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

October 28, 2011

Who's to blame: MJ or Dr. Murray?

Wem ist die Schuld zuzuschreiben: MJ oder Dr. Murray?
Posted: 08:05 PM ET



So how exactly did Michael Jackson die? Experts from both sides have now had their chance to weigh in. We heard from the prosecution's anesthesiologist earlier in the trial who said the only way Jackson could have died is by an IV propofol drip, which was set up by Dr. Conrad Murray. The defense got a chance to shoot down that theory on Friday when their own anesthesiologist took the stand.

Dr. Paul White testified that Jackson probably died after injecting himself with a fatal dose of propofol. He says the anesthetic was stacked on top of several lorazepam pills, which could have been taken without Dr. Murray's knowledge.

So what about Dr. Steven Shafer's IV demo, which he set up in court? It seemed pretty convincing. He showed everyone how he believes Dr. Murray placed a propofol bottle into a slit IV bag and infused the anesthetic into Jackson's body. Well Dr. White totally dismissed the whole thing, calling it "befuddling."

"Why would you go to all the hassle?" Dr. White asked.

He pointed out the fact that there's a little tab on the bottle that is normally pulled and used to hang it on an IV pole.

"Anyone picking up the bottle would naturally gravitate for pulling up the little hanger," White said. He pointed out how even prosecutor David Waglren had pulled the tab on the actual bottle that was entered into evidence (this happened while Dr. Shafer was performing his propofol demo).

Dr. White also brought up the fact that the IV line found in Jackson's bedroom only had propofol in the lower part of it, suggesting that the drug had been injected lower down on the line (not infused from above).

So did Dr. Murray inject Jackson with the lorazepam and infuse the propofol through an IV drip? Or did Jackson take a bunch of lorazepam pills on his own and inject a single dose of propofol himself? Looks like that's the question jurors will ultimately have to answer for themselves.

http://insession.blogs.cnn.com/2011/10/28/whos-to-blame-mj-or-dr-murray/ (Archiv-Version vom 31.10.2011)

Expert: Jackson likely gave self fatal propofol shot



By Alex Dobuzinskis
LOS ANGELES | Sat Oct 29, 2011 8:54am IST

(Reuters) - Michael Jackson likely injected himself with a fatal dose of the anesthetic propofol after popping an extra eight sedatives without his doctor's knowledge, a Los Angeles court heard on Friday.


Dr. Paul White, the last defense witness in the involuntary manslaughter trial of the singer's physician, Dr. Conrad Murray, said that self-administration was the most likely scenario to explain levels of propofol and lorazepam found in Jackson's system after his death on June 25, 2009.

White said that based on the amount of propofol found in Jackson's urine, he believed the pop star gave himself a further injection of propofol about one hour after Murray has admitted injecting the 50 year-old singer with a relatively small 25 milligram dose of the drug as a sleep aid.

"With the administration of the additional 25 milligrams that we're speculating was self-injected by Mr. Jackson, the level increases rapidly and at the time of death would be almost identical to the level found in the urine at autopsy," White told jurors.

Using a mathematical model, White also said Jackson could have swallowed eight lorazepam tablets earlier in the night as he struggled with sleeplessness, bringing the amount of the sedative found in his blood to that seen at autopsy.

"The combination effect is potentially profound," White said of the two drugs.

Authorities have ruled Jackson died of an overdose of propofol, with lorazepam playing a contributing role.

A rival expert testified for the prosecution last week that he believed Jackson died after Murray left him on an intravenous drip of propofol for a number of hours.

But White said there was no physical evidence at the scene to support the prosecution scenario. It also did not reconcile with Murray's statements about the amount of drugs he gave Jackson that night, White said.

Prosecution experts will cross examine White on Monday as the five-week trial enters its closing stages.

White on Friday questioned the mathematical modeling prepared by prosecution expert Dr. Steven Shafer to support the intravenous propofol drip theory.

In order to reach the blood level of propofol found at autopsy, Jackson would have had to stop breathing right as the last drops fell from a 1,000 milligram bottle of propofol given with an IV drip, White said.

White called Shafer's hypothesis an "incredible coincidence of circumstances."

Murray denies involuntary manslaughter but could face up to four years prison if convicted. His attorneys said earlier this week he will not testify in his own defense.

Murray told police he had been trying to wean Jackson off his dependence on propofol. But he claimed the singer begged him for the drug the day he died.

Prosecution witnesses have also testified that Murray delayed calling emergency services, failed to tell ambulance and hospital staff about the propofol, and say he should never have been giving Jackson the drug for insomnia at all.

(Editing by Jill Serjeant and Eric Walsh)


http://in.reuters.com/article/2011/10/29/idINIndia-60185120111029 (Archiv-Version vom 01.11.2011)

Defense witness: Michael Jackson caused own death

By LINDA DEUTSCH, AP Special Correspondent – 21 minutes ago

LOS ANGELES (AP) — With dramatic courtroom testimony, attorneys for Michael Jackson's doctor have dropped the bombshell they've been hinting at for months — an expert opinion accusing the singer of causing his own death.

Dr. Paul White said Jackson injected himself with a dose of propofol after an initial dose by Dr. Conrad Murray wore off. He also calculated that Jackson gave himself another sedative, lorazepam, by taking pills after an infusion of that drug and others by Murray failed to put him to sleep.

That combination of drugs could have had "lethal consequences," the defense team's star scientific witness said Friday.

Murray has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter.

White showed jurors a series of charts and simulations he created in the past two days to support the defense theory. He also did a courtroom demonstration of how the milky white anesthetic propofol could have entered Jackson's veins in the small dose that Murray claimed he gave the insomniac star.

White said he accepted Murray's statement to police that he administered only 25 milligrams of propofol after a night-long struggle to get Jackson to sleep with infusions of other sedatives.

"How long would that (propofol) have had an effect on Mr. Jackson?" asked defense attorney J. Michael Flanagan.

"If you're talking effect on the central nervous system, 10 to 15 minutes max," White said.

He then said Jackson could have injected himself with another 25 milligrams during the time Murray has said he left the singer's room.

"So you think it was self-injected propofol between 11:30 and 12?" asked Flanagan.

"In my opinion, yes," White said.

The witness, one of the early researchers of the anesthetic, contradicted testimony by Dr. Steven Shafer, his longtime colleague and collaborator. Shafer earlier testified Jackson would have been groggy from all the medications he was administered during the night and could not have given himself the drug in the two minutes Murray said he was gone.

"He can't give himself an injection if he's asleep," Shafer told jurors last week. He called the defense theory of self-administration "crazy."

White's testimony belied no animosity between the two experts, who have worked together for 30 years. Although White was called out by the judge one day for making derogatory comments to a TV reporter about the prosecution case, White was respectful and soft spoken on the witness stand.

When Flanagan made a mistake and called him "Dr. Shafer" a few times, White said, "I'm honored."

The prosecution asked for more time to study the computer program White used before cross-examining him. Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor granted the request, saying he too was baffled by the complicated simulations of Jackson's fatal dose. He recessed court early and gave prosecutors the weekend to catch up before questioning White on Monday.

The surprise disclosure of White's new theory caused a disruption of the court schedule, and the judge had worried aloud that jurors, who expected the trial to be over this week, were being inconvenienced. But the seven men and five women appeared engaged in the testimony and offered no complaints when the judge apologized for the delay.

Prosecutors could call Shafer back during their rebuttal case to answer White's assertions.

Among the key issues is how White calculated that a large residue of propofol in Jackson's body could have come from the small dose that Murray says he administered. Shafer assumed Murray had lied, and he estimated Jackson actually was given 1,000 milligrams of the drug by Murray, who he said left the bottle running into an IV tube under the pull of gravity. White disputed that, saying an extra 25 milligrams self-administered by Jackson would be enough to reach the levels found in his blood and urine.

