morning, specifically at 11:51 a.m. was making a phone call to Anding rather than tending to his patient. The Court remarks that Walgren has used the term "cocktail waitress" in a demanding manner--Walgren disagrees. The Court states the prosecution may explore the social relationship but there are limits on discussing financial arrangements since this is a preliminary hearing. The Court states at some other time Murray and Anding's financial relationship may be relevant. The defense (Flanagan) jumps in and states that nothing outside of June 25th is relevant in the case. Chernoff then says it is not a coincidence that Anding, Morgan and Nicole Alvarez are all giving testimony in the same day. He further claims their evidence is not relevant but rather is being used to create prejudice against Murray.

The Court states he is not going to spend the entire day dealing with the matter mentioned above. He states the bottom line is the parties are allowed to explore relationships within certain limits of the preliminary hearing.

Discussion resumes in open court. Anding states the first time Murray and she met he gave her his phone number. She returned the favor by giving him her phone number. Anding agrees that after their first meeting she saw him with some frequency. Anding states she was not Murray's girlfriend. However, she then states that he referred to her as his girlfriend. He purchased her gifts.

Anding agrees her phone number is (832) ***-3832. This is her cell phone number. She agrees that she received a phone call from Murray on June 25th, 2009. She was in Houston. She states she knows it was 12:30 p.m. (Central Standard Time) because she was getting ready go to out. She agrees he called her on his cell phone.

(Please note this time does not reflect the correct time he called her--phone records indicate Murray called Anding at 11:51 a.m. PST which would mean he called Anding at 1:51 p.m. Houston/CST).

Brazil: WHAT DID HE SAY WHEN HE FIRST SPOKE WITH YOU ON THE PHONE ON JUNE 25, 2009?

Anding: HE TOLD ME IT'S CONRAD MURRAY, AND HE SAID, "HELLO, HOW ARE YOU?"AND I SAID, "FINE. HOW ARE YOU?"

Brazil: AND WHEN YOU SPOKE WITH HIM THAT DAY, DID YOU RECOGNIZE HIS VOICE BECAUSE YOU HAD SPOKEN TO HIM ON THE PHONE ON OTHER OCCASIONS?

Anding agrees.

Brazil: SO HE IDENTIFIED HIMSELF, AND HE ASKED YOU HOW YOU WERE?

Anding agrees.

Brazil: DID HE TELL YOU HOW HE WAS DOING?

Anding: NO.

Brazil: WHAT DID HE SAY TO YOU?

Anding: HE TOLD ME THAT HE WAS DOING WELL, AND THAT WAS IT. THEN I CUT HIM OFF, AND I STARTED TALKING.

(Side note--did Anding not just contradict herself? She says he did not tell her how he was doing then in the very next sentence she says he told her he was doing well.)

Brazil: WHAT DO YOU MEAN YOU CUT HIM OFF?

Anding: I CUT HIM OFF LIKE, I GUESS, HE WAS GOING TO SAY SOMETHING. AND I WAS, I TOLD HIM, "WELL, LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT MY DAY." ALL I HEARD HIM SAY, "WELL, I AM DOING FINE, WELL." AND THAT IS LIKE WHEN I WAS LIKE, LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT MY DAY.

Brazil: SO YOU BASICALLY INTERRUPTED HIM, CORRECT?

Anding agrees.

Brazil: AND THEN YOU PROCEEDED TO TALK ABOUT WHAT?

Anding: WELL, JUST TALK ABOUT HOW HE WAS DOING, AND WHAT I WAS ABOUT TO GO DO. AND I HAVEN'T TALKED TO HIM IN AWHILE. AND THAT IS WHEN I REALIZED HE WASN'T ON THE PHONE ANYMORE.

(Side note--did Anding not just contradict herself again? She says she interrupts him then says they discussed how he was doing. I find it peculiar that she would decide to tell him all about her day and her well-being when it was he who initiated the call--as in, typically when someone initiates a call they are the one who has something to say initially.)

Anding says the last time she had seen Murray in person was May 23rd, 2009. They went to eat somewhere in Houston.

Brazil: SO YOU INTERRUPT DOCTOR MURRAY, AND YOU BEGIN JUST CHATTING WITH HIM ABOUT YOUR DAY AND WHAT'S GOING ON IN YOUR LIFE, CORRECT?

Anding: YES.

Brazil: AND WHAT DID HE SAY IN RESPONSE?

Anding: I DIDN'T HEAR HIM ON THE PHONE ANYMORE.

