MJ~Leben u. Sterben~u das Geschehen danach!

Last Updated: October 22, 2011

Expert challenged in Michael Jackson doctor trial

by: By Linda Deutsch
From: AP
October 22, 2011 6:19PM


Dr Conrad Murray, right, with attorney Edward Chernoff. AP

THE lead lawyer for the doctor charged in Michael Jackson's death has challenged a key prosecution expert about his contention that the physician was responsible for the death of the singer.


Anaesthesiology expert Dr Steven Shafer. AP

Lawyer Ed Chernoff today cross-examined Dr Steven Shafer, who previously testified that the only plausible explanation for the death was that Jackson had been hooked up to an IV drip of the anesthetic propofol then left alone by Dr Conrad Murray.

"That's a bold claim, isn't it," Mr Chernoff asked.

"It's an honest statement," Dr Shafer replied.

Mr Chernoff also questioned the Columbia University researcher and professor about his IV demonstration for jurors yesterday.

The defence lawyer suggested Dr Shafer had drawn conclusions that weren't necessarily supported by the evidence. Mr Chernoff said the type of IV line that Dr Shafer used in the demonstration was never found at Jackson's house.

Dr Murray has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter. He could face up to four years behind bars and the loss of his medical licence if convicted.

Dr Shafer was expected to be the last witness called by the prosecution. After Dr Shafer's testimony ends, defence lawyers will begin presenting their case.

http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/world/expert-challenged-in-jackson-doctor-trial/story-e6frf7lf-1226173916528

was Chernoff da von sich gibt, ist ja fast wie im Kindergarten ... die Verteidigung möchte den Zeugen der Staatsanwaltschaft, Dr. Steven Shafer, als unglaubwürdig hinstellen ...

hätte es Dr. Shafer nötig, etwas zu tun, um Dr. White zu ärgern ???? so ein Quatsch ... :D

October 22, 2011

What's propofol taste like? Dr. Shafer knows!

Nach was schmeckt Propofol? Dr. Shafer weiß es!
Posted: 12:13 AM ET



Dr. Steven Shafer testified that he drank about 20 milliliters of propofol only one time, before conducting a study on oral ingestion of the anesthetic with six human subjects.
Dr. Steven Shafer bezeugte, dass er nur einmal ungefähr 20 Milliliter Propofol getrunken hat, vor der Durchführung einer Studie über orale Aufnahme des Anästhetikums mit sechs menschlichen Probanden.

In a testy exchange, Chernoff pointed out that in his earlier testimony, Dr. Shafer said that ingestion of propofol was not effective orally and that even a first year medical student should have known that, but despite this knowledge Dr. Shafer still conducted the human study directing volunteers to drink propofol and he himself even drank it. Chernoff said Dr. Shafer did all of this just to spite the defense expert Dr. Paul White and to prove Dr. White was wrong.
In einem gereizten Austausch, wies Chernoff darauf hin, dass in seiner früheren Aussage, Dr. Shafer sagte, dass die orale Einnahme von Propofol nicht wirksam war und dass das auch im ersten Jahr Medizinstudenten bekannt sein sollte, aber dass Dr. Shafer trotz dieses Wissens noch die menschliche Studie ausführte, Freiwillige anleitend Propofol zu trinken und er selbst trank es auch. Chernoff sagte, Dr. Shafer hat all dies nur getan, um den Experten der Verteidigung, Dr. Paul White, zu ärgern und zu beweisen, dass Dr. White sich geirrt habe.

http://insession.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/22/whats-propofol-taste-like-dr-shafer-knows/ (Archiv-Version vom 23.10.2011)

Jackson trial claim challenge

Jackson Prozess Behauptungen in Frage stellen

6:08am UK, Saturday October 22, 2011

Lawyers for Conrad Murray have dramatically challenged a key prosecution witness over his claim that the doctor was responsible for the death of Michael Jackson.

Dr Steven Shafer has testified that the only plausible explanation for Jackson's death was that he had been hooked up to a drip of the anaesthetic propofol, then left alone by Murray.

In cross examination, Murray's lawyer Ed Chernoff asked Dr Shafer: "That's a bold claim, isn't it?" Dr Shafer replied: "It's an honest statement."

Mr Chernoff also questioned the Columbia University researcher and professor about his demonstration of IV equipment for jurors on Thursday.

He suggested Dr Shafer had drawn conclusions that were not necessarily supported by the evidence.

In a bad-tempered exchange, Mr Chernoff asked Dr Shafer if he understood the difference between opinion and fact.

Mr Chernoff asked: "You understand everything you said in the last few days was an opinion, right?" Dr Shafer replied: "I think I stated my name, which is a fact."

Earlier Dr Shafer had admitted it was possible Jackson had opened a clamp to release a dose of drugs into the IV line but that Murray would still be responsible for not staying with his patient.