White also said a minuscule residue of the sedative lorazepam in Jackson's stomach convinced him the singer took some pills from a prescription bottle found in his room. He suggested the combination of lorazepam, another sedative, midazolam, plus the propofol could have killed Jackson.

"It potentially could have lethal consequences," said White. "... I think the combination effect would be very, very profound."

White's testimony was expected to end Murray's defense case after 16 witnesses. It likely will be vigorously challenged by prosecutors, who spent four weeks laying out their case that Murray is a greedy, inept and reckless doctor who was giving Jackson propofol as a sleep aid in the singer's bedroom. Experts including Shafer have said propofol is not intended to treat insomnia and should not be given in a home.

White's theory was based on urine and blood levels in Jackson's autopsy, evidence found in Jackson's bedroom and Murray's long interview with police detectives two days after Jackson died while in his care.

While accepting Murray's account of drugs he gave Jackson, the expert's calculations hinged on the invisible quotient: Jackson's possible movements while his doctor was out of the room. With no witnesses and contradictory physical evidence, that has become the key question hanging over the case.

Those who knew the entertainer in his final days offered a portrait of a man gripped by fear that he would not live up to big plans for his comeback concert and worried about his ability to perform if he didn't get sleep. He was plagued by insomnia, and other medical professionals told of his quest for the one drug he believed could help him. He called it his "milk," and it was propofol.

Jurors have now seen it up close as both Shafer and White demonstrated its potential use as an IV infusion.

With White's testimony, the defense sought to answer strong scientific evidence by the prosecution. But they did not address other questions such as allegations that Murray was negligent and acting below the standard of care for a physician.

Flanagan, the defense attorney, produced a certificate from Sunrise Hospital in Las Vegas showing Murray was certified to administer moderate anesthesia, referred to as "conscious sedation." However, the document showed several requirements including that the physician "monitor the patient carefully" and "provide adequate oxygenation and ventilation for a patient that stops breathing."

Medical witnesses noted that Murray left his patient alone under anesthesia and did not have adequate equipment to revive him when he found him not breathing.

The coroner attributed Jackson's June 25, 2009, death to "acute propofol intoxication" complicated by other sedatives.

Copyright © 2011 The Associated Press.


http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gQ85NtGR5fyctN7TQ-C78evXEcpQ?docId=d76a51654f4e4f98a11000241cf7769c (Archiv-Version vom 31.10.2011)

Jackson gave himself fatal injection claims propofol expert

By The Associated Press

Last updated at 2:23 AM on 29th October 2011

An anesthesia expert testifying for the doctor charged in Michael Jackson's death told jurors today he believes the pop superstar gave himself a fatal injection of an anesthetic.

Dr Paul White said the self-injection theory is the only one supported by the physician's statement to police and by evidence found at Jackson's rented mansion.

White said he saw no evidence supporting the prosecution theory that Jackson's doctor was infusing the singer with propofol using an IV.


Testimony: Dr Paul White, an anaesthesiologist and propofol expert, holds a bottle of the drug as he says he believes singer injected himself

The researcher said the evidence recovered in Jackson's bedroom was more consistent with the singer receiving the powerful anaesthetic through an injection.

A prosecution expert had told jurors he believed Jackson's doctor used an IV drip of propofol and said that was the only way to explain the high levels of the drug found in the singer's body.

White noted there were no IV bags or lines found in Jackson's bedroom that showed propofol residue throughout the lines. He also said the levels of propofol found in Jackson's urine did not support the IV theory.

Jackson's doctor, Conrad Murray, has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter.

White's testimony was expected to end Murray's defence case after 16 witnesses.


Demonstration: Dr White said he saw no evidence supporting the prosecution theory that Jackson's doctor was infusing him with propofol using an IV

It likely will be vigorously challenged by prosecutors, who spent four weeks laying out their case that Murray is a greedy, inept and reckless doctor who was giving Jackson propofol as a sleep aid in the singer's bedroom.

Propofol is not intended as a sleep aid and, medical groups say, should be administered only in a hospital or surgical setting with advanced monitoring equipment.


Accused: Jackson's doctor, Conrad Murray, has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter

Cross-examination of White has been delayed until Monday to give prosecutors more time to review a new analysis prepared by the defence based on recently conducted tests of samples taken during Jackson's autopsy.

The judge hearing the case, which ends its fifth week on Friday, reluctantly agreed to delay the cross examination and said he is concerned about losing jurors.

Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor, however, noted the panel has remained rapt throughout the trial.

'Every single member of that jury and all the alternates are paying extraordinary attention to every witness,' Pastor said.

White told jurors he saw no evidence that Murray left Jackson on an IV drip of propofol when he left the room and returned to find the singer unresponsive June 25 2009.

White said the singer would have had to lie completely still to keep from disturbing the bottle under that scenario, and he has never heard of anyone using an IV saline bottle to suspend a bottle of propofol for a drip.

White noted all bottles of the drug come with a tab on the side, which can be used to hang them from an IV stand.


Singer: Michael Jackson died in June 2009 after he was found unconscious at his rented house in Los Angeles

Defence attorney J Michael Flanagan concluded his direct examination of White on Friday morning, and the judge recessed the case until Monday.

White performed clinical studies of propofol for years before it was approved for usage by the Food and Drug Administration in 1989.

White initially was reluctant to become involved in the Jackson case.

But he said after reading more than a dozen expert reports, he couldn't figure out how others came to the conclusion that Murray would have had to leave Jackson on a propofol IV drip for the singer to die with the anesthetic still coursing through his body.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2054946/Michael-Jackson-death-trial-Singer-gave-fatal-injection-propofol-claims-witness.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

Jackson 'injected propofol himself'

(UKPA) – 7 hours ago

Lawyers for Michael Jackson's doctor dropped the bombshell they had been hinting at for months - an expert opinion accusing the legendary singer of causing his own death.

Dr Paul White, the defence team's star scientific witness, said Jackson injected himself with a dose of propofol after an initial dose by Dr Conrad Murray wore off.

He also calculated that Jackson, 50, gave himself another sedative, lorazepam, by taking pills after an infusion of that drug and others by Murray failed to put him to sleep.

That combination of drugs could have had "lethal consequences", the researcher said.

Murray, who had been hired as the singer's personal physician for his This Is It tour, has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter over Jackson's death in June 2009.

Dr White showed jurors at Los Angeles Superior Court a series of charts and simulations he created in the past two days to support the defence theory. He also did a courtroom demonstration of how the milky white anaesthetic propofol could have entered Jackson's veins in the small dose that Murray claimed he gave the insomniac star.

Dr White said he accepted Murray's statement to police that he administered only 25 milligrams of propofol after a night-long struggle to get Jackson to sleep with infusions of other sedatives.

The witness, one of the early researchers of the anaesthetic, contradicted evidence by Dr Steven Shafer, his long-time colleague and collaborator. Dr Shafer earlier said Jackson would have been groggy from all the medications he was administered during the night and could not have given himself the drug in the two minutes Murray said he was gone.

"He can't give himself an injection if he's asleep," Dr Shafer told jurors last week. He called the defence theory of self-administration "crazy".

The prosecution asked for more time to study the computer programme Dr White used before cross-examining him. Judge Michael Pastor granted the request, saying he too was baffled by the complicated simulations of Jackson's fatal dose. He recessed court early and gave prosecutors the weekend to catch up before questioning Dr White on Monday.

Copyright © 2011 The Press Association

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5jDv63SD6f1tzXn8PL_HbmFr4RsTw?docId=N0339411319831505143A

Conrad Murray trial: Expert says Michael Jackson gave himself fatal dose

Friday, October 28, 2011
By Miriam Hernandez and Robert Holguin


VIDEO im Bericht

LOS ANGELES (KABC) -- During day 20 of the Conrad Murray involuntary manslaughter trial, the defense's propofol expert told the jury he believed Michael Jackson gave himself a fatal injection of the anaesthetic.

