Anyone is following Dr. Murray's trial?

Luzz said:
He was with the defense, said that Michael injected himself propofol and swalled pills, so clearing Dr. Murray of any wrong doing.
Click to expand...


This is not our Earth logic! There is a reason why propofol is only available to qualified medical personnel on prescription. And it's not so they can give it to their patients and allow them to inject themselves with it.

I don't care if Jackson did inject himself with the stuff, Murray is still 100% culpable for allowing him free access to it in the first place.

Rolfe.
 
Rolfe said:
This is not our Earth logic! There is a reason why propofol is only available to qualified medical personnel on prescription. And it's not so they can give it to their patients and allow them to inject themselves with it.

I don't care if Jackson did inject himself with the stuff, Murray is still 100% culpable for allowing him free access to it in the first place.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

This part I couldn't agree with more. When I heard that the defense against negligence was that he gave his patient a sedative (other than propofol) then left the patient alone with access to propofol, my first thought was 'Isn't that kind of the definition of negligence'

I am not a medical professional, but even I can see the problems with starting with a patient that already has a known drug problem, then diminishing his capacity with a mild sedative and leaving him alone with means to self inject a major sedative. The fact that the defense argued that this is evidence against negligence is just mind boggling to me.
 
cwalner said:
Removed post of embarrassing wrongness
Click to expand...

Ah, we all might profit from that on occasion.

On the topic, I was interested but I haven't been quite interested enough to read more than the headlines. I was hoping that I could just form an opinion based on what a few JREFers had to say without actually expending any work to form one.

One thing that I haven't seen mentioned in the press was that Murray looked a little addled to me. Is this guy playing with a full deck or are there a few cards missing?
 
davefoc said:
One thing that I haven't seen mentioned in the press was that Murray looked a little addled to me. Is this guy playing with a full deck or are there a few cards missing?
Click to expand...

Not sure what you mean by addled, and I haven't seen the coverage (only heard a bit on radio). However, MJ was his only client, so I assume he developed a close relationship with him. Now, on top of losing a person he was close to, he is also on trial as being responsible for that death. I would not interpret too much beyond these stresses in his appearances.
 
cwalner said:
Not sure what you mean by addled, and I haven't seen the coverage (only heard a bit on radio). However, MJ was his only client, so I assume he developed a close relationship with him. Now, on top of losing a person he was close to, he is also on trial as being responsible for that death. I would not interpret too much beyond these stresses in his appearances.
Click to expand...
Indeed. Even if he didn't care a whit for Jacko, being on trial (televised trial, no less) for homicide can't be a picnic, even - perhaps especially - if you're guilty.
 
Babbylonian said:
Indeed. Even if he didn't care a whit for Jacko, being on trial (televised trial, no less) for homicide can't be a picnic, even - perhaps especially - if you're guilty.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen him break out of his deer in the headlights expression in any of the footage I have seen of him. I think his demeanor is out of the normal range. Yeah, his situation is out of the normal range and maybe that is the explanation for what I have noticed, but it doesn't look right to me even given his out of the normal situation. His alleged behavior around the time of Jackson's death seemed to edge into just plain stupid to me and that might be because his judgment was already severely impaired.

Even his decision to fight this thing is looking a little on the not quite bright side. I don't know what kind of a deal he was offered but I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't so bad that taking a shot given the evidence against him may not have been a rational decision, especially when one considers the huge monetary costs on him of this trial.
 
Yes, his control over his expression was interesting...
I wonder what that might indicate to a body languager.
 
Wow, I just read a Slate article on this that linked to a Fox News article. According to the article Murray never received even a single pay check. The Fox News article said that Murray had worked for Jackson for six weeks but the contract to pay Murray the $150K per month was never signed and Jackson never paid Murray a single penny.

I had guessed that Murray had been taking in the $150K/month for at least the time of the rehearsals for the tour. So Murray got zero remuneration, paid staggering legal bills, was convicted of manslaughter and could still face civil suits if any of the very wealthy people that have a stake in this decided to go after him. This Michael Jackson gig didn't work out so well for Murray.
 
davefoc,
Dr. Murry had already worked for 2 months with Michael according to his interview with the police, that makes at least 8 weeks. However the report could be true, contracts and negociations take time, so I am not surprised if he hadn´t been paid yet.