Brazil asks for clarification on what is meant by Anding's statement.

Anding: HE WASN'T ON THE PHONE NO MORE. I HEARD COMMOTION AS IF THE PHONE WAS IN A POCKET OR SOMETHING. THE NOISE WAS LIKE (SOUND) AND I HEARD COUGHING LIKE (SOUND) AND THEN I HEARD LIKE MUMBLING OF VOICES AND THEN I STAYED ON THE PHONE FOR PROBABLY FIVE TO SIX MINUTES AND I HUNG UP AND I KEPT CALLING AND CALLING AND TEXTING AND TEXTING, AND THEN I NEVER HEARD FROM HIM AGAIN.

Brazil: LET'S GO BACK THE POINT IN TIME DURING YOUR CONVERSATION WITH CONRAD MURRAY THAT YOU REALIZED THAT HE'S NOT SAYING ANYTHING TO YOU CAN YOU ESTIMATE FOR ME ABOUT HOW FAR INTO THE PHONE CALL FROM THE TIME HE SAID "HELLO" TO YOU UNTIL THE TIME THAT YOU REALIZED HE WASN'T THERE ANYMORE BECAUSE HE WASN'T SAYING ANYTHING TO YOU?

Anding's reply is 5 minutes.

Brazil asks Anding if she would have any way in knowing when Murray stopped listening to her. She says no.

Brazil: YOU TOLD US THAT YOU WERE SPEAKING INTO THE PHONE. DID YOU EVER SAY ANYTHING SPECIFIC TO, INTO THE TELEPHONE WHEN YOU REALIZED THAT HE WASN'T SAYING ANYTHING IN REPLY?

Anding: NO. I JUST REMEMBER SAYING, "HELLO, HELLO, HELLO. ARE YOU THERE? ARE YOU THERE? ARE YOU THERE?"

Brazil: AND WHEN YOU SAID ALL OF THOSE THINGS, DID YOU GET ANY RESPONSE BACK FROM CONRAD MURRAY?

Anding states no.

Brazil: WHEN YOU HEARD THE MUMBLING ON THE OTHER END, WERE YOU ABLE TO TELL IF IT WAS DOCTOR MURRAY'S VOICE THAT YOU RECOGNIZED THE MUMBLING TO BE COMING FROM?

Anding states no.

Anding agrees she tried to call Murray back and received no response. She also states she texted him and received no response either.

Brazil asks if it was unusual for Murray not to call back after being disconnected while speaking to each other on the phone. Anding states yes.

Brazil asks when Anding next spoke to Murray after June 25th, 2009. Chernoff objects. Court overrules. Anding states she last spoke to him when the L.A.P.D. came to her house after a baseball game (the Houston Astros). She could not recall the month but states it was in 2009. She states she does recall it was around 9:00 p.m. and she was in the car headed home. She states that at some point while she was at the baseball game she learned from her father police detectives wanted to speak with her.

She says that when she was notified that the detectives were at her house she called Murray and told him that detectives were at her house. She says he apologized and gave her the number to his attorney. He told her that if she spoke with L.A.P.D to have his lawyer present. She told Murray "okay".

Anding agrees that she called the attorney that Murray instructed her to call. Anding agrees she spoke to the attorney the next day. Throughout this discussion Chernoff is objecting to most of the questioning. Most objections are sustained.

Brazil completes her direct examination.

CROSS-EXAMINATION: MR. CHERNOFF

Anding states she is doing fine. She flew into L.A. "yesterday". She states L.A.P.D. paid for her airfare. L.A.P.D. paid for her hotel/motel accommodations the previous night but will not be paying for her to stay tonight. She states she will be flying out today.

Chernoff: NOW ALL THE THINGS YOU TESTIFIED TO TODAY, YOU TOLD THIS MAN, DAN MEYERS, DIDN'T YOU?

Anding agrees and states she did not add anything today that was different to what she told Dan Myers (L.A.P.D).

Chernoff ends his cross examination.

Brazil does not re-direct examine and Anding is excused.