Murray has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter. He faces up to four years in prison and the loss of his medical licence if convicted.

He had been Jackson's personal doctor as the star prepared for a series of comeback concerts at London's O2 arena. He was with Jackson when he suffered a fatal cardiac arrest in June 2009.

Dr Shafer, an expert on propofol, told jurors earlier this week that his explanation was supported by items found in Jackson's bedroom, the singer's post-mortem examination results and Murray's lengthy statement to police.

http://news.sky.com/home/article/16094068

Defence grills Jackson trial expert

Verteidigung nimmt im Jackson Prozess Experten in die Mangel

(UKPA) – 3 hours ago


Dr Conrad Murray on trial in Los Angeles (AP)

The lead lawyer for the doctor charged in connection with Michael Jackson's death has challenged a key prosecution expert about his contention that the physician was responsible for the death of the singer.

Ed Chernoff cross-examined Dr Steven Shafer, who previously testified that the only plausible explanation for the death was that Jackson had been hooked up to an IV drip of the anesthetic propofol then left alone by Dr Conrad Murray.

"That's a bold claim, isn't it," Mr Chernoff asked.

"It's an honest statement," Dr Shafer replied.

Mr Chernoff also questioned the Columbia University researcher and professor about his IV demonstration for jurors.

The defence lawyer suggested Dr Shafer had drawn conclusions that were not necessarily supported by the evidence.

Mr Chernoff said the type of IV line that Dr Shafer used in the demonstration was never found at Jackson's house.

Dr Murray has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter.

He could face up to four years behind bars and the loss of his medical licence if convicted.

Dr Shafer was expected to be the last witness called by the prosecution. After Dr Shafer's testimony ends, defence lawyers will begin presenting their case.

Copyright © 2011 The Press Association.


http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5iA4FUOw6tVeCji0T68U0oWCVRd_Q?docId=N0212921319229849116A (Archiv-Version vom 22.10.2011)

Conrad Murray Defense Attacks Witness' Theory on Michael Jackson's Death

By BRYAN LAVIETES and MICHAEL S. JAMES
Oct. 21, 2011


Michael Jackson Trial: Defense to Respond

VIDEO im Bericht

Dr. Conrad Murray's defense today attacked a key prosecution witness' scenario on how Murray could have been responsible for the death of singer Michael Jackson.

But in a sidebar session, it was a prospective witness for Murray's defense under attack, being excoriated by Judge Michael Pastor for apparently denouncing either a prosecution witness or a prosecutor as a "scumbag" within earshot of reporters, possibly in contempt of court.

Murray is on trial in Los Angeles Superior Court for involuntary manslaughter involving Jackson's death.

The prosecution witness, Dr. Steven Shafer, an anesthesiologist affiliated with Columbia University, has testified in recent days that Murray most likely hooked up Jackson to an IV drip containing the anesthetic propofol and then left the singer unattended.

Shafer added today that even if Jackson were able to start the IV drip on his own, Murray still would be responsible for the death.

"If Michael Jackson had reached up, seeing the roller clamp, and opened [it] himself, this is a foreseeable consequence of setting up a dangerous way of giving drug [and] is in no way exculpatory for the fact that Dr. Murray was not present and permitted this to happen," Shafer said.

But then the defense took its shots, questioning whether Shafer was using medical knowledge or actually doing investigative work beyond his expertise when he came up with his theory on Jackson's death.

"Everything you said in the last two days was your opinion," defense attorney Ed Chernoff told Shafer at one point. "You do understand that, right? Do you understand that?"

Answered Shafer, "I stated my name, which I think is a matter of fact."

Shafer's theory relied on Murray using a vented IV -- which would let air into the propofol bottle, allowing it to drip.

However, Chernoff noted, there was no such vented IV line found in the bedroom where Jackson was discovered unconscious.

Shafer maintained that Seacoast Medical records showed Murray had ordered vented IV's in the past, and that the IV tubing was small enough that it could have been easily removed from the room.

Later, Chernoff pressed Shafer for the corroborating evidence he used to come up with his theory that Murray put a propofol bottle in a cut-open saline bag to set up a propofol drip -- a set-up that Shafer admitted he had never seen before.

Chernoff got Shafer to concede that he relied on an earlier witness, Alberto Alvarez, who said he had seen such a set-up before stashing it in a blue bag.

The defense has attacked Alvarez's credibility on the claim he handled the IV bag because there were no fingerprints.

After Murray's defense concludes its cross-examination of Shafer next week, the prosecution is expected to rest its case and let the defense present its case.

But a prospective defense witness already faced heat today over his alleged statements, published by E! online, in possible violation of a gag order.

As Shafer demonstrated Thursday how Murray could have administered propofol to Jackson, E! reported, Murray could be heard whispering loudly to the possible witness, Dr. Paul White, "Can you believe that?" At which point, according to E!, White turned to journalists and said, "What a scumbag."

It was unclear whether White was referring to Shafer or prosecutor David Walgren.

Possible Conrad Murray Defense Witness in Contempt of Court?

But today, outside of the presence of jurors, Judge Pastor set a Nov. 16 hearing to determine whether White should be held in contempt of court.

In addition to his complaint about the "scumbag" remark, Walgren complained to the judge that White has been caught on TV cameras reacting to testimony -- "the rolling of the eyes and facial expressions, things of that nature," Walgren said, according to a transcript.

White and other medical experts have been allowed to attend court sessions to inform their possible testimony, but without publicly commenting.

"I don't want to harm Dr. Murray or defense counsel in this case by excluding Dr. White at this juncture if defense counsel still want him here," Pastor said in the transcript, "because I have to balance my concern about decorum with the defendant's right to a fair trial. But this may very well constitute a violation of the court's order."

"I'm going to talk to him," replied Chernoff, the defense attorney. "I'm embarrassed by this. You should hold me personally responsible."

Later, though, Pastor himself focused his anger on White in another sidebar session.

White said he could not recall his "scumbag" comment, but recalled making other statements to reporters and to Walgren, according to a transcript.

"You have no business making any of those comments, Dr. White," Pastor told him, "either to Mr. Walgren or in this courtroom where such comments can be overheard. This raises the issue of whether those comments constitute a violation of my continuing orders in this case, repeated on innumerable occasions.

"If you want to retain counsel, that is your absolute right, and anybody else who wants to be heard," Pastor added. "But I'm going to set it for further proceedings to determine if I should sanction you or even cite you for contempt of court."

ABC News Radio and The Associated Press contributed to this report.


http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/MichaelJackson/conrad-murray-defense-attacks-witness-theory-michael-jacksons/story?id=14790261

Does This Photo Prove Michael Jackson Could Not Have Injected Himself?

Oct 21, 2011 11:37am
By Jim Avila


ABC News Exclusive: Michael Jackson, seen here in 2003 in a photo taken by business associates, reacted poorly to multiple needle punctures, making it difficult for doctors to find a suitable vein for medical injections. (ABC News Exclusive)

A photo of Michael Jackson and obtained exclusively by ABC News may help illusrate that the late pop singer could not have injected himself with that fatal dose of propofol.

Taken by Jackson’s business associates in 2003, the photo vividly demonstrates the reaction Jackson had to multiple needle punctures, making it difficult for doctors to find a suitable vein for medical injections.

“Michael Jackson did not have good veins, in fact they were so poor he had to start this IV in a vein below the left knee,” Dr. Steven Shafer, the prosecution’s star witness, testified Thursday. “So the possibility of direct self injection seems extremely unlikely…You would not want to inject into a vein and miss because that would be extremely painful.”

Click here to see more Michael Jackson needle puncture photos.
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/slideshow/michael-jackson-reacts-poorly-needle-punctures-14785326 (Archiv-Version vom 21.10.2011)

In court Thursday, the prosecution hammered away at the defense’s contention that Jackson killed himself by self-injecting propofol, pointing to a medical condition they said made self-injection nearly impossible. The relentless attack was apparently designed to prove that Dr. Conrad Murray lied to police about how much propofol he gave the sleep-deprived singer.

Read more about Shafer’s testimony here.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/entertainment/2011/10/conrad-murray-trial-propofol-not-fatal-when-taken-orally-expert-says/ (Archiv-Version vom 25.10.2011)

A visibly-angry Murray sat and listened to the prosecution’s expert witness for the third straight court day.

Shafer also emphasized one of the prosecution themes: even if the jury believes the defense’s claim that it was Jackson who desperately grabbed and injected propofol into his own body, Murray is still at fault.

“He is a physician who has brought propofol into the room, started an intravenous, and provided access to propofol to a patient who may, in fact, be developing a dependency on sedatives,” Shafer said. “And, he has been entrusted by Michael Jackson to look after his safety every night. He is responsible for every drop of propofol in that room.”

The defense will cross examine Shafer today and is expected to begin its case Monday.


http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/entertainment/2011/10/does-this-photo-prove-michael-jackson-could-not-have-injected-himself/ (Archiv-Version vom 22.10.2011)

Conrad Murray's words may seal his fate

Whether he lied or told police the truth, Michael Jackson's physician is guilty, prosecutors say.

By Harriet Ryan and Victoria Kim, Los Angeles Times
October 22, 2011


Dr. Conrad Murray, with defense attorney J. Michael Flanagan, left, listens in court Friday. Legal experts said the prosecution’s case has left the defense with a big damage-control job. (Reed Saxon / Pool photo / October 21, 2011)

The prosecution's case against Michael Jackson's personal physician might be summarized this way: He lied about everything, but even if he told the truth, he's still guilty.

During a four-week case that rounded toward a conclusion Friday, prosecutors suggested that Dr. Conrad Murray's own words created a Catch-22 in which conviction was the only outcome possible. His statement to police, if taken by jurors at face value, contained enough admissions of gross negligence to amount to a manslaughter confession, prosecutors said.

And if jurors decided he lied to police, as numerous scientific experts and others said he must have, his true conduct was even more egregiously criminal, they argued.

FULL COVERAGE: The trial of Conrad Murray
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/michael-jackson-trial/

The simultaneous use and debunking of Murray's own words sets up an enormous challenge for his defense, which will began its case next week.

His lawyers have not announced whether the doctor will take the stand in his own defense. But some legal experts said that would be a significant risk.

"There is just so much out there now, from his statement and these experts, and for him to get up there, I just think the prosecution would have a field day," said J. Christopher Smith, a Los Angeles criminal defense attorney who has followed the case closely.

Initially, Murray's attorneys planned to delve into Jackson's history of abusing propofol and other drugs and the financial pressures on him at the time he died. These two elements, the defense had said, explained why the singer might give himself the anesthetic propofol in a desperate attempt to sleep before critical rehearsals.

But Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor barred most testimony pertaining to those areas as irrelevant and prejudicial.

So the defense case instead will focus on witnesses who are expected to challenge the prosecution's contention that Murray's treatment of Jackson amounted to criminal conduct. They will also present character witnesses likely to offer testimonials about the doctor's charitable works and caring manner.

Legal experts said the prosecution's case has left the defense with a big damage-control job.

"They've got the defense in a trick bag," Smith said. "Whichever way they go, it seems like the prosecution is going to have a comeback."

The falsehoods and ineptitude, as recounted from the witness stand, began months before Jackson's death when Murray assured an insurance company the singer was in perfect health. It culminated in his interview with homicide detectives. An audio recording of that 2 1/2-hour interview was played for jurors and became an initial basis for three prosecution medical experts to call Murray clearly responsible for his patient's death.

"It's like leaving a baby that's sleeping on your kitchen countertop," one expert, cardiologist Alon Steinberg, said of Murray's account to police that he left Jackson alone after injecting him with propofol.

Steinberg and two other physician experts found medical incompetence in nearly every part of Murray's narrative. He failed at even the most basic aspects of care, they said. His attempt to perform CPR when Jackson still had a pulse goes against basic medical training, the experts said.

The witnesses also attacked Murray's account of how Jackson died. Dr. Steven Shafer, an anesthesiologist, said that almost nothing about the quantity of drugs Murray said he administered matched up with what was later found in Jackson's blood. Of the physician's claim that he gave Jackson just two small injections of the sedative lorazepam, Shafer said, "This did not happen."

He was also dismissive of Murray's account of injecting Jackson with a 25-milligram dose of propofol more than an hour before his death. Shafer said blood levels showed the dose was probably 40 times larger and given by an intravenous drip. The only way to explain the massive amount of propofol in Jackson's body, Shafer said, was that Murray left the drug running into Jackson's veins after his heart stopped.

He also called "crazy" the defense's main contention: that Jackson injected himself with a lethal combination of lorazepam and propofol. Even when Shafer appeared to throw the defense a bone — acknowledging Friday that it was possible Jackson had triggered the fatal flow of propofol by knocking a clamp off an intravenous line — he maintained Murray was at fault for abandoning his patient.

Defense attorneys have already abandoned one scenario they had previously argued: that the pop star drank the propofol that killed him, prompting a prosecutor to complain that their case was "ever-changing."

The Murray defense team plans to call two experts: a toxicologist and Dr. Paul White, an anesthesiologist who has researched propofol. Those experts could argue that Murray's care of Jackson was unorthodox but not criminal. The charge of involuntary manslaughter requires prosecutors to show that Murray caused Jackson's death by committing a crime "not amounting to a felony" or while acting "without due caution and circumspection."

Defense experts could tell jurors that off-label uses of drugs are common and in many cases help patients, said Joseph Low IV, a Long Beach criminal lawyer who previously worked on Murray's defense.

"Just because he used propofol differently than its original use doesn't make it … manslaughter," Low said.

He said that defense experts might tell jurors that the hard-and-fast rules prosecution witnesses have accused him of violating — providing propofol in a household setting, for example — are more nuanced.

"Standard of care is a matter of opinion based on who you put on the stand," Low said.

The character witnesses include an 82-year-old woman who knows Murray's work at a Houston charity clinic. The defense is expected to use their testimony to counter the portrayal of Murray as primarily concerned with collecting his $150,000-a-month salary.

"It humanizes him," said veteran criminal defense attorney Roger Rosen. "Jurors are still human beings at the end of the day, and I think that even though they are instructed not to be guided by sympathy, let's face it: That does enter into it."

http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-1022-conrad-murray-20111022,0,7127288.story

Joe Jackson in seinem Element ... leider wurde nicht angegeben von wann diese Bildaufnahme ist ... auch das Event wurde nicht genannt ... :D

ja, Joe, genieße es, auch du weißt ja nicht mehr wie lange du diese "schönen" Augenblicke noch erleben darfst ... wie heißt es, "Das Leben gehört den Lebenden" ... und da ist was Wahres dran ...
auch im Land der "Doppelmoral" ...

Original anzeigen (0,2 MB)

noch etwas interessantes aus dem mjackson Forum
Eintrag # 79 User: Lacoeur

vielen Dank

http://www.mjackson.net/forum/showthread.php?15268-21.10.11-15.-TAG-Dr.-Shafer-Diskussion/page8


Dr. Shafer hat ausführlich erläutert, warum es diese unterschiedlichen Zeitvorgaben für die Gabe von Propofol gibt. Sie stehen auch im Beipackzettel, an dem Dr. Shafer ja auch mitgearbeitet hat.

Wenn der Arzt eine Narkose mit Propofol einleiten will, sollte er es langsam über 2-5 Minuten geben. Denn auch nach dem Zeitpunkt, zu dem der Arzt feststellt, dass der Patient "betäubt" ist, steigt die Propofolkonzentration im Gehirn noch weiterhin an. Indem man das Propofol langsam über 2-5 Minuten gibt, vermeidet man, den Patienten durch eine ansonsten zu früh "angehängte" Infusion in eine zu tiefe Narkose zu bringen.

Verteidiger nehmen Narkose-Experten ins Kreuzverhör

Samstag, 22.10.2011, 11:07



Der Narkose-Experte, der Michael Jacksons früherem Leibarzt die Schuld am Tod des Sängers gegeben hat, ist einem scharfen Kreuzverhör unterzogen worden.

Die Verteidiger des wegen fahrlässiger Tötung angeklagten Herzspezialisten Conrad Murray griffen die Aussage des renommierten Anästhesisten Steven Shafer an, dass Murray seinem Patienten eine tödliche Menge des Narkosemittels Propofol intravenös verabreicht habe.

Shafer hatte am Donnerstag vor den Geschworenen in Los Angeles einen Tropf aufgebaut, um darzustellen, wie Jackson aus seiner Sicht in Murrays Obhut ums Leben gekommen sei. Als letzter und wichtigster medizinischer Zeuge der Anklage hatte Shafer dem Mediziner zahlreiche gravierende Fehler im Umgang mit Propofol vorgehalten.

Die Verteidigung will kommende Woche einen langjährigen Kollegen Shafers in den Zeugenstand holen, der eine andere Erklärung für Jacksons Tod vertritt. Gerichtsbeobachter erwarten ein spannendes Duell der beiden Experten. In dem Ende September begonnenen Prozess sind 33 Zeugen für die Anklage zu Wort gekommen. Nach US-Medienberichten wollen Murrays Anwälte rund 15 Zeugen anbringen.

Jackson war am 25. Juni 2009 an einer akuten Vergiftung mit dem starken Betäubungsmittel Propofol gestorben. Die Staatsanwaltschaft will beweisen, dass der Leibarzt abgelenkt war und grob fahrlässig mit dem Sänger umging. Die Verteidigung will dagegen zeigen, dass Jackson etliche Mittel ohne Wissen seines Arztes eingenommen und sich damit versehentlich selbst getötet hat. Im Falle eines Schuldspruchs drohen dem 58 Jahre alten Herzspezialisten bis zu vier Jahre Haft.
dpa


http://www.focus.de/panorama/boulevard/prozesse-verteidiger-nehmen-narkose-experten-ins-kreuzverhoer_aid_677091.html

Conrad Murray trial expert called a 'scumbag' by witness & former colleague during testimony: report

BY Nancy Dillon
DAILY NEWS WEST COAST BUREAU CHIEF

Saturday, October 22nd 2011, 4:00 AM


Reed Saxon/Pool
Dr. Paul White is accused of mumbling a snide remark while his former colleague, Dr. Steven Shafer (below), testified on Friday.


Reed Saxon/Pool
Dr. Steven Shafer


LOS ANGELES - The trial of Michael Jackson's personal doctor took a bizarre turn Friday with an accusation that a key defense witness mumbled "scumbag" as his former colleague testified.

The judge set a Nov. 16 hearing to consider whether Dr. Paul White should be found in contempt of court for allegedly making the snide aside to a reporter for E! Entertainment Television on Thursday.

White told the judge he did not recall making the outburst.

But White was captured rolling his eyes Friday as his former colleague, Columbia University Professor Dr. Steven Shafer, continued his testimony as a key prosecution witness.

Shafer admitted under cross-examination Friday that he worked with White on books and even nominated him for an award in research excellence in 2009.

He then reiterated an earlier comment that he was "disappointed" when White prepared a defense report saying it was possible Jackson died after chugging the surgery-strength anesthetic propofol while the defendant, Dr. Conrad Murray, wasn't looking.

Defense lawyer Ed Chernoff tried to paint Shafer as an egotistical former student trying to upstage his one-time mentor, accusing Shafer of trying to "shove" the mistake down White's "professional throat" by swilling propofol himself to prove White wrong.

Shafer is an important prosecution witness because he's considered a foremost expert on propofol, the anesthetic that killed the King of Pop in conjunction with other sedatives.

He performed a powerful demonstration for jurors Thursday, setting up a replica of the propofol drip system that he believes killed Jackson on June 25, 2009.

Chernoff did his best to discredit the simulation Friday, pointing out that the IV system Shafer used was not like any that cops found in the house.

Shafer conceded the point and suggested that an IV line is easy to roll up and smuggle out of a location.

"That's a bold claim, isn't it?" Chernoff said of Shafer's overall theory that Murray gave Jackson more propofol than he admitted to police.

"It's an honest statement. It's what I think happened," the New York anesthesiologist said.

The grilling got even testier at times.

"You do understand the difference between opinion and fact, don't you?" Chernoff asked. "You understand that everything you've said in the last few days was your opinion. You understand that?"

Shafer called the question "interesting," adding that he gave his name on the stand, and that was a fact.

"To say that one should not lie at UCLA Medical Center is my opinion," he concluded, referencing the prosecution's claim that Murray lied when he didn't disclose his propofol use to doctors at the hospital as they tried to revive Jackson.

Murray, 58, has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter and faces up to four years in jail and the loss of his medical license if convicted.


http://www.nydailynews.com/gossip/2011/10/22/2011-10-22_conrad_murray_trial_expert_called_a_scumbag_by_witness__former_colleague_during_.html (Archiv-Version vom 24.10.2011)

Weiß nicht ob wir das schon hatten ........ ich wußte das nicht .......wenn doch dann sorry :D

Karen Faye, MJs Maskenbildnerin, Hauptzeugin der Verteidigung Conrad Murrays?

Es wird erwartet, daß Karen Fayes Aussage entscheidend für Conrad Murrays Verteidigung sein wird. Michael Jackson Fans sollten besser auf eine Bombe im Conrad Murray-Prozess gefasst sein, wenn die Verteidigung des Arztes in Gang kommt. Am Mittwoch wurde veröffentlicht, Michael Jacksons Maskenbildnerin sei eine der wichtigsten Zeugen, und die Welt werde einen Einblick in die Zusammenhänge im engsten Kreis des Superstars erhalten.

Karen Faye hat bereits in der Vergangenheit ausgesagt, sie habe gespürt, daß der Künstler nicht dazu bereit war, aufzutreten. Diese Schlüsselinformationen könnten dazu beitragen, der Anklage der Staatsanwaltschaft wegen fahrlässiger Tötung zu schaden. Da Faye eine der wenigen war, die sich in Michael Jacksons engstem Umfeld aufhielten und die sogar in dem Schlafzimmer war, wo Jackson starb, könnte man zu dem Schluß kommen, daß ihre Ansicht von Bedeutung sei. Und die Jury wird voraussichtlich eine Menge von den Funktionsweisen und Abläufen rund um Michael Jackson zu hören bekommen.

Neben Karen Faye werden ein Polizist, der am Tatort war, ein weiterer Propofol-Experte, der das Medikament erläutern wird und mehrere von Dr. Murrays Patienten im Zeugenstand erwartet. Auch wenn die Verteidigung noch weitere Zeugen benennt, wird die Maskenbildnerin höchstwahrscheinlich die Hauptzeugin sein.

Der Conrad Murray-Prozess wird am Mittwoch übertragen, pausiert am Donnerstag und wird voraussichtlich am Freitag mit dem Start der Verteidigung weitergehen. Es wird erwartet, daß der Fall am Freitag nächster Woche der Jury übergeben wird.

Übersetzung Pearl

http://www.mjackson.net/forum/showthread.php?14472-Der-Murray-Prozess-News-amp-Infos-%28keine-Diskussion%29/page13

Hier der original Bericht ...

http://www.examiner.com/celebrity-headlines-in-national/karen-faye-mj-s-makeup-artist-the-conrad-murray-defense-star-witness

habe die Übersetzung aus dem mjackson Forum genommen ...

hier wurde der Bericht bereits heute um 01:37h eingestellt ... :D
Tsk, tsk! Defense expert in trouble ...

Tss, tss! Verteidigungs - Experte in Schwierigkeiten ...


Eintrag # 85 von pearl
vielen Dank

http://www.mjackson.net/forum/showthread.php?15268-21.10.11-15.-TAG-Dr.-Shafer-Diskussion/page9

FaIrIeFlOwEr schrieb:Defense expert Dr. Paul White could be held in contempt for comments he made on Thursday, which were apparently overheard by members of the public and media. The judge addressed the matter outside of the presence of the jury.

He asked Dr. White if he said, "What a scumbag," in reference to prosecutor David Walgren. Dr.
White denied making the comment.

He recalled expressing his disapproval over the way Walgren had handled a propofol bottle. He said he made a comment to Walgren about how he thought he was tampering with evidence.

The judge also asked Dr. White if he said that "Dr .Shafer's testimony has changed the way I think of him." Or, "I will take the high road, not the low road. The truth will come out."

Dr. White tried to explain that he felt that some of the things that have been said about him were unfair. But the judge ignored his attempt to put the comments into context.

"You have no business making those comments either in this courtroom or where they can be overheard," said Judge Pastor.

The judge also reminded everyone that the attorneys, their staff and witnesses are not allowed to comment on the evidence.

A contempt hearing has been set for Nov 16th.

Dr. Paul White, Experte der Verteidigung, könnte aufgrund von Bemerkungen, die er am Donnerstag gemacht hatte und die offenbar von Mitgliedern der Öffentlichkeit und den Medien aufgeschnappt wurden, wegen Missachtung des Gerichts belangt werden. Der Richter behandelte die Angelegenheit in Anwesenheit der Jury.
Er fragte Dr. White, ob er in Bezug auf Staatsanwalt David Walgren gesagt habe: "Was für ein Drecksack". Dr. White bestritt dies.
Er habe seine Missbilligung über die Art und Weise, wie Walgren mit einer Propofol-Flasche hantiert hatte, zum Ausdruck gebracht. Er sagte, er habe eine Bemerkung über seine Ansicht darüber gemacht, wie Walgren mit Beweismitteln umging.
Der Richter fragte Dr. White auch, ob er gesagt habe, daß "Dr. Shafers Aussage die Art, wie ich über ihn denke“ verändert habe. Oder: "Ich werde den ethischen Weg beschreiten, nicht den unmoralischen. Die Wahrheit wird ans Licht kommen."
Dr. White versuchte zu erklären, er habe das Gefühl, daß einige der Dinge, die über ihn gesagt wurden, unfair sind. Doch der Richter ignorierte seinem Versuch, die Kommentare in einen Kontext zu bringen.
"Sie haben kein Recht, diese Kommentare zu machen, weder in diesem Gerichtssaal noch irgendwo, wo sie mitgehört werden können", sagte Richter Pastor.
Der Richter erinnerte außerdem alle daran, daß es den Anwälten, ihren Mitarbeitern und den Zeugen nicht erlaubt ist, Beweise zu kommentieren.
Eine diesbezügliche Anhörung wurde für den 16. November angesetzt.

@ghost777

ghost777 schrieb:Weiß nicht ob wir das schon hatten ........ ich wußte das nicht .......

nein, den hatten wir noch nicht ...

@ghost777

ghost777 schrieb:Karen Faye hat bereits in der Vergangenheit ausgesagt, sie habe gespürt, daß der Künstler nicht dazu bereit war, aufzutreten. Diese Schlüsselinformationen könnten dazu beitragen, der Anklage der Staatsanwaltschaft wegen fahrlässiger Tötung zu schaden. Da Faye eine der wenigen war, die sich in Michael Jacksons engstem Umfeld aufhielten und die sogar in dem Schlafzimmer war, wo Jackson starb, könnte man zu dem Schluß kommen, daß ihre Ansicht von Bedeutung sei.

aber trotz allem, führt kein Weg daran vorbei, dass Murray sich als Arzt sehr verantwortungslos
verhalten hat ... Murray wurde ja nicht gezwungen, diesen Job anzunehmen ... aber Murray hatte viele Gründe, diesen für ihn lukrativen Job anzunehmen ... :)

aber warten wir ab, was die Zeugen der Verteidigung wirklich von sich geben werden ...
alles andere sind jetzt doch nur Spekulationen ...

wobei die Verteidigung muß nicht direkt Murrays Unschuld beweisen ... sie kann aber vieles in Frage stellen und viele Zweifel und Verwirrungen bei der Jury säen ... und dann heißt es "im Zweifel für den Angeklagten" ...

@FaIrIeFlOwEr

Diese Karen ist doch iwie unglaubwürdig ........ sie hatte immer getwitter wie toll und Klasse MJ bei
den Proben war bis zum 25 ..........war er phantastisch .....erst später änderete sie ihre Meinung...
ober verwechsel ich da was ??

@ghost777

ghost777 schrieb:Diese Karen ist doch iwie unglaubwürdig ........ sie hatte immer getwitter wie toll und Klasse MJ bei den Proben war bis zum 25 ..........war er phantastisch .....erst später änderete sie ihre Meinung...
ober verwechsel ich da was ??

ich kann mich nicht mehr genau an die vielen Tweets von Karen Faye erinnern ... ob sie wirklich "belastendes" über MJ geäußert hatte ??? .... und ob das, was sie im Zeugenstand aussagen würde, nun tatsächlich der Verteidigung helfen wird, bleibt abzuwarten ...

vielleicht waren es mal wieder Äußerungen, total aus einem Zusammenhang heraus gerissen ... keine Ahnung ... :)

abc7 hat heute Nacht eine Nachricht nachgeschoben ... :D

abc7MurrayTrial ABC7 Murray Trial
FYI prosecution has still not rested and Dr Shafer will be back on the stand Monday for cross-examination #murraytrial
vor 10 Stunden

FYI (for your information) zur Information Staatsanwaltschaft ruht sich noch nicht aus und Dr. Shafer wird am Montag zum Kreuzverhör wieder in den Zeugenstand beim Murray Prozess zurückkehren

http://twitter.com/#!/abc7MurrayTrial (Archiv-Version vom 22.10.2011)

bei dem Eintrag von heute um 12:36 hat sich ein kleiner Fehler eingeschlichen ...

The judge addressed the matter outside of the presence of the jury.
wurde so übersetzt >

FaIrIeFlOwEr schrieb:Der Richter behandelte die Angelegenheit in Anwesenheit der Jury.

muß aber heißen

Der Richter behandelt die Angelegenheit außerhalb dem Beisein der Jury

Beim Examiner ist man bereits beim 17. Tag ... sie haben wohl die beiden Verhandlungsfreien Tage mit einbezogen ... :D

Michael Jackson 2011 trial on HLN (Day 17)

Kris Best, Lafayette Addictions Examiner
October 21, 2011 - Like this? Subscribe to get instant updates.

This is a Thursday and Friday recap of the trial of the People vs Dr. Conrad Murray shown on HLN tv beginning at 11 a.m. till 6 p.m. CST channel 45 on October 20-21, 2011.

Dr. Shafer finished up his testimony by testifying that, “People just don’t wake up from anesthesia like that. It’s a crazy scenario and it just doesn’t happen.” He stated this in response to the question if it’s possible Michael Jackson could have injected himself.

Note: When you think about going to surgery, then having to recover at least one hour in the recovery room from anesthesia, it does seem ridiculous.

Dr. Shafer also thought Dr. Murray gave Michael Jackson an IV drip of Propofol, picking up the 100 cc bottle of Propofol as the bottle which was used. This bottle he picked up was of 1000mg of Propofol. This would explain the cut bag of IV fluids and the Propofol found inside of the bag and testified to. However, if you recall, the LA police department sent in a rather incompetent Investigator, Elissa Fleak. For some unknown reason, she forgot to take a picture of the bottle of Propofol in the IV fluids, but she did remember it in there. Dr. Shafer further testified this would explain the high levels of Propofol in Michael Jackson’s body and tissues after death.

This is the same conclusion this Examiner came to in this previous article.
http://www.examiner.com/addictions-in-lafayette-la/michael-jackson-2011-trial-on-hln-day-9

Dr. Shafer then went on to say that the Ativan given to Michael Jackson also was a dose 10X the amount given, according to Dr. Murray. Dr. Murray stated he gave only 4mg. Dr. Shafer surmised that if 10X the dose of Ativan were given (4mg), this would equal 40mg; which would explain how much Ativan was in Michael Jackson’s system at the time of autopsy.

Upon cross examination by Ed Chernoff, Dr. Shafer was asked if he knew that what he testified to was “his opinion.”

Note: No, I think not. It is not his opinion, but forensics that tells the final tale. Forensics tells the tale of Propofol being in Michael Jackson’s body hours after death. A very large dose of Propofol would have had to be in his system. If that 1000mg bottle of Propofol was on the stand, of course, it was that bottle. The amount of Propofol ordered by Dr. Murray also suggested he was giving 1000mg of Propofol per night to Michael Jackson. Another piece of evidence was the looks of Michael’s veins. A nightly infusion of Propofol would cause Michael Jackson’s veins to be non-existent. Ativan 40mg showed up in Michael Jackson’s system also, not the 4mg that Dr. Conrad said he gave to Michael. All of this adds up to “evidence.” What does Ed Chernoff have? Dr. Conrad Murray’s word?

Dr. Conrad Murray even lied about comforting Michael Jackson’s children after Michael Jackson died.

Dr. Paul White, witness for the defense, also had a contempt charge levied against him by the Judge for talking to the media.

In summary, the defense has no defense. The L.A. Prosecutors, David Walgren and Deborah Brazil were excellent. The trial should be rapping up shortly.


http://www.examiner.com/addictions-in-lafayette-la/michael-jackson-2011-trial-on-hln-day-17