What an irony, isn´t it? He was medical negligent because of money but never got a penny. But I am sure he will cash from this, with books, movies, interviews and documentaries after he has served his sentence, which is only 4 years. So at the end, he will be a rich man and the world would have lost an amazing enterteinment artist.
 
A bitch got rich by drugging a rich bitch. Then the rich drugged bitch predictably died. Now the rich drugger-bitch has been convicted of manslaughter.

Who didn't see that coming? Hell, anybody with ears could have heard it coming, like an incoming 180 mm artillery shell.

GAME OVER

END PRINT

END PROGRAM

STOP
 
I closely followed the trial. Murray was making a documentary during the trial and gave television interviews saying that it wasn't his fault, about nine days before he was found guilty. He never took the stand in court. The documentary and interviews were broadcast after the trial but before today's sentencing. The judge took a very dim view of that along with Murray's other shortcomings.
 
Murray claimed that he was attempting to get Jackson off of propofol gradually. Does anybody know if that claim was investigated by comparing the amount of propofol purchased to the amount used?

Was there an estimate of how much propofol had been administered to Jackson and did the court specifically find that Murray had administered all of it thereby rejecting the defense claim that Jackson had self administered some of it.
 
davefoc said:
Murray claimed that he was attempting to get Jackson off of propofol gradually. Does anybody know if that claim was investigated by comparing the amount of propofol purchased to the amount used?

Was there an estimate of how much propofol had been administered to Jackson and did the court specifically find that Murray had administered all of it thereby rejecting the defense claim that Jackson had self administered some of it.
Click to expand...

Murray ordered about four gallons of propofol in total. He didn't keep any records of the doses. He claimed that the last dose he gave to Jackson was 25mg, which is not enough to put anyone under.

The order book with the pharmacist indicated that Murray was ordering gradually increasing amounts. Propofol is an anaesthetic primarialy and is only used in hospitals. Even Dr White, Murray's expert said that it should never have been administered in someone's bedroom and also not for a sleep disorder.
 
Last edited:
Parallax said:
Murray ordered about four gallons of propofol in total. He didn't keep any records of the doses. He claimed that the last dose he gave to Jackson was 25mg, which is not enough to put anyone under.

The order book with the pharmacist indicated that Murray was ordering gradually increasing amounts. Propofol is an anaesthetic primarialy and is only used in hospitals. Even Dr White, Murray's expert said that it should never have been administered in someone's bedroom and also not for a sleep disorder.
Click to expand...

This sounds pretty damning.

As a casual follower of the case, I was aware of a few lines of defense:
1. Interactions with other drugs that Murray wasn't involved in administering or prescribing caused the death.
2. Jackson, himself, administered the fatal dose while Murray was out of the room.
3. Jackson, before Murray, had become addicted to propofol and Murray was gradually reducing dosages to break Jackson's dependency.

The lack of written records by itself sounds pretty damning though. Did Murray's defense have an explanation for that?

It sounds like the gradually-reducing-the-dosage defense was pretty much shattered by the facts.

I take it the interaction theory was shot down because there weren't other drugs in Jackson's system that would have been consistent with that theory?

What about the, Jackson-administered-the-fatal-dosage-himself theory? Didn't the defense have a doctor that testified in favor of that theory?
 
Doesn't matter. Propofol is strictly prescription-only for a reason, and that reason isn't so you can get some and leave it around for your crazy rich boss to self-administer.

It was Murray's responsibility to keep that stuff securely locked up so that nobody who wasn't authorised to access it could get at it. Which includes Jackson.

That wasn't a defence. It was an admission.

Rolfe.
 
Hi Rolfe,
Any chance you're a descendant of Pochahontas?

And slightly more on topic, OK, it sounds like based on my casual understanding of the case Murray's defense was total crap. Can anybody, even playing devil's advocate, make some kind of a case for Murray?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom