[Hess]

http://www.tmz.com/2...d-dies-defense/


Dr. Conrad Murray's lawyer announced in court this AM that Murray is abandoning the argument that Michael Jackson accidentally killed himself by orally self-administering Propofol.

Michael Flanagan said in court today that an independent study by the defense showed swallowing Propofol would not produce fatal results.

Associated Press initially reported that Murray's lawyers were dropping the claim that MJ self-administered the fatal dose, but that is not accurate.

Lead lawyer, Ed Chernoff, said in opening statements that they would show MJ self-administered the drug. Chernoff can still argue that MJ injected the fatal dose after awakening and becoming frustrated.

[Hess]

http://edition.cnn.c...rial/index.html

Los Angeles (CNN) -- Dr. Conrad Murray's defense team has dropped its theory that Michael Jackson may have orally ingested the surgical anesthetic propofol that the coroner says killed the pop icon, his lawyers told the court Wednesday.

Lawyers for Murray, who is on trial for involuntary manslaughter, will instead focus on the theory that Jackson used a syringe to inject the fatal overdose through a catheter on his left leg while Murray was away from his bedside.

Murray's defense also contends that Jackson swallowed eight tablets of lorazepam, a sedative, in a desperate search for sleep the day he died.

Also Wednesday, Dr. Alon Steinberg, a cardiologist called as an expert witness by the prosecution, listed six examples of gross negligence by Murray that he testified contributed to Jackson's death.

"If these deviations would not have happened, Mr. Jackson would be alive," Steinberg testified.

The Los Angeles County coroner ruled that Jackson's June 25, 2009, death was from "acute propofol intoxication" in combination with several sedatives, including lorazepam.

Prosecutors argue that Murray is criminally responsible for Jackson's death because his use of propofol to treat the singer's insomnia was grossly negligent and an extreme deviation from the standard of care required of physicians.

Murray should be found guilty even if jurors accept the theory that Jackson self-administered the fatal dose because the doctor was reckless for leaving the drugs near his patient when he was not around, Steinberg testified Wednesday.

The possibility that Jackson drank propofol arose during Murray's preliminary hearing in January, when a prosecution expert agreed with the defense that a higher level of propofol in his stomach compared to his blood suggested it could have happened.

Both prosecution and defense experts conducted tests on animals since January's preliminary hearing on the "bio-availabity" of propofol if consumed orally. Defense attorney Michael Flanagan agreed Wednesday that the studies showed "propofol, when orally ingested, is not bio-available."

Another study, conducted over the summer on university students in Chile, concluded "if you drink propofol, it will have trivial effects on the person," Deputy District Attorney David Walgren said.

"Oral propofol did not kill Michael Jackson," Walgren said.

The defense, in a rare moment in the trial, agreed.

"We are not going to assert at any point in time that Michael Jackson orally ingested propofol," Flanagan said.

Steinberg is the first of three experts who will wrap up the prosecution's case.

With about three days of defense testimony expected, closing arguments could be just a week away in Murray's involuntary manslaughter trial.

The pathologist who conducted the autopsy on Jackson testified Tuesday that while it was physically possible that Jackson could have given himself the overdose that killed him, Murray is still guilty of causing his death because he gave him access to the dangerous drugs.



Harry Belafonte: Jackson was 'sweet kid'
If convicted of involuntary manslaughter, Murray could spend four years in a California prison and lose his medical license.

The closing days of the prosecution case will be filled with science, a contrast to previous testimony from Murray's girlfriends, dramatic audio recordings and shocking death photos that highlighted the first 10 days of the trial.

Murray was hired as Jackson's personal physician while the singer prepared for his "This Is It" comeback concerts in London, planned to start in July 2009.

A stark photo of Jackson's naked corpse lying on the autopsy table a day after he died was displayed on a large screen in front of the jury Tuesday.

A Jackson fan who won a lottery for a seat in court became so upset she fled, while other fans quietly wept and hugged each other.

The singer's mother, Katherine Jackson, was forewarned by the prosecutor about the photograph and chose to leave the courtroom during the mid-morning break, before the pathologist who autopsied her son took the witness stand.

The photograph was shown during the testimony of Dr. Christopher Rogers, the Los Angeles County deputy medical examiner who conducted the autopsy and ruled Jackson's death a homicide.

Rogers said Murray's admission in a police interview that he used propofol to treat Jackson's insomnia was a factor in his conclusion that it was a homicide, not an accidental death.

He said Murray's use of propofol in Jackson's home without proper monitoring and resuscitation equipment or a "precision dosing device" contributed to the singer's propofol overdose and subsequent death.

"Essentially, the doctor would be estimating how much propofol he would be giving," Rogers testified. "I think it would be easy under those circumstances for the doctor to estimate wrong and give too much propofol."

Murray, in the interview played for the jury over the past two days of testimony, told detectives he gave Jackson a series of three sedatives -- Valium, lorazepam and midazolam -- over a 10-hour period before finally giving in to Jackson's plea for propofol.

"I've got to sleep, Dr. Conrad," Murray said Jackson pleaded to him. "I have these rehearsals to perform. I must be ready for the show in England. Tomorrow, I will have to cancel my performance, because you know I cannot function if I don't get to sleep."

Murray said he injected a small dose of propofol using a syringe, but the prosecution contends he also used a makeshift IV setup to keep Jackson medicated and asleep. That drip may have malfunctioned while the doctor was not monitoring his patient, they contend.

The propofol bottle that prosecutors say Murray used for the IV drip had a slit in the rubber top, which Rogers said is evidence it was part of the drip system.

On the recording, Murray insisted he kept a close watch on Jackson after he finally fell asleep. The physician never mentioned the long list of e-mails and calls that cell phone records later revealed.

Rogers testified it was unlikely that Jackson self-administered the deadly dose of propofol in the two minutes Murray said he was away from him, but he conceded under defense questioning that it was physically possible.

Jackson could have reached the IV port near his left knee to self-inject propofol, he said. If Jackson pushed the drug in quickly, it could have made his heart stop immediately, Rogers said.

Rogers later added, under questioning by the prosecutor, that he would still consider it a homicide even if Jackson administered the fatal overdose to himself since the doctor would have been negligent in leaving the drugs nearby.

His testimony also gave some support to the defense theory that Jackson orally ingested an overdose of lorazepam from a pill bottle next to his bed.

A toxicology study of Jackson's stomach contents, conducted in recent months, showed a level of lorazepam four times higher in the stomach that in his blood.

"There would have to be some oral lorazepam taken somewhere along the line," Rogers testified, after taking a moment to do some quick math while on the witness stand.

Dette indlæg er redigeret af Hess: 12 October 2011 - 08:22 PM

[Hess]

Murray's forsvar har lidt et kæmpe nederlag. - De har afvist deres første teori.

De mener selvfølgelig stadig MJ selv tog stoffet, men har ændret historie. - Det gør unægteligt deres historie/teori mere svækket og upålidelig!

[Hess]

http://www.bt.dk/kri...-sig-selv-ihjel

Pludselig ser det sort ud for privatlægen Conrad Murray, der står anklaget for at have dræbt verdens største popstjerne Michael Jackson.





Efter flere eksperter først havde spået, at Dr. Conrad Murray, der angiveligt gav Michael Jacksons den dødbringende indsprøjtning med det stærkt bedøvende middel Propofol, var godt vej til en frifindelse i retssagen i Los Angeles, vender sagen pludselig på en tallerken.

I går afgav retsmedicineren Christopher Rogers nemlig sit vidneudsagn. Og dét var ikke gode nyheder for Conrad Murray og hans advokater.

Det var således Dr. Rogers, der foretog selve obduktionen på Michael Jackson. Og med sit vidneudsagn nedskød han én gang for alle forsvarets teori om, at Michael Jackson på én eller anden måde havde slået sig selv ihjel ved at tage en ekstra stor dosis af Propofolen.

Ifølge Dr. Rogers var koncentrationen af Propofol i Jacksons krop således alt for stor, hvis Dr. Conrad Murray, som han selv har fastholdt, kun lod Jackson være alene i to minutter.

Og med al dén medicin, der i forvejen var i Popkongens krop, anser Christopher Rogers det så godt som umuligt, at popstjernen kunne være nærværende nok til selv at indtage den dødbringende dosis Propofol.

Sagen fortsætter i dag. Og hvis Conrad Murray findes skyldig i uagtsomt manddrab, risikerer han op til fire års fængsel.

Michael Jackson døde 25. juni 2009.

[themjj]

"Efter flere eksperter først havde spået, at Dr. Conrad Murray, der angiveligt gav Michael Jacksons den dødbringende indsprøjtning med det stærkt bedøvende middel Propofol, var godt vej til en frifindelse i retssagen i Los Angeles, vender sagen pludselig på en tallerken."

Øhhh hvilke eksperter? Ingen eksperter jeg hørt udtale sig har sagt noget som helst i den retning, tvært imod! Hvor i alverden har de det fra, BT journalistik er noget underligt noget...

[Hess]

Jeg tænkte præcis det samme da jeg læste artiklen.

Der er jo aldrig nogen der har sagt at sagen var til Murrays fordel.

Anklageren har ganske enkelt været bedre end Murrays forsvar!

[Mike's Moonwalker]

Der er både godt og skidt i sagen indtil videre.

Godt er:
- Obduktionslægen slog fast, at han betegner Michaels død som et mord uanset om Michael selv sprøjtede noget af propofolen ind eller ej, fordi Murray er ansvarlig for, at Michael i det hele taget havde adgang til et farlig stof som propofol.
- At Murray valgte at give Michael propofol under yderst kritisable forholde, hvor der ikke var den nødvendige overvågnings- og genoplivningsudstyr og ej heller måleudstyr, og derfor kunne Murray nemt komme til at fejldosere.
- At Michael kunne sprøjte propofolen ind på de 2 minutter, som Murray påstår, at han var væk. Ergo hvis forsvaret vil fastholde, at Michael selv sprøjtede det ind, må de erkende, at Murray havde ladet Michael være uovervåget i længere tid, end han påstår -> dermed skal Murray både indrømme, at han har løjet, og at han negligerede sin patient.

Skidt er:
- Obduktionslægen vidnede, at Michael i praksis godt kunne have sprøjtede sig selv med propofol, fordi han godt kunne nå det ene IV drop og dette ville have fået hans hjerte til at stoppe med det samme.
- At juryen skal ved midste tvivl om skyld frikende Murray. Eftersom mistanken om, at Michael selv kunne sprøjte propofol ind ikke er aflivet, kan denne mistanke gør, at juryen ikke med sikkerhed kan dømme Murray til skyldig. Hvis de ikke med sikkerhed kan sige, at Murray er skyldig, bliver de nødt til at dømme ham uskyldig.

Personlig er jeg sikker på, at Michael aldrig selv vil have sprøjtet propofolen ind! Uanset hvor desperat Michael måtte have været for at falde i søvn, ville han aldrig gøre det. Jeg er sikker på, at Michael var udmærket klar over, hvad propofol er, og hvad den vil gøre ved ham.

[HeavenCanWait]

Men Michael's fingeraftryk er ikke fundet på nogen af tingene - hverken flaskerne, sprøjterne eller IV....

[Mike's Moonwalker]

HeavenCanWait, på 13 October 2011 - 11:17 AM, sagde:

Men Michael's fingeraftryk er ikke fundet på nogen af tingene - hverken flaskerne, sprøjterne eller IV....

Nemlig! Så anklageren skal "bare" overbevise juryen om, at Murray er skyldig, så de ikke er det mindste i tvivl. Beyond any doubt!