Dr. Paul White resumed his testimony on Friday. He was expected to be the final witness to testify in the case.

White has reviewed Jackson's medical records on behalf of the defense, and he said he doesn't believe Murray is responsible for the singer's death.

The propofol expert refuted the reports created by the prosecution's expert witness, Dr. Steven Shafer.

Investigators believe Jackson's death in 2009 was caused by acute propofol intoxication, and that sedatives were also a factor. Prosecutors argue that Murray is criminally liable because he recklessly administered the drug.

But White challenged Shafer's reports, especially when it came to sedative injections.

"I'd just like to point out a couple things that to me are bothersome. Specifically these last few injections, where the patient would have been given (a) large dose of lorazepam, 4 milligrams, at a time when they are at a high-blood level and would be expected to be asleep," White said.

White said some of scenarios and theories created by Shafer were absurd.

"It would mean putting Michael Jackson at deep sedation, or even approaching unconsciousness, waiting until he barely wakes up, and then slamming him down again repeatedly. I don't understand the rationale for the simulation," White testified.

White took Murray at his word that the doctor gave Jackson a safe amount of the agent: 25 milligrams.

"In essence, it would produce a reduction in anxiety, and a mild level of sedation or sleepiness," White said.

The defense proposed Jackson acted on his own, taking the sedative lorazepam. An empty pill bottle was found under his bed.

The reason high levels were not found in Jackson's stomach at autopsy was that they were taken and digested much earlier, White testified.

"My guess, if you will, that rather than taking eight pills at the same time, that Mr. Jackson may well have taken three or four pills at a couple of different times," White said.

In White's scenario, there was no IV setup to deliver a long infusion of propofol. No evidence of a infusion system was found in Jackson's bedroom.

White testified that if a vial of the agent was rigged in a hanging saline bag slit open, "I would imagine that if Mr. Jackson was sleeping in his bed with an IV in his leg, and he rolled over or moved his leg, that this could easily just come right out of the bag."

But what could explain the high level of propofol found in Jackson's body? The prosecution says there must have been a flow streaming into his body even after he died.

But the defense alleges Jackson could given himself a fast dose into the IV port inserted in his leg, so fast that it stopped his breathing and his heart.

"So you think it was the self injection of propofol ... between 11:30 and 12 that did it?" defense attorney Michael Flanagan asked.

"In my opinion, yes," White testified.

Kathy and Richard Hilton, Paris Hilton's parents, showed up at the courthouse to support the Michael Jackson family.

Kathy Hilton went to private school with Michael Jackson and has been a longtime family friend. Also in court were Janet Jackson, Randy Jackson and Joe Jackson.

Proceedings in the Conrad Murray trial took a twist late Thursday when the defense made an 11th-hour disclosure that White, devised a new computer simulation shedding light on what killed Jackson. Prosecutors told the judge they were surprised by the new development and needed time to study the software program, so they were given the weekend.

Prosecutors will cross examine White on Monday when the trial resumes at 9 a.m. PT.

Murray is on trial for involuntary manslaughter for Jackson's sudden death on June 25, 2009, at the age of 50. Prosecutors allege Murray tried to hide the fact that he had been giving propofol to Jackson.

Murray, 58, has pleaded not guilty and has denied any wrongdoing. If convicted, he could face up to four years in prison and lose his medical license.

Copyright ©2011 KABC-TV/DT.

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/entertainment&id=8409484 (Archiv-Version vom 29.10.2011)

La Toya Jackson talks Paul White testimony: 'Michael did not kill himself'

Katrina K Wheeler, Jackson Family Examiner
October 28, 2011 -



The defense called its final witness to the stand today, Dr. Paul White, to his continue his testimony from yesterday. There were a number of things discussed, and one of the things that is making headlines today is that Dr. White said that the theory that Michael Jackson self-injected himself is likely what happened. La Toya Jackson, one of Michael Jackson's sisters took to her official Twitter today to address what was said in court today, and she says that she believes that Michael Jackson was murdered, and that he did not kill himself as is being suggested.

La Toya Jackson wrote via her official Twitter account: "@hlntv @justice4michael I'm even more convinced after today that someone intentionally injected Michael. MICHAEL WAS MURDERED!!!!!" She then wrote: "@hlntv @justice4michael #murraytrial MiCHAEL DID NOT KILL HIMSELF!!! HE WOULD NEVER DO THAT!!!!!!"

J. Michael Flanagan direct examined Dr. White today, and there was a demonstration done in the courtroom as well. The main thing that was stated today though that is generating headlines is what Paul White said in regard to the theory of self-injection. Prosecutor David Walgren will be cross-examining Paul White when court resumes on Monday.

What do you think of what La Toya Jackson had to say in light of what Paul White said in his testimony today? Have you been following the Conrad Murray trial, and if so, what do you think of the defense's witness, Dr. Paul White?

http://www.examiner.com/jackson-family-in-national/la-toya-jackson-talks-paul-white-testimony-michael-did-not-kill-himself

Defense witness: Michael Jackson caused own death

October 29, 2011 3:11 AM

(AP) LOS ANGELES — With dramatic courtroom testimony, attorneys for Michael Jackson's doctor have dropped the bombshell they've been hinting at for months — an expert opinion accusing the singer of causing his own death.

Dr. Paul White said Jackson injected himself with a dose of propofol after an initial dose by Dr. Conrad Murray wore off. He also calculated that Jackson gave himself another sedative, lorazepam, by taking pills after an infusion of that drug and others by Murray failed to put him to sleep.

That combination of drugs could have had "lethal consequences," the defense team's star scientific witness said Friday.

Murray has pleaded not guilty to involuntary manslaughter.

White showed jurors a series of charts and simulations he created in the past two days to support the defense theory. He also did a courtroom demonstration of how the milky white anesthetic propofol could have entered Jackson's veins in the small dose that Murray claimed he gave the insomniac star.

White said he accepted Murray's statement to police that he administered only 25 milligrams of propofol after a night-long struggle to get Jackson to sleep with infusions of other sedatives.

"How long would that (propofol) have had an effect on Mr. Jackson?" asked defense attorney J. Michael Flanagan.

"If you're talking effect on the central nervous system, 10 to 15 minutes max," White said.

He then said Jackson could have injected himself with another 25 milligrams during the time Murray has said he left the singer's room.

"So you think it was self-injected propofol between 11:30 and 12?" asked Flanagan.

"In my opinion, yes," White said.

The witness, one of the early researchers of the anesthetic, contradicted testimony by Dr. Steven Shafer, his longtime colleague and collaborator. Shafer earlier testified Jackson would have been groggy from all the medications he was administered during the night and could not have given himself the drug in the two minutes Murray said he was gone.

"He can't give himself an injection if he's asleep," Shafer told jurors last week. He called the defense theory of self-administration "crazy."

White's testimony belied no animosity between the two experts, who have worked together for 30 years. Although White was called out by the judge one day for making derogatory comments to a TV reporter about the prosecution case, White was respectful and soft spoken on the witness stand.

When Flanagan made a mistake and called him "Dr. Shafer" a few times, White said, "I'm honored."

The prosecution asked for more time to study the computer program White used before cross-examining him. Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor granted the request, saying he too was baffled by the complicated simulations of Jackson's fatal dose. He recessed court early and gave prosecutors the weekend to catch up before questioning White on Monday.

The surprise disclosure of White's new theory caused a disruption of the court schedule, and the judge had worried aloud that jurors, who expected the trial to be over this week, were being inconvenienced. But the seven men and five women appeared engaged in the testimony and offered no complaints when the judge apologized for the delay.

Prosecutors could call Shafer back during their rebuttal case to answer White's assertions.

