PatrickS77 said:

^^So what? Quoting songs won't convince anyone of anything! And Klein would say, that he wasn't addicted. Even the expert on the stand today couldn't say whether he was addicted.

[Edited 10/27/11 14:36pm]

... of course is going to deny that 'he wasn't addicted'. He doesn't want to be part of the 'doctors'

who helped feed Michael's addiction. Wouldn't you distant yourself from this circus? He is trying to

clear his conscience . He is just as guilty as the rest. He was getting paid too , don't think he wasn't .

'"They are pushers with white coats."

[Edited 10/27/11 14:51pm]

RosesRred said:

PatrickS77 said:

^^So what? Quoting songs won't convince anyone of anything! And Klein would say, that he wasn't addicted. Even the expert on the stand today couldn't say whether he was addicted.

[Edited 10/27/11 14:36pm]

of course is going to deny that 'he wasn't addicted'. He doesn't want to be part of the 'doctors'

who helped feed Michael's addiction. Wouldn't you distant yourself from this circus? He is trying to

clear his conscience . He is just as guilty as the rest. He was getting paid too , don't think he wasn't .

'"They are pushers with white coats."

The problem is that so far NOONE has claimed he was addicted. Even the addiction witness called by the defence that he was NOT able to say that he was addicted. Walgren had to ask him three times though to get this answer from him.

dag said:

angel345 said:

Kibbles, do you know why AEG Randy Phillips was called to the stand? What was the revelance in that?

angle, don't worry. None of the defence witnesses was relevant so far.

I didn't think so

RosesRred said:

PatrickS77 said:

^^So what? Quoting songs won't convince anyone of anything! And Klein would say, that he wasn't addicted. Even the expert on the stand today couldn't say whether he was addicted.

[Edited 10/27/11 14:36pm]

... of course is going to deny that 'he wasn't addicted'. He doesn't want to be part of the 'doctors'

who helped feed Michael's addiction. Wouldn't you distant yourself from this circus? He is trying to

clear his conscience . He is just as guilty as the rest. He was getting paid too , don't think he wasn't .

'"They are pushers with white coats."

[Edited 10/27/11 14:51pm]

You said Klein would disagree with me, that he wasn't addicted! So don't come back to me whith that, when I pick up on that! If he Klein would knowingly hit up an addicted Michael Jackson with Demerol, why would he keep thorough notes of that??

Nope guess not, nevermind.

[Edited 10/27/11 15:08pm]

angel345 said:

dag said:

angle, don't worry. None of the defence witnesses was relevant so far.

I didn't think so

What do you mean? Has any of their witnesses made sense to you or proved any point?

dag said:

angel345 said:

I didn't think so

What do you mean? Has any of their witnesses made sense to you or proved any point?

You've just confirmed what I thought all along. He's not revelant. Thank you.

However, the nurse was revelant for both the defense and the prosecution.

angel345 said:

dag said:

angle, don't worry. None of the defence witnesses was relevant so far.

I didn't think so

the nearest i can determine about phillips is they wanted him to testify to mj missing rehearsals, the contract (tried to slip it in), and so-called 'riot act' meeting to establish that mj was stressed out from the concerts and in such a precarious financial position that he would visit klein to get doped up. but of course, much of this hearsay (a statement made outside of court offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted) couldn't be backed up by facts.

it's like that expert on the stand and the poster rosesrred above making assertions about mj's addictions based on "public perception" or the fact that he wrote a song about addiction. these assertions may be offered for "truth", but it's ridiculous to rely on them as such w/o other evidence.

[Edited 10/27/11 15:23pm]

PatrickS77 said:

RosesRred said:

... of course is going to deny that 'he wasn't addicted'. He doesn't want to be part of the 'doctors'

who helped feed Michael's addiction. Wouldn't you distant yourself from this circus? He is trying to

clear his conscience . He is just as guilty as the rest. He was getting paid too , don't think he wasn't .

'"They are pushers with white coats."

[Edited 10/27/11 14:51pm]

You said Klein would disagree with me, that he wasn't addicted! So don't come back to me whith that, when I pick up on that! If he Klein would knowingly hit up an addicted Michael Jackson with Demerol, why would he keep thorough notes of that??

Why? 6 words...

HE HAD TO COVER HIS TRACKS.

Remember

Klein is watching the trial in the comfort of his own home.

He might be biting his nails right now since his name is being brought up quite

often nowdays.

They did make a BIG deal because Conrad was lacking notes.

Look how much respect that nurse received when

she was on the stand , she appeared Believable.

kibbles said:

angel345 said:

I didn't think so

the nearest i can determine about phillips is they wanted him to testify to mj missing rehearsals, the contract (tried to slip it in), and so-called 'riot act' meeting to establish that mj was stressed out from the concerts and in such a precarious financial position that he would visit klein to get doped up. but of course, much of this hearsay (a statement made outside of court offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted) couldn't be backed up by facts.

it's like that expert on the stand and the poster rosesrred above making assertions about mj's addictions based on "public perception" or the fact that he wrote a song about addiction. these assertions may be offered for "truth", but it's ridiculous to rely on them as such w/o other evidence.

[Edited 10/27/11 15:23pm]

Life doesn't always imitate art. Sure, it is one thing to suspect, but proof is the best defense.

RosesRred said:

PatrickS77 said:

You said Klein would disagree with me, that he wasn't addicted! So don't come back to me whith that, when I pick up on that! If he Klein would knowingly hit up an addicted Michael Jackson with Demerol, why would he keep thorough notes of that??

Why? 6 words...

HE HAD TO COVER HIS TRACKS.

Remember

Klein is watching the trial in the comfort of his own home.

He might be biting his nails right now since his name is being brought up quite

often nowdays.

They did make a BIG deal because Conrad was lacking notes.

Look how much respect that nurse received when

she was on the stand , she appeared Believable.

Yes, but it is known that Murray gave him stuff... he even admitted as much. Whereaas with Klein, the only proof that he gave Michael Demerol are his notes. If Klein wouldn't have documented it, there wouldn't be any proof whatsoever that Michael has gotten Demerol from Klein! So again, why would he keep notes, if he had reason to suspect that he was fueling Michael's "addiction"?

dag said:

RosesRred said:

of course is going to deny that 'he wasn't addicted'. He doesn't want to be part of the 'doctors'

who helped feed Michael's addiction. Wouldn't you distant yourself from this circus? He is trying to

clear his conscience . He is just as guilty as the rest. He was getting paid too , don't think he wasn't .

'"They are pushers with white coats."

The problem is that so far NOONE has claimed he was addicted. Even the addiction witness called by the defence that he was NOT able to say that he was addicted. Walgren had to ask him three times though to get this answer from him.

i supposed if you don't count janet, rebbie, and randy. i read on another board that they were nodding in agreement when the def expert was claiming that mj was addicted.

It's upsetting seeing MSN headlines like "MJ most likely addicted:says expert", I HATE how misleading it is, knowing already what was spoken about.

I used to go WTF over Janet's media statements and what Randy and Rebbie possibly think. They either mean once addicted, always an addict cause of the painkillers in 1993, or one or more of them do not agree with taking anti depressants or whatever it was to run away from pain. Remember, Janet had depression but I don't think she took anything based on public knowledge, according to an article back then, but MJ endured much worse and it's understandable if he had it and developed anxiety and needed Ativan. Those are not for anyone, even his family to say he didn't need them. This is not the first time family does not understand mental health, and that is all it is.

Due to me being out of the office yesterday, I was able to watch (HLN & In Session) a good portion of Dr. Waldman (the addiction specialist) exchange with both the defense team who hired him and the cross examination. Those commentators were annoying as hell afterwards in trying to stir drama with this addiction crap.

Call me crazy but I don't see the significance of establishing whether or not he was addicted to anything. It doesn't matter. His death came under Conrad's watch. No excuses for negligence and incompetence.

1. He wasn't supposed to receive Propofol in the first place. Regardless of how much Michael might have begged for it, he shouldn't have given it to him. PERIOD. Indefensible. Not to mention him lying about it later to the paramedics. Plus, the cover up after the fact. He knew he fucked up and tried to cover himself.

2. He wasn't supposed to be left alone, even for two minutes.

3. Failure to call 911 immediately is another matter of gross incompetence. The time between the so-called discovery and the actual call being made for 911, is criminal alone. I recently took a CPR course, and that's the first thing we were taught, Assign someone "in particular" to call 911 IMMEDIATELY, even before administering CPR.

To me, if he was an addict as they claim and was trying to ween him off the stuff, why such poor care and attention? You had ONE patient dude. The addiction claim just makes Conrad look worse to me. It highlights his failures as his primary care physician. I don't see anyway around that.

I'm sure the prosecutors will review everything well enough to keep things in perspective for the jury. This case is a no brainer for me. Too bad he won't do much time in the end...

Interestingly, don't you find it strange that with Waldman, they were going for Demerol addiction and the withdrawal causing the death and with White they are going for Lorazapam and Midazalam theories? They are throwing out there anything hoping something will work. How is it even possible for them to change their story with every witness with every minute?

^Cause all the defense has to do is provide reasonable doubt, they can/are throwing everything at the wall hoping that if enough sticks the jury will question what actually happened when MJ was alone in his bedroom. There doesnt need to be a clear point A to Point B logic.

[Edited 10/28/11 9:01am]

lazycrockett said:

^Cause all the defense has to do is provide reasonable doubt, they can/are throwing everything at the wall hoping that if enough sticks the jury will question what actually happened when MJ was alone in his bedroom. There doesnt need to be a clear point A to Point B logic.

[Edited 10/28/11 9:01am]

But how come that it is allowed? They should be telling the truth, right? And not come up with various theories?

Flanagan just called MJ "Mr. Lorazapam"

[Edited 10/28/11 9:57am]

dag said:

Flanagan just called MJ "Mr. Lorazapam"

[Edited 10/28/11 9:57am]

Flanagan should just retire after this one. He's done. His brain is fried.

Actually thats being crafty, he's having the jury associate Mj with Lorazpam.

I find it interesting that this guy is degrading Shafer's graphs while he hasn't done any himself. He had someone else do them for him and he keeps on "estimating".

They're trying to make Shafer look like an idiot for making all the diagrams when he did them just to show how dumb defence's theories are.

dag said:

They're trying to make Shafer look like an idiot for making all the diagrams when he did them just to show how dumb defence's theories are.

yep, they are going off of what murray said, rather than what the evidence at the scene including mj's body actually showed. that will backfire when walgren reminds white of all the lies murray told in that interview. how can you rely on his word when it's unreliable?

kibbles said:

dag said:

They're trying to make Shafer look like an idiot for making all the diagrams when he did them just to show how dumb defence's theories are.

yep, they are going off of what murray said, rather than what the evidence at the scene including mj's body actually showed. that will backfire when walgren reminds white of all the lies murray told in that interview. how can you rely on his word when it's unreliable?

I so can't wait for the cross.

Judge Michael Pastor expressed concern that the court may start losing jurors now that the trial of Dr. Conrad Murray is starting to push into late next week.

During a chambers meeting with lawyers on Thursday, prosecutor David Walgren asked the judge for more time to consider new evidence submitted by the defense. The new evidence includes new simulations from defense expert Dr. Paul White's showing the possible effects of the drugs in Jackson's system the day he died.

Walgren called the graphs of the new simulations, "hieroglyphics."

Judge Pastor acknowledged Walgren's concerns, but said he's worried about changing the schedule because the jurors have lives and commitments outside of the trial.

Walgren said that losing jurors to scheduling conflicts is a risk the state is prepared to take.

Judge Pastor granted the state to begin their cross examination of Dr. White on Monday, giving them the weekend to examine the new defense evidence.

Once Dr. White's testimony is concluded, we expect that the defense will rest. After the defense rests, the prosecution will likely present some sort of rebuttal case.

If things go more quickly than anticipated, closings in the trial could still be Monday. That scenario, however, now seems remote.

If testimony continues into or concludes on Monday – which is certainly possible – then closings in the case could be Tuesday.

But it's also possible that Tuesday could be a dark day, to give the attorneys time to prepare their closing arguments. If that happens, then closings would be delivered on Wednesday.

PatrickS77 said:

RosesRred said:

Why? 6 words...

HE HAD TO COVER HIS TRACKS.

Remember

Klein is watching the trial in the comfort of his own home.

He might be biting his nails right now since his name is being brought up quite

often nowdays.

They did make a BIG deal because Conrad was lacking notes.

Look how much respect that nurse received when

she was on the stand , she appeared Believable.

Yes, but it is known that Murray gave him stuff... he even admitted as much. Whereaas with Klein, the only proof that he gave Michael Demerol are his notes. If Klein wouldn't have documented it, there wouldn't be any proof whatsoever that Michael has gotten Demerol from Klein! So again, why would he keep notes, if he had reason to suspect that he was fueling Michael's "addiction"?

Klein had to know that MJ was dependent/addicted to the demerol by the sheer amount that he was giving to MJ. The addiction expert testified that the amount and frequency of the demerol shots indicated at least dependency, so Klein should have known.

I think Klein should at least lose his license because of this, but I would love for him to go to jail too.

tmo1965 said:

PatrickS77 said:

Yes, but it is known that Murray gave him stuff... he even admitted as much. Whereaas with Klein, the only proof that he gave Michael Demerol are his notes. If Klein wouldn't have documented it, there wouldn't be any proof whatsoever that Michael has gotten Demerol from Klein! So again, why would he keep notes, if he had reason to suspect that he was fueling Michael's "addiction"?

Klein had to know that MJ was dependent/addicted to the demerol by the sheer amount that he was giving to MJ. The addiction expert testified that the amount and frequency of the demerol shots indicated at least dependency, so Klein should have known.

I think Klein should at least lose his license because of this, but I would love for him to go to jail too.

He also said, even though he didn't want to admit it, that based on those records he can't say that MJ was an addict.

PatrickS77 said:

tmo1965 said:

Klein had to know that MJ was dependent/addicted to the demerol by the sheer amount that he was giving to MJ. The addiction expert testified that the amount and frequency of the demerol shots indicated at least dependency, so Klein should have known.

I think Klein should at least lose his license because of this, but I would love for him to go to jail too.

He also said, even though he didn't want to admit it, that based on those records he can't say that MJ was an addict.

Exactly. I love how people come here only to pick on the negative said about MJ even though the very same witnesses eventually admitted something else.

alphastreet said:

It's upsetting seeing MSN headlines like "MJ most likely addicted:says expert", I HATE how misleading it is, knowing already what was spoken about.

I used to go WTF over Janet's media statements and what Randy and Rebbie possibly think. They either mean once addicted, always an addict cause of the painkillers in 1993, or one or more of them do not agree with taking anti depressants or whatever it was to run away from pain. Remember, Janet had depression but I don't think she took anything based on public knowledge, according to an article back then, but MJ endured much worse and it's understandable if he had it and developed anxiety and needed Ativan. Those are not for anyone, even his family to say he didn't need them. This is not the first time family does not understand mental health, and that is all it is.

I think that MJ did have a drug problem at points in his life. How extensive it was cannot be determined by people who were not around him. MJ admitted to the drug problem in 1993. In 1995 or 1996, he collapsed while preparing for a show in New York. David Gest has been reported as saying that MJ was late for the Jacksons 30 Year Reunion show in 2001, reportedly due to demerol use (http://www.dailymail.co.u...women.html) - See the "On stage and off his head" section. Jackson family members have stated that there were interventions done, but he was in denial.

I totally understand him needing anti-depressants, but there is a difference between having a medical need and abuse.