The transcripts used to create these summaries were lawfully
obtained from www.teammichaeljackson.com.

http://gatorgirl277.blogspot.com/2011/08/sade-andings-hearing-testimony-010711.html

[TrueCrypt]

MITSCHULD NOCH NICHT GEKLÄRT
Michael Jackson: Neue Klage gegen Hausarzt.

http://www.promiflash.de/michael-jackson-neue-klage-gegen-hausarzt-11080633.html

Samstag, 06. August 2011
Nachdem der Tod von Michael Jackson (†50) nun schon mehr als zwei Jahre zurückliegt, scheinen immer noch viele Details über Mitschuldige aus seinem Umfeld ungeklärt zu sein. Jetzt erhebt auch der frühere Assistent und Vertraute von Michaels Hausarzt, Jason Pfeiffer, schwere Vorwürfe gegen den Arzt des King of Pop.
Wie TMZ.com erfahren haben will, sagte Pfeiffer in seiner neuen Klage gegen seinen ehemaligen Chef Dr. Arnold Klein (66) aus. Klein habe ihn mehrere Male gebeten, Michael zu seinem Auto zu begleiten, da dieser unter zu starken Drogen stand, um selbst laufen zu können. Weiter sagte er, dass er seine Besorgnis darüber geäußert habe, dass die Dosis an Medikamenten, die der Sänger von seinem Arzt erhielt, zu hoch dosiert war. Klein habe ihm daraufhin lediglich entgegnet, er solle „die Klappe halten“.
Die aktuelle Klage ist nicht die erste gegen Dr. Klein. Schon früher wurde ihm vorgeworfen, er habe Michael Jackson insgesamt 51 Spritzen Schmerzmittel in den letzten drei Monaten vor seinem Tod verabreicht. Der Arzt ließ alle neuen Vorwürfe von seinem Anwalt abstreiten. Wir können nur hoffen, dass die Schuldigen, die zum Tod des wohl größten Popstars aller Zeiten beigetragen haben, bald zur Rechenschaft gezogen werden!

[TrueCrypt]

Michael Jackson's OTHER Doctor Now Involved In Lawsuit!

Der ehemaliger Assistent Jason Pfeiffer reichte eine Klage gegen den Arzt ein für die Bereitstellung von "ernsten Drogen" für MJ.............

Dr. Murray will certainly be pleased to hear this.

To recap, the Jacksons have been immersed in a wrongful death lawsuit against MJ's doctor Conrad Murray for quite some time now.

Back in March, Dr. Murray filed legal documents claiming that Michael Jackson's OTHER doctor, Arnold Klein, got him addicted to Demerol and "another powerful narcotic."

Now it looks like Dr. Conrad Murray's claims are being substantiated, because Dr. Klein's former assistant Jason Pfeiffer is filing a lawsuit against the doctor for providing "serious drugs" to MJ.

Here are the allegations that Pfeiffer made against Dr. Klein in the lawsuit:

"Throughout 2009, Michael was a frequent patient of Klein…Several times, Klein told Pfeiffer to help Michael down to the car because Michael was too drugged up and disoriented to stand on his own."

In the lawsuit, Pfeiffer also claims that he was told to "keep his mouth shut" when he was worried that MJ was being overmedicated, AND he claims that Klein "tried to sneak Michael prescription muscle relaxers in 2009 by writing a prescription in Pfeiffer's name." Deplorable!

Pfeiffer ALSO claims that he was wrongfully terminated, and that he was forced to help the doctor "round up gay sex partners, including prostitutes and homeless people." Yuck!

It actually gets worse though…the lawsuit claims that Klein forced Pfeiffer to help him prepare for his sex partners by washing his "groin." Double Yuck!

Due to everything listed (above) Pfeiffer claims that he's suffering from severe emotional problems, and he's suing the doctor for unspecified damages.

The doctor has, of course, refuted these claims.

Stay tuned…

http://perezhilton.com/2011-08-04-michael-jacksons-other-doctor-now-involved-in-lawsuit

[geli2709]

Conrad Murray pretrial scheduled for Monday

A pretrial hearing into the death of megastar Michael Jackson is scheduled for Monday when attorneys will discuss questionnaires that prospective jurors will be asked to fill out.

Conrad Murray, who was hired as Jackson's personal physician as he prepared for his comeback concerts in London, is charged in the singer's death.

It’s been more than two years since Jackson's death, which the Los Angeles coroner ruled was from an overdose of the surgical anesthetic propofol, combined with other drugs.

Jury selection was under way in May when the defense requested a delay so its expert witnesses could have more time to prepare for new experts hired by the prosecution.

The judge in the case then dismissed hundreds of prospective jurors and rescheduled the trial for several months later.

Jury selection in the trial is set to begin on September 8 in a Los Angeles County courtroom, with opening statements later in the month.

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/08/07/ahead-of-the-curve-the-next-7-days-42/

Jury Selection Starting for Conrad Murray Trial


Jury selection is gearing up for Houston medical doctor Conrad Murray’s manslaughter case.
Michael Jackson’s former personal doctor is facing charges in the singer’s death. Police searched Murray’s Houston medical office and storage unit in July. The trial is to start in September.

The process for picking jurors for the Conrad Murray manslaughter trial starts with a 30-page, 177-question document, which lawyers from both sides came up with a few months ago. Answers that prospective jurors give to these questions will be poured over by the attorneys and their jury consultants.

The questionnaire lists 136 potential witnesses including Michael’s parents, brothers and sisters, and his three children.

It also asks if, and why, an individual saw Michael’s “This Is It.” The prosecution is planning to show a clip from the documentary because they say it proves Michael was in a good health days before his death.

There is a question asking about potential juror’s familiarity with a laundry list of 27 different prescription drugs, including Propofol, the drug tied to Michael Jackson’s death.

It is likely that at least one question will be added about the Casey Anthony trial. Lawyers on both sides may want to know how much individuals followed that trial.

Murray’s lawyers say they are concerned about the amount of publicity that Anthony received, suggesting that jurors might have to be sequestered to ensure Dr. Murray gets a fair trial.

http://www.mjnewsalerts.com/2011/08/08/jury-selection-starting-for-conrad-murray-trial/#ixzz1USFqASGy

[Lena]

Conrad Murray Jury-Fragebogen zur Debatte

Gericht und Anwälte trafen im Fall gegen Michael Jackson`s persönlichen Arzt C. Murray am Montag zu einer Voranhörung zusammen

Die Anhörung war fokussiert auf die Fragen für potenziellen Juroren. Der Richter Michael Pastor sagte er hat das Gefühl das die Fragen, die in den Medien am Wochenende diskutiert wurden "bezogen waren auf einen alten Entwurf"

Es wurde währende der Montagsanhörung offenbart, dass die Staatsanwaltschaft eine Liste von Medikamenten hat die Murray anderen Patienten als Jackson verschrieben hat.Die Staatsanwaltschaft fragte auch an, dass die Murray-Verteidiger mehr Informationen offenlegen über ihre 103 potenziellen Zeugen. Derzeit so die Staatsanwaltschaft gibt es von 76 Zeugen-Kandidaten keine Stellungnahmen.

Murray war nicht präsent am Montag.

Nächste Voranhörung ist angesetzt für Mittwoch

Murray plädiert nicht schuldig gegen die Anklage der fahrlässigen Tötung von Jackson, der an einer Überdosis Propofol in 2009 starb.

Letzten Monat hat die Verteidigung angefragt, dass Juroren abgesondert werden um den Einfluss von TV-Experten zu vermeiden.

Murray´s Prozessbeginn ist für den 8 September angesetzt.

http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Conrad-Murray-Questionnaire-127232718.html

[Lena]

30 day countdown starts for trial of Michael Jackson's doctor

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/08/08/california.conrad.murray.hearing/index.html?iref=allsearch

By Alan Duke, CNN
August 8, 2011 -- Updated 1752 GMT (0152 HKT)

STORY HIGHLIGHTS

* Prosecutors complain defense lawyers have not met discovery requirements yet
* All sides meet privately with the judge to discuss jury questions
* Prosecutors want to use medical records of other Murray patients
* Dr. Conrad Murray is charged with involuntary manslaughter in Michael Jackson's death

Los Angeles (CNN) -- Anwälte, die Michael Jackson`s letzten Arzt Michael Jackson verteidigen verbleibt 1 Tag um die richterliche Anordnung zu erfüllen um der Staatsanwaltschaft alle Stellungnahmen und Reports von ihren potenziellen Zeugen zu übergeben.
Die Regel des californ. Gerichts besagen das beide Seiten 30 Tage bevor ein Prozess beginnt ihre Entdeckungen übergeben müssen, was am Dienstag im Dr. Murray-Fall der Fall ist, der angeklagt ist wegen des Todes von Jackson in 2009.
"Wir sind diesen Weg gegangen und ich hoffe wir müssen ihn nicht wieder gehen" sagte LA Conty Richter Michael Pastor während der Montagsanhörung nachdem die Staatsanwaltschaft beklagte, dass die Verteidigung Unterlagen zurück hält.
Der Staatsanwaltschaft fehlen 76 von 103 Stellungnahmen von der Zeugenliste der Verteidigung, Dokumente, die wiedergeben was diese wohl aussagen werden, sagte Staatsanwalt David Walgren.
"Wir können dies lösen" sagte Staatsanwalt Ed Chernoff dem Richter. Die Verteidigung hat alles übergeben was gesammelt ist, aber viele der potenziellen Zeugen haben nicht kooperiert.
Richter beruft beide Anwälte auf Mittwoch-Morgen ein, 29 Tage vor der Jury-Auswahl, so dass er "in den Griff bekommt" die aufgedeckten Fragen.
The judge moved talks about jury selection from open court into his chambers Monday morning. The lawyers are drafting the questions they'll ask potential jurors next month.
Das Gericht zog bezüglich der Absprache der Juryauswahl von öffentlicher Sitzung in seine "Gemächer". Die Anwälte sind bei der Auswahl der Fragen, die sie den potenziellen Jurymitgliedern nächsten Monat vorlegen werden.
"Es hört nie auf" sagte Pastor und meinte die Sorge, dass Teile der Jury-Fragen an die Medien leaken.
Die 129 Fragen die 500 potenzielle Juroren im März und April vorgelegt wurden wurden öffentlich gemacht nachdem der Pool auf 171 reduziert wurde, Aber der Prozess musste verschoben werden um Anwälten mehr Zeit zur Vorbereitung zu geben.
Verteidiger-Anwälter sagten sie haben Angst das die Juroren beeinflusst werden über das was sie im TV über den Fall hören, sagend das HLN`s Nancy Grace der Staatsanwaltschaft Argumente während des Casey Anthony-Prozess lieferte.
Die Staatsanwaltschaft teilte Pastor am Montag mit, dass sie wollen, dass er medenzin. Reports von Murray`s Patienten einsieht um zu entscheiden, dass sie diese nutzen dürfen um die Verschreibungspraxis von Murray darzulegen. Keine der Patieten hat einen Bezug zum Jackson-Fall, sagt Wagren.
Pastor stellte die Rrechtmäßgkeit in Frage private medez. Reports geschützt durch ein föderales Gesetz ohne die Patientenerlaubnis zu behandeln.
" Ich möchte nicht durch persönlichzen medizin. Reports von Leuten gehen ohne das es dafür einen Grund gibt" sagt Pastor.
Die Strafverfolgung beschlagnahmte Boxen von Reports von Murray`s Praxen in Houston, Texas, Las Vegas und Nevada.

Jackson's death on June 25, 2009, was from an overdose of the surgical anesthetic propofol, combined with other drugs, the Los Angeles coroner ruled. Murray, whom Jackson hired to care for him as he prepared for his comeback concerts in London, allegedly administered the fatal dose.

[Lena]

Von der heutigen Anhörung:
Letzter Termin für die Abgabe von Unterlagen für die Verteidigung. Staatsanwaltschaft sagt Verteidigung hat nun Offenlegungspflichten erfüllt.
Richter sagt der 8. September für Juryauswahl soll als Termin gehalten werden, Eröffnungsstatements in der Woche vom 26. Sept. wenn alles nach Plan läuft.
Verteidigung eröffnete dem Gericht, dass sie diese Woche Donnerstag oder Freitag Pfeifer interviewen wollen, der eine Zivilklage gegen Klein einreichte er habe MJ mit in den letzten Wochen seines Lebens mit verschreibungspflichtigen Medikamenten versorgt (Pfeifer widerum ist von Klein verklagt worden wegen Hinterziehungen von Millionen während seiner Tätigkeit für Klein)

http://edition.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/08/10/california.conrad.murray.hearing/index.html?iref=allsearch

Murray lawyers to question assistant to another Michael Jackson doctor
By Alan Duke, CNN
August 10, 2011 -- Updated 1701 GMT (0101 HKT)
Click to play
Did Michael Jackson's doctor cross line?
STORY HIGHLIGHTS

* NEW: September 8 is still "our go date" for the trial to start, judge says
* NEW: Defense interviews Dr. Arnold Klein's ex-office manager as a possible witness
* NEW: The former manager says Klein supplied Jackson with drugs before his death
* NEW: Prosecutors says defense lawyers have now met discovery requirements

RELATED TOPICS

* Conrad Murray
* Manslaughter
* Crime and Law

Los Angeles (CNN) -- Defense lawyers for Michael Jackson's last doctor met Wednesday's deadline for handing over documents to prosecutors in the involuntary manslaughter case, clearing the way for the start of the trial in 29 days.

Dr. Conrad Murray, who is charged with causing the pop star's death two years ago, was not present at Wednesday morning's hearing in Los Angeles County Superior Court.

If jury selection stays on schedule, opening statements would probably be delivered during the last week of September, Judge Michael Pastor said.

Wednesday's hearing offered a peek into the previously secret defense witness list when it was revealed that a former office assistant for another doctor may testify about allegations that that doctor was giving Jackson drugs in his last months.

Jason Pfieffer, who worked as office manager and personal assistant for Dr. Arnold Klein, filed a legal action last week accusing the Beverly Hills dermatologist of supplying Jackson with prescription drugs during the last months of his life.

Klein previously sued Pfieffer in federal court, accusing him of embezzling millions of dollars while he worked for him.

Defense lawyer Ed Chernoff told the court Wednesday he intended to interview Pfieffer either Thursday or Friday of this week.

One potential roadblock to the trial starting on time was removed Wednesday when Deputy District Attorney David Walgren told the judge that the defense has provided a "much greater level of detail as to the status of the witnesses." Walgren had previously complained that information about 76 of the 103 witnesses on the defense list had not been disclosed.

Pastor made it clear that September 8 is still "our go date" for the start of jury selection, with opening statements sometime during the week of September 26. The trial would end around Thanksgiving, based on previous estimates by lawyers.

Several hundred potential jurors will be screened to determine if their personal lives would allow them to sit through a two-month trial. Those who pass that test will be given a questionnaire with more than 100 questions to determine if they are qualified to be jurors.

Jackson's death on June 25, 2009, was from an overdose of the surgical anesthetic propofol, combined with other drugs, the Los Angeles coroner ruled.

Murray, whom Jackson hired to care for him as he prepared for his comeback concerts in London, is accused of administering the fatal dose.

[hope?]

"Der Prozess gegen Michael Jacksons Leibarzt Conrad Murray beginnt am 26. September in Los Angeles. Das teilte der zuständige Richter Michael Pastor am Mittwoch mit. Mit der Auswahl der Geschworenen soll demnach bereits am 8. September begonnen werden."

Quelle: http://www.stern.de/news2/aktuell/pr...r-1715471.html

[TrueCrypt]

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2011/08/nine-michael-jacksons-former-docs-could-be-called-witnesses-dr-conrad-murray

By Jen Heger - Radar Legal Editor

Dr. Conrad Murray's criminal defense team has nine of Michael Jackson's former doctors on their witness list, all of whom could be called at his upcoming involuntary manslaughter trial, RadarOnline.com is exclusively reporting.

In court documents reviewed by RadarOnline.com, Dr. Murray's lawyers list 103 people who could be called at the trial, including a nurse practitioner Cherilyn Lee who claims Jackson asked her for Propofol in the weeks leading up to his death, but she refused to supply it.

PHOTOS:* Michael Jackson Through The Years

Among the doctors on the list, which includes Dr. Arnold Klein, is Dr. Neil Ratner, who toured with Jackson in 1996 and 1997. According to a CNN report Dr. Ratner would keep medical equipment which would monitor Jackson's vital signs as he was "under." Jackson allegedly had trouble sleeping and utilized the anesthesiologist* to "take him down" and "bring him back up."

Ratner confirmed that Michael Jackson suffered from a sleep disorder, but wouldn't elaborate further than that. It's anticipated that Dr. Murray's lawyers Ed Chernoff and Michael Flanagan will grill Dr. Ratner about the specifics of his medical treatment of Jackson.

PHOTOS: Stage Shots of Michael Jackson Performing

Dr. David Adams, a Las Vegas anesthesiologist who gave Jackson Propofol at least four times for medical procedures, is also on the witness list. As RadarOnline.com previously reported, the defense feels "Dr. Adams is clearly relevant."

Cherilyn Lee, a nurse practitioner and nutritionist who worked for Jackson, and claimed in the days after his sudden death that he had asked her for Propofol in April 2009, was served with a subpoena to testify at the trial by Dr. Murray's defense team in May 2011.

PHOTOS: Prince And Paris Jackson Out And About

"Cherilyn is prepared to testify at the trial and tell the truth. Cherilyn has never spoken with anyone from the District Attorney's office. She was interviewed in the weeks after Jackson's death by the coroner and the LAPD. Cherilyn hasn't heard from those agencies since that time," an insider connected to the case tells us.

Jury selection in the criminal trial against Dr. Murray begins on September 8, 2011, and is anticipated to take several weeks to select a jury. Opening arguments are slated for the last week of September. The trial could last until Thanksgiving

Dr. Conrad Murray faces up to four years in state prison if convicted of the charge.

Dr. Murray is the only doctor connected with Jackson who has been criminally charged in connection with the Superstars death