Among the key issues is how White calculated that a large residue of propofol in Jackson's body could have come from the small dose that Murray says he administered. Shafer assumed Murray had lied, and he estimated Jackson actually was given 1,000 milligrams of the drug by Murray, who he said left the bottle running into an IV tube under the pull of gravity. White disputed that, saying an extra 25 milligrams self-administered by Jackson would be enough to reach the levels found in his blood and urine.

White also said a minuscule residue of the sedative lorazepam in Jackson's stomach convinced him the singer took some pills from a prescription bottle found in his room. He suggested the combination of lorazepam, another sedative, midazolam, plus the propofol could have killed Jackson.

"It potentially could have lethal consequences," said White. "... I think the combination effect would be very, very profound."

White's testimony was expected to end Murray's defense case after 16 witnesses. It likely will be vigorously challenged by prosecutors, who spent four weeks laying out their case that Murray is a greedy, inept and reckless doctor who was giving Jackson propofol as a sleep aid in the singer's bedroom. Experts including Shafer have said propofol is not intended to treat insomnia and should not be given in a home.

White's theory was based on urine and blood levels in Jackson's autopsy, evidence found in Jackson's bedroom and Murray's long interview with police detectives two days after Jackson died while in his care.

While accepting Murray's account of drugs he gave Jackson, the expert's calculations hinged on the invisible quotient: Jackson's possible movements while his doctor was out of the room. With no witnesses and contradictory physical evidence, that has become the key question hanging over the case.

Those who knew the entertainer in his final days offered a portrait of a man gripped by fear that he would not live up to big plans for his comeback concert and worried about his ability to perform if he didn't get sleep. He was plagued by insomnia, and other medical professionals told of his quest for the one drug he believed could help him. He called it his "milk," and it was propofol.

Jurors have now seen it up close as both Shafer and White demonstrated its potential use as an IV infusion.

With White's testimony, the defense sought to answer strong scientific evidence by the prosecution. But they did not address other questions such as allegations that Murray was negligent and acting below the standard of care for a physician.

Flanagan, the defense attorney, produced a certificate from Sunrise Hospital in Las Vegas showing Murray was certified to administer moderate anesthesia, referred to as "conscious sedation." However, the document showed several requirements including that the physician "monitor the patient carefully" and "provide adequate oxygenation and ventilation for a patient that stops breathing."

Medical witnesses noted that Murray left his patient alone under anesthesia and did not have adequate equipment to revive him when he found him not breathing.

The coroner attributed Jackson's June 25, 2009, death to "acute propofol intoxication" complicated by other sedatives.


http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501368_162-20127375/defense-witness-michael-jackson-caused-own-death/

Samstag, 29. Oktober 2011
Leibarzt vor Gericht

Experte: Jackson spritzte selbst


Dr. White zeigt ein Fläschchen mit Propofol.
(Foto: REUTERS)

Beim Prozess um den Tod von Michael Jackson hat der Anästhesist und Propofol-Experte Paul White die Ansicht vertreten, der Popstar habe sich die tödliche Propofol-Spritze selbst gesetzt.

Auf die Frage, ob er von einer Selbst-Verabreichung des starken Medikaments "zwischen 11.30 Uhr und 12.00 Uhr" am 25. Juni 2009 ausgehe, sagte White: "Nach meiner Ansicht, ja." White blieb bei seiner zweitägigen Vernehmung konsequent bei seiner Ansicht, die Argumente der Anklage über die Verantwortung von Jacksons Leibarzt Conrad Murray für dessen Tod seien nicht zwingend.

Jackson habe am Tag seines Todes vermutlich auch mehrere Pillen eines starken Beruhigungsmittels geschluckt, sagte White. Michael Jackson müsse während einer Behandlungspause zusätzlich Pillen geschluckt haben. Die Vernehmung Whites, des wichtigsten Entlastungszeugen der Verteidigung, wurde am Freitag unterbrochen. Die Anklagevertreter sollen über das Wochenende die Möglichkeit haben, seine komplexen Aussagen zu durchdenken, um ihm ab Montag weitere Fragen zu stellen.

Die Staatsanwaltschaft hält Murray vor, er habe Jackson eine Überdosis Propofol verabreicht. Murray ist daher wegen fahrlässiger Tötung angeklagt. Vor White war der Suchtspezialist Robert Waldman zu Wort gekommen, der die Ansicht vertrat, Jackson sei schon Monate vor seinem Tod von dem Schmerzmittel Demerol abhängig gewesen. Dieses Schmerzmittel wurde dem Popstar zwischen April und Juni 2009 verabreicht, weil er an den Folgen von Botox- und anderen schönheitschirurgischen Eingriffen litt. Murray muss bei einem Schuldspruch mit vier Jahren Gefängnis rechnen.


http://www.n-tv.de/panorama/Experte-Jackson-spritzte-selbst-article4645016.html

ein gleichlautender Bericht unter
http://www.n24.de/news/newsitem_7378091.html

Murray Defense Expert: Jackson Likely Administered Lethal Dose

Updated: Friday, 28 Oct 2011, 3:14 PM PDT
Published : Friday, 28 Oct 2011, 3:14 PM PDT


Dr. Conrad Murray is on trial charged with involuntary manslaughter. (MyFox LA)

(NewsCore) - The defense's star medical expert witness in the Conrad Murray trial testified Friday that Michael Jackson likely injected himself with the anesthetic that ultimately killed the pop superstar on June 25, 2009.

Anesthesiologist Paul White said in court Friday that the amount of the anesthetic propofol found in Jackson's urine indicated that it was likely that Jackson introduced the drug into his bloodstream without the assistance of Murray.

"You think it was self-injection of propofol ... between 11:30 and 12 o'clock?" defense attorney Michael Flanagan asked, according to the Los Angeles Times.

"In my opinion, yes," White said.

White's conclusion directly contrasts with the findings of the prosecution's medical expert Steven Shafer -- whom White taught when Shafer was a student at Stanford Medical School.

Shafer previously testified that the level of propofol found in Jackson's body at the time of his death indicated Murray -- Jackson's personal physician -- must have administered the drug via an intravenous drip.

Murray is charged with involuntary manslaughter in Jackson's death.

White and Shafer are longtime friends, but have clashed as the star expert witnesses on opposing sides of the case.

White was reported to have called Shafer a "scumbag" for his harsh testimony in which he stated Jackson would still be alive today had Murray adhered to professional medical standards. White has denied using the derogatory term, but Los Angeles County Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor set a November hearing date for possible contempt-of-court charges for White.

White on Friday additionally advanced the defense's assertion that Jackson's oral consumption of the sedative lorazepam contributed to the King of Pop's death.

"The fact that there is even a tiny amount of free lorazepam [in Jackson's stomach] is consistent with the theory that he took lorazepam orally," White said, according to the Times.

The defense completed its direct examination of White Friday, but the prosecution will not begin their cross-examination of the doctor until Monday. Pastor granted a request by Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney David Walgren to delay the cross-examination of White in order to give the prosecution more time to prepare.

In their defense of Murray, attorneys have advanced a theory that an insomnia-suffering Jackson fatally injected himself with an overdose of the anesthetic propofol in an attempt to sleep at night while rehearsing for his upcoming world tour.

The prosecution, however, insists that Murray is guilty of involuntary manslaughter for giving in to the demands of his famous patient and negligently administering the overdose of propofol himself to maintain his $150,000-a-month salary as Jackson's personal physician.

If convicted, Murray faces up to four years in prison and the loss of his medical license, which has been suspended pending the trial's outcome.


http://www.myfoxla.com/dpps/entertainment/murray-defense-expert-says-jackson-likely-administered-lethal-dose-dpgonc-20111028-kh_15697615

Defense Expert: Michael Jackson Injected Fatal Dose of Sedative

A key defense witness will resume testimony next week after a prosecution request raises concerns for the judge in Conrad Murray's involuntary manslaughter trial

By Jonathan Lloyd
| Friday, Oct 28, 2011 | Updated 5:44 PM PDT


The Propofol expert testified against the prosecution's theory, saying the facts just don't add up to Dr. Murray giving Michael Jackson a fatal infusion of Propofol. NBC4's Patrick Healy reports.
VIDEO im Bericht

Jurors in the involuntary manslaughter trial of Michael Jackson's personal physician heard details Friday regarding the defense's version of what happened in the hours before the King of Pop's death.

Conrad Murray Trial: Propofol Guidelines, Testimony Timeline, Juror Profiles
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Conrad-Murray-Trial.html?page=1 (Archiv-Version vom 01.11.2013)

The jury, through witness testimony and detectives' interview with Dr. Conrad Murray, has already heard about the early hours of June 25, 2009 as the prosecution attempted to show that Murray abandoned his superstar patient after he administered a powerful surgical sedative in the bedroom of rented Holmby Hills mansion.

But defense attorneys have told jurors that Jackson is to blame for his own death. They claim the King of Pop created a "perfect storm" of drugs in his system, administering the fatal dose of propofol when Murray left the bedroom on the day he died.

Testimony from Dr. Paul White in support of the defense's theory was followed by a tweet from sister La Toya Jackson Friday after court recessed: "MiCHAEL DID NOT KILL HIMSELF!!! HE WOULD NEVER DO THAT!!!!!!"


White, the defense's propofol expert, took the stand Friday to challenge a prosecution medical expert who referred to the defense theory as "crazy." White's testimony became a battle of words with the prosecution's propofol expert -- Dr. Steven Shafer.

The self-injection theory is the only theory supported by Murray's statement to police, White testified. He claimed there was no evidence to support the theory that Murray used an IV to administer the powerful drug.

Dr. Murray's Interview With Detectives: Part 1 | Part 2
http://media.nbclosangeles.com/documents/murray+interrogation+1-75.pdf
http://media.nbclosangeles.com/documents/murray+interrogation+76-125.pdf

Evidence found in the bedroom suggests Jackson received propofol with an injection, White said. Shafer told jurors Murray used an IV drip to administer the sedative.

Based on levels of sedatives Murray told investigators he gave Jackson, the singer should not have stopped breathing, White testified. Murray told investigators he realized when he returned from the bathroom on the morning of June 25, 2009 that the entertainer had stopped breathing.

The evidence shows a rapid injection of 25 milligrams of propofol less than one hour after Murray slowly infused 25 milligrams of the anesthetic, White testified.

"You think it was a self-injection of propofol between 11:30 (a.m.) and 12 (p.m.)?'' defense attorney J. Michael Flanagan asked

"In my opinion, yes,'' White said.

White claimed Shafer didn't take into account the levels of the sedative lorazepam that Jackson may have accumulated in his body.

The defense has attempted to portray Murray as a caring physician who was not motivated by financial gain. Jackson was willing to take great risks in his quest for sleep, according to defense claims.

"There are two good reasons why Michael Jackson has, in a sense, been put on trial here," said legal analyst Darren Kavinoky. "If you're the defense team, you want to shift all focus away from Conrad Murray. But, more importantly... all of this relates to whether there was an intervening act that would cut Dr. Murray's criminal responsibility."

Judge Concerned About Trial Delay

The trial was expected to wind down Friday as White faced cross-examination. But prosecutors indicated Thursday they need more time to examine evidence submitted by defense attorneys.

That means White's testimony will continue next week. Prosecutors want more time to review an analysis prepared by the defense based on tests on samples taken during the pop star's autopsy.

"This is the entire crux of the defense case,'' Deputy District Attorney David Walgren said before the judge agreed to the delay.

Judge Michael Pastor had indicated to jurors they could expect to get the case soon. The judge met with attorneys Thursday, and a transcript of the meeting indicated the judge has concerns about losing jurors.

"Every single member of that jury and all the alternates are paying extraordinary attention to every witness," Pastor said.


http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Michael-Jackson-Death-Conrad-Murray-Trial-132780268.html

Narkosespezialist entlastet Michael Jacksons Leibarzt


29. Oktober 2011, 10:10 Uhr

Der letzte Zeuge im Prozess gegen Michael Jacksons früheren Leibarzt Conrad Murray war für die Verteidigung der wichtigste: Der Anästhesist Paul White erklärte vor Gericht, dass der Popstar sich die Todesspritze vermutlich selbst setzte, und entlastete den Angeklagten damit erheblich.


Der Anästhesist Paul White entlastet Michael Jacksons früheren Leibarzt, Conrad Murray, vor Gericht© Paul Buck/Reuters

Einer der führenden Narkosespezialisten in den USA hat Michael Jacksons früheren Leibarzt, Conrad Murray, vor Gericht entlastet. Der Anästhesist Paul White sagte am Freitag vor der Jury in Los Angeles, dass sich der Popsänger wahrscheinlich selbst die tödliche Dosis des Betäubungsmittels Propofol gespritzt habe.

ackson habe am Tag seines Todes vermutlich auch mehrere Pillen eines starken Beruhigungsmittels geschluckt, sagte White. Der Musiker müsse während einer Behandlungspause zusätzlich Pillen geschluckt haben.

White war der letzte Zeuge im Prozess gegen Jacksons Arzt. Der Propofol-Experte war von der Verteidigung vorgeladen worden. Seine Vernehmung soll nach Angaben der "Los Angeles Times" am Montag fortgesetzt werden.

Vor White war der Suchtspezialist Robert Waldman zu Wort gekommen, der die Ansicht vertrat, Jackson sei schon Monate vor seinem Tod von dem Schmerzmittel Demerol abhängig gewesen. Dieses Schmerzmittel wurde dem Popstar zwischen April und Juni 2009 verabreicht, weil er an den Folgen von Botox- und anderen schönheitschirurgischen Eingriffen litt.

Zeuge hält Murrays Aussage für glaubwürdig

Laut Autopsiebericht war der Sänger im Juni 2009 an einer Überdosis des Betäubungsmittels gestorben. Die Anklage geht davon aus, dass Jackson eine große Menge Propofol intravenös gespritzt bekommen hatte. Sie macht Conrad Murray dafür verantwortlich.

Der wegen fahrlässiger Tötung angeklagte Herzspezialist Murray hatte bei der Polizei angegeben, seinem Patienten nur eine kleine Menge des starken Mittels verabreicht zu haben.

Diese Aussage bezeichnete White jetzt als glaubwürdig. Er halte es für möglich, dass sich der Sänger nach der ersten Injektion durch seinen Leibarzt in einem unbeobachteten Moment selbst eine zweite, höhere Dosis spritzte.

Der Prozess befindet sich in der fünften Woche. Nach Abschluss der Vernehmung von White könnte das Verfahren zur Urteilsfindung an die Geschworenen gehen. Es wird nicht erwartet, dass Murray selbst in den Zeugenstand tritt. Im Falle eines Schuldspruchs drohen dem 58-jährigen Mediziner bis zu vier Jahre Haft.

http://www.stern.de/panorama/prozess-gegen-conrad-murray-narkosespezialist-entlastet-michael-jacksons-leibarzt-1744922.html

etwas über Dr. F. White ... :D

Dr. Paul F. White served as chairman from July 1992 to April 1993. Under his leadership the Margaret Milam McDermott Chair in Anesthesiology was upgraded to the Margaret Milam McDermott Distinguished Chair in Anesthesiology. In addition, the Eugene McDermott Center for Pain Management was established and the department's name was changed to the "Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Management," emphasizing our expanding role in this important subspecialty field. Because he was already a world renowned researcher, Dr. White greatly expanded the department's capacity for research. He is best known for the introduction of propofol infusions, patient controlled analgesia, the prevention and treatment of post-anesthesia nausea and vomiting, and his work with the Society of Ambulatory Anesthesia (SAMBA), which he served as president. Dr. White was born in La Mesa, California, the second of five children. He earned a PhD and MD degree at the University of California San Francisco, where he also took his training in anesthesiology. He served on the faculty at Stanford University and at Washington University St. Louis before coming to Dallas. He is married with two daughters.

Dr. Paul F. White war von Juli 1992 bis April 1993 als Vorsitzender beschäftigt. Unter seiner Führung wurde der Margaret Milam McDermott Lehrstuhl für Anästhesiologie, in die Margaret Milam McDermott Distinguished Chair in Anästhesiologie höhergestuft. Darüber hinaus wurde das Eugene McDermott Center for Pain Management etabliert und der geänderte Name des Deparments hieß "Klinik für Anästhesiologie und Schmerztherapie", betonend, dass unsere wachsende Funktion zu diesem wichtigen Teilgebiet führen. Da war er bereits ein international anerkannter Forscher, Dr. White erweiterte die Kapazität der Resorts für die Forschung in hohem Maße. Er ist der Beste für die Einführung von Propofol-Infusionen, Patienten kontrollierte Analgesie, die Prävention und Behandlung von Nebenwirkungen wie Übelkeit und Erbrechen, und bekannt für seine Arbeit mit der Gesellschaft für ambulante Anästhesie (SAMBA), welcher er als Präsident diente. Dr. White wurde in La Mesa, Kalifornien, als zweites von fünf Kindern geboren. Er erwarb einen PhD und MD Abschluss an der University of California San Francisco, wo er auch seine Ausbildung in der Anästhesie nahm. Er diente an der Fakultät der Stanford University und an der Washington University St. Louis, bevor er nach Dallas kam. Er ist verheiratet und Vater von zwei Töchtern.

http://www.utswanesthesia.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=50&Itemid=97 (Archiv-Version vom 23.11.2006)

gilt evtl. nicht nur für das deutsche Rechtssystem, manches könnte man teilweise vielleicht auch im amerikanischen Rechtssystem so interpretieren ... :D

"Es wird nirgendwo so gelogen wie vor Gericht!"

Wer gewinnt eigentlich Prozesse? Der klügere Jurist oder derjenige, der überzeugende Beweise hat?

Der Ausgang von Prozessen häufig hängt an der Überzeugung des Richters und nicht so sehr an der juristisch feinteiligen Arbeit. Diese Erkenntnis ist Juristenkreisen Allgemeingut. Daher sind Zeugenaussagen so wichtig für den Ausgang der Prozesse. Der Autor erinnert sich noch dunkel an seinen Religionslehrer aus der Schule, der immer sagte: „Kinder, nirgendwo wird so viel gelogen, wie vor Gericht.“ Wir Schulkinder waren geschockt von der Welt der Erwachsenen, leider stimmt die These aber.

Stimmt das eigentlich? Der Wahrheitsbegriff des deutschen Rechts muss dazu definiert werden.

Zum einen gibt es den so genannten Amtsermittlungsgrundsatz oder den Beitreibungsgrundsatz. Der Amtsermittlungsgrundsatz bedeutet, dass der Richter aufgefordert ist, von Amts wegen Tatsachen aufzuklären und nachzuforschen und nachzufragen, die für die Entscheidung von Bedeutung sind. Dieser Grundsatz beherrscht z.B. den Strafprozess (hier geregelt im § 244 Absatz 2 StPO).

Die Zivilprozessordnung, d.h. Streitigkeiten zwischen Bürgern, ist zumeist geprägt von dem so genannten Beibringungsgrundsatz. Dieser besagt, dass das Gericht bei der Entscheidungsfindung nur die von den Parteien in den Prozess eingebrachten Tatsachen berücksichtigen muss.

Hier muss der Richter nicht groß fragen, sondern muss sich primär auf das verlassen, was die Parteien vortragen.

Anders als im Strafverfahren wo der Angeklagte oder Beschuldigte zu seinen Gunsten lügen kann, müssen die Parteien im Zivilprozess gemäß § 138 ZPO die Umstände „vollkommen und der Wahrheit gemäß“ abgeben.

Wichtige Erkenntnisquellen für Gerichte sind neben Urkunden, dem Augenschein, die Zeugenaussage.

Hier fängt die Krux an. Der Zeuge kann selten den Sachverhalt wahrheitsgetreu darstellen. Oft liegt es daran, dass die Geschehnisse weit in der Vergangenheit liegen. So kann es sein, dass die Geschehnisse als sicher dargestellt werden, obwohl der Zeuge sich kaum daran erinnern kann. Zeugen sind auch selten objektiv, meistens irren sie sich oder lügen sogar.

Auch der Zeuge im Zivilprozess wird zur Wahrheit ermahnt und darauf hingewiesen, dass er unter Umstände die Aussage zu vereidigen habe (§ 395 Absatz 1 ZPO). Wie ein Richter die Zeugenaussagen würdigt, steht in seinem Ermessen (§ 286 ZPO). Der Richter entscheidet darüber ob der Zeuge glaubwürdig und ob seine Aussage glaubhaft ist. Für einen Richter ist es allerdings nur schwer erkennbar, wann ein Zeuge die Wahrheit sagt und wann er lügt.

Wieso wird die Lüge nicht erkannt?

Der Fehler liegt wahrscheinlich schon in der juristischen Ausbildung. Zukünftige Richter werden nicht auf soziales Verhalten und Psychologie geschult. Während des Studiums wird an einem vollständig aufgeklärten Sachverhalt gearbeitet, im juristischen Vorbereitungsdienst werden vielleicht ein paar Mal Zeugen befragt.

Kein Wunder, dass ein Richter das Verhalten des Zeugen und die Art der Aussage nicht richtigerweise bewerten kann.

So werden Zeugenaussagen oft falsch gewürdigt.

Auch wenn die Zeugen nicht absichtlich lügen, so ist auf das menschliche Erinnerungsvermögen nicht hundertprozentig Verlass. So wird ein Tathergang oft nicht zuverlässig rekonstruiert. Vieles hängt hier von der Konzentration auf den Handlungshergang ab. So entstehen Erinnerungslücken, verschiedene Details werden ausgelassen.

So vorgetragen wird dem Richter ein verfälschtes Bild über die entscheidenden Geschehnisse vermittelt.

Das Wahrnehmungsvermögen ist auch von Mensch zu Mensch unterschiedlich, es hängt vom aktuellen Zustand, Alter und auch der Konzentration auf bestimmte Geschehnisse ab. So werden oft Details falsch wahrgenommen, die für die Sachverhaltsaufklärung von Bedeutung sein könnten. Die Zeugen können sich verhören, optisch täuschen, Personen und deren Namen verwechseln. Nehmen wir als Beispiel einen Verkehrsunfall. Dieser geschieht normalerweise so schnell, dass ein Mensch kaum alle Geschehnisse richtigerweise erfassen kann. Vielmehr erfasst er nur Einzelne Teile vom Geschehnis und daraus bildet er unbewusst das „Gesamtgeschehen“.

Zu diesem Thema wurden auch zahlreiche Forschungen durchgeführt. Sie ergaben, dass Geschehnisse, direkt von den Menschen interpretiert, oft mit anderen Umständen in Verbindung gebracht und erst dann gespeichert werden. Später werden sie dann verfälscht wiedergebracht.

Natürlich werden Falschaussagen vor Gericht auch strafrechtlich belangt. Dies allerdings auch nur dann, wenn die Unwahrheit erwiesen wird. Und gerade das erweist sich als problematisch, vor allem wenn die Zeugenaussage das einzige Beweismittel ist oder es Aussage gegen Aussage steht. Dies wissen die Parteien meist schon vor Prozessbeginn und können sich darauf einstellen.

Das Problem ist in den Juristenkreisen weit bekannt, eine zufriedenstellende Lösung wurde noch nicht gefunden. Hilfreich wäre es Richter im Bereich Aussagepsychologie zu schulen, so könnten sie lernen die Fragen richtig zu stellen und die Antworten richtig zu bewährten.

Wie erfährt man wann der Zeuge lügt? Vor allem soll es auf die richtige Fragestellung ankommen. So ergaben zahlreiche Forschungen in diesem Bereich, dass oft fragen über Details zu einem bestimmten Geschehnis die Lügner ins stocken bringen. Gelogene Geschichten werden chronologisch Aufgebaut. Der lügende Zeuge ist gut auf die konkreten Fragen zum streitigen Sachverhalt geschult worden. Die vorbereiteten Antworten will er auch schnell loswerden. Bei unerwarteten Fragen zum Wetter oder Details über die Kleidung des Beklagten werden die Lügner dann meistens enttarnt.

Leerfragen wie z.B. „was ist dann passiert?“ sollen den Zeugen dazu bringen, weitere, unbeeinflusste Auskünfte zu erteilen Durch Anstoßfragen soll der Befragte auf ein konkretes Thema gebracht werden, z.B. mit „Wie ist es zu diesem Gespräch gekommen?“

Zuerst solle der Zeuge selber berichten können, ohne unterbrochen zu werden. Dann sollte man die Person ergänzen lassen. Möglichst lange sollten „W“ Fragen gestellt werden „Wer?“, “Wie?“, „Wo?“). Ob die Wahrheit gesagt wird kann der Vernehmer auch an der Beantwortung von Situationsfragen erkennen, indem unerwartete Fragen zu nebensächlichen Themen gestellt werden. Lügner können diese nur mit Mühe beantworten, sie verfügen nämlich nicht über „echte“ Erinnerungen“.

Ein großer Fehler sei es verneinende Fragen zu stellen. Es ist einfacher zu lügen, wenn man die Fragen nur mit „nein“ oder „ja“ beantworten muss. Es sollten auch nicht mehrere Fragen aneinander geknüpft sein. Dadurch wird der Zeuge verwirrt und gibt nicht auf alle Fragen eine ausgiebige Antwort. Auch wenn die Befragungstechnik hier ganz einleuchtend erscheint, ist es auch oder vor allem für erfahrene Rechtsanwälte oder Juristen schwer, diese praktisch umzusetzen. Schließlich gestaltet sich jede Befragungssituation anders und jeder Befragte reagiert auf bestimmte Fragen anders.

Woran erkennt man, dass der Zeuge lügt?

Nach der ständigen Rechtsprechung des Bundesgerichtshofs sollte der Richter bei der Bewertung den Schwerpunkt auf die Ermittlung der Richtigkeit der Angaben anstatt der Glaubwürdigkeit des Aussagenden legen.

„Es geht vielmehr um die Beurteilung, ob auf ein bestimmtes Geschehen bezogene Angaben zutreffen, d.h. Einem tatsächlichen Erleben entsprechen“ (BGH Urteil vom 30.07.1999 – 1 StR 618/98)

Es gibt nämlich keine Personen die generell die Wahrheit sagen oder generell Lügen. Auch kann dies nicht anhand der beruflichen oder gesellschaftlichen Reputation festgestellt werden. Es ist auch nicht die Regel, dass die Ehefrau des Beklagten in seinem Sinne lügt und der Polizeibeamte immer wahrheitsgetreu antwortet.

Ein oft ungleiches Verhältnis bei der Prozessführung ist dann gegeben, wenn sich z.B. große Firmen und kleine Unternehmen gegenüberstehen. Große Firmen mit vielen Mitarbeitern können oft mehrere Zeugen benennen, während die kleinen Unternehmer schon Partei im Prozess sind. Die Mitarbeiter großer Gesellschaften identifizieren sich natürlich auch mit dem Arbeitgeber und sagen oft zu seinem Gunsten aus.

Genau so soll es leichter sein zu Ungunsten von großen anonymen Institutionen auszusagen. Der Zeuge kann es leichter mit sich selber vereinbaren, wenn z.B. große Gesellschaften wie Kreditinstitute oder der Staat benachteiligt wird.

Oft lässt sich der Richter bei der Vernehmung von der unbewussten Sympathie oder Antipathie zum Zeugen leiten. So haben die Richter Wendler und Hoffmann feststellen können, dass die Sympathie, gleiche Herkunft, die Angehörigkeit zur gleichen gesellschaftlichen Schicht Auswirkungen auf die Bereitschaft haben Aussagen weniger zu hinterfragen. So erwiesen Tests, dass einem Skinhead mehr Nachfragen gestellt worden sind als einer hübschen jungen Frau, bei gleicher Aussage. Auch werden die Aussagen von Ausländern öffter mit Skepsis behandelt.

Die Frage der Motivation des Zeugen kann auch in die Erwägungen über die Glaubhaftigkeit des Zeugen mit einfließen (so auch der BGH in seiner Entscheidung vom 30.07.1999, Az.: 1 StR 618/98. Allerdings sollten hier diese Feststellungen nicht pauschal vorgenommen werden. Der Grundsatz der freien Beweiswürdigung (§286 ZPO), der besagt, dass das Gericht die Beweise ohne feste Regeln immer im Einzelfall zu bewerten habe, sollte dabei nicht vergessen werden.

Als ein Indiz, dass für die Wahrheit der Aussage spricht, wird in der Rechtsprechung die Selbstbelastung anerkannt. Bewusst falsche Aussagen haben nur selten eine selbstbelastende Wirkung.Anders versuchen sich intentional falsch aussagende Zeugen möglichst vorteilhaft und positiv darzustellen.

Zudem konnten Praktiker feststellen, dass lügende Personen bei ihrer Darstellung oft übertreiben um auf diese Weise den Richter überzeugen zu können. Einer sicher klingenden Behauptung wird schließlich oft mehr Glauben geschenkt als einer sich weniger bestimmt anhörenden.

In ihrem Buch weisen die Richter Wendler und Hoffmann auch darauf hin, dass die lügenden Zeugen nur begrenzt beurteilen können, ob dass was sie vor Gericht geschildert haben ausreicht um das Prozessziel zu erreichen. Deswegen sagen Lügner mehr, um zu „überzeugen“. Oft spricht also das „zu wenig“ gesagte für die Wahrheit. Ist es für die Richter dann zu wenig und sie verlangen eine „genaue Schilderung“ wird der Lügner meist darauf eingehen und nochmal „nachbessern“. Verzichtet der Zeuge auf diese „Ergänzungen“ kann man eher von der Wahrheit der Aussage ausgehen.

Ehrliche Personen sollen auch in ihren Aussagen Erinnerungsmängel zugeben können, während falsch aussagende Zeugen dies vermeiden.

Die Körpersprache ist auch ein Erkenntnismittel für die Richter. Dabei kommt es nicht auf die Merkmale wie Nervosität oder Vermeidung von Blickkontakt an. Vielmehr sind gerade die unbewussten Signale ausschlaggebend. Die Interpretation der Körpersprache ist in der Praxis allerdings sehr schwierig. Manche Verhalten können nämlich mehrdeutig interpretiert werden oder auch andere Gründe haben. Eine Person kann auch aus anderen Gründen innerlich aufgewühlt sein.

Als Fazit lässt sich also feststellen, dass die Zeugen nicht nur zu bezeugen brauchen, sondern eher überzeugen müssen. Der Zeuge muss also eine gute, glaubhafte Aussage liefern. Der Anwalt kann hier über noch so gute juristische Kenntnisse verfügen, letztlich spielt nur die Beweiskraft die entscheidende Rolle und hier ist der Zeuge meistens die Schlüsselfigur.

Dr. Thomas Schulte, Rechtsanwalt

http://www.dr-schulte.de/2010-pressemitteilungen/es-wird-nirgendwo-so-gelogen-wie-vor-gericht.html (Archiv-Version vom 30.03.2013)

das müßte Dr. White sein

Dr. Paul White

Anesthesiology, Internal Medicine

Male - 30 years experience

5323 Harry Hines Blvd
Dallas, TX

er kommt aus Dallas/Texas ...

der Verteidiger von Murray
Edward M. Chernoff ~ Ed Chernoff kommt aus Houston/Texas
http://www.houstoncriminallaw.com/

und

J. Michael Flanagan kommt aus Kalifornien
http://www.fuglaw.com/Firm%20Info/Lawyers/102259.aspx (Archiv-Version vom 03.11.2011)
http://dearconradmurray.com/the-attorneys-2/j-michael-flanagan/ (Archiv-Version vom 30.10.2011)

bald ist es soweit ... diese Jury entscheidet im Conrad Murray Prozess über "schuldig oder nicht schuldig" ... fast wie über "Leben oder Tod" ... :)

THE 12 PEOPLE THAT WILL DECIDE WHAT REALLY HAPPENED TO JACKSON

Juror No. 1: Mexican male, 51, U.S. Postal Service letter carrier, married father-of-five. A Michael Jackson fan who said he finds law enforcement officers, firefighters and doctors 'always believable'.
Mexikaner, männlich, 51, US Postal Service Briefträger, verheiratet Vater von fünf Kindern. Ein Michael Jackson Fan, der sagte, dass er Polizeibeamte, Feuerwehrleute und Ärzte immer glaubwürdig findet. "

Juror No. 2: Spanish female, 57, unemployed. Has served on five previous juries and closely followed the O.J. Simpson trial but said it did not affect her opinion of the criminal justice system. She does not consider herself a Jackson fan.
Spanierin, weiblich, 57, arbeitslos. Hat bei fünf vorherigen Jurys "gedient" und genau den O.J. Simpson Prozess verfolgt, aber sagte, es beeinträchtigte nicht ihre Meinung über das Strafjustizsystem. Sie betrachtet sich nicht selbst als ein Jackson Fan.

Juror No. 3: American male, 45, a partner in a management consulting firm. His wife is a former registered nurse, and both his brother-in-law and cousin are physicians. He has served on two previous juries, including a murder case in 1994.
Amerikaner, männlich, 45, ein Partner in einer Unternehmensberatung. Seine Frau ist eine ehemalige Krankenschwester, und seine beiden Schwager und Cousine sind Ärzte. Er hat bei zwei vorherigen Jurys "gedient", darunter einem Mordfall im Jahr 1994.

Juror No. 4: American male, 32, part-time bookseller and cashier. He served as a U.S. Army National Guard specialist as a telecom operator. His primary source of news is the Internet.
Amerikaner männlich, 32, Teilzeit-Buchhändler und Kassierer. Er diente als US Army National Guard-Spezialist bei einem Telekom-Betreiber. Seine primäre Quelle für Nachrichten ist das Internet.

Juror No. 5: American female, 48, paralegal. She watched the Casey Anthony murder trial 'on and off' because family members were interested was very interested but said it did not affect her opinion of the criminal justice system.
Amerikanerin, weiblich, 48, Rechtsanwaltsfachangestellte. Sie beobachtete den Casey Anthony Mordprozess "hin und wieder", weil Familienmitglieder interessiert waren, sehr interessiert, aber sie sagte, es beeinträchtigte nicht ihre Meinung über das Strafjustizsystem.

Juror No. 6: Cuban/Mexican male, 39, associate director of product management. He is an occasional reader of various Internet news and gossip sites. He considers himself a Jackson fan and owns various Michael Jackson, Jackson 5 and Janet Jackson CDs.
Kubaner/Mexikaner, männlich, 39, Vizedirektor vom Product Management. Er ist ein gelegentlicher Leser von verschiedenen Internet-News und Klatsch-Websites. Er hält sich für einen Jackson Fan und besitzt verschiedene Michael Jackson, Jackson 5 und Janet Jackson CDs.

Juror No. 7: Mexican American female, 57, relocation representative in office management/customer service. She followed the Casey Anthony case and believes people of wealth or fame are treated differently in the court system.
mexikanischstämmige Amerikanerin, weiblich, 57, Umzugs-Beauftragte im Office-Management / Kundenservice. Sie verfolgte den Casey Anthony Fall und glaubt, dass Menschen mit Vermögen oder Ruhm unterschiedlich beim Gericht betrachtet werden.

Juror No. 8: Mexican male, 42, school bus driver. He believes Hollywood celebrities get away with crimes because of their status. He does not consider himself a fan of Michael Jackson but has a positive opinion of him.
Mexikaner, männlich, 42, Schulbusfahrer. Er glaubt, dass Hollywood-Stars aufgrund eines Verbrechens davon kommen, wegen ihres Status. Er betrachtet sich selbst nicht als ein Fan von Michael Jackson, aber er hat eine positive Meinung von ihm.

Juror No. 9: African American male, 54, television technical director. A Michael Jackson fan, he has served on two criminal juries and one civil jury.
Afroamerikaner, männlich, 54, Fernseh-technischer Direktor. Ein Michael Jackson Fan, er hat bei zwei strafrechtlichen Jurys und einer zivilen Jury "gedient".

Juror No. 10: English female, 43, international marketer but previously worked as a pathology/medical technician in a biochemistry lab.
Engländerin, weiblich, 43, internationale Vermarkterin, aber hat vorher als eine Pathologie / medizinisch-technische Assistentin in einem Biochemie-Labor gearbeitet.

Juror No. 11: Hispanic female, 36, customer service representative. She reads People magazine and TMZ.com and watches reality television. She was shot in a drive-by shooting in 1993.
Hispanoamerikaner, weiblich, 36, stellvertretende Kundenberaterin. Sie liest People-Magazin und TMZ.com und schaut Reality-TV. Sie wurde 1993 bei einer Schießerei im Vorbeifahrenin angeschossen.

Juror No. 12: American male, 54, retired animator now working as a teacher. He considers Michael Jackson a 'gifted performer' and has owned Jackson CDs and albums since he was a teenager.
Amerikaner, männlich, 54, pensionierter Animator, arbeitet jetzt als Lehrer. Er betrachtet Michael Jackson als einen "begnadeten Darsteller" und hat Jackson CDs und Alben besessen, seit er ein Teenager war.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2042463/Michael-Jackson-trial-Final-indignity-jury-sees-shocking-deathbed-picture.html

@FaIrIeFlOwEr
Die Schlagzeilen sind ja mal wieder eindeutig. Wird dieser eine Zeuge von der Verteidigung, das Ruder noch mal rumdrehen können? Ich finde es sehr gewagt von Dr. White, mit einer solchen Sicherheit zu behaupten, MJ habe sich das Propofol selbst gegeben. Da kann man nur hoffen, dass die Staatsanwaltschaft, Lücken und Tücken bei Dr. Whites Behauptungen findet. :D

@CosmicQueen

CosmicQueen schrieb:Die Schlagzeilen sind ja mal wieder eindeutig. Wird dieser eine Zeuge von der Verteidigung, das Ruder noch mal rumdrehen können? Ich finde es sehr gewagt von Dr. White, mit einer solchen Sicherheit zu behaupten, MJ habe sich das Propofol selbst gegeben. Da kann man nur hoffen, dass die Staatsanwaltschaft, Lücken und Tücken bei Dr. Whites Behauptungen findet. :D

ja, die Headlines wurden wieder reißerisch gestaltet ... aber noch hat Dr. White ja nur für die Verteidigung ausgesagt ... das Kreuzverhör der Staatsanwaltschaft folgt ja noch ...
und da gehe ich doch von aus, dass sich Walgren übers Wochenende gründlich vorbereiten wird ...

bis jetzt hat Dr. White doch kaum zu verstehen gegeben, dass auch seine Ausführungen nichts weiter als Theorien sind ... nur er hat von Murrays Angaben aus dem Befragungsprotokoll vom 27.06.2009 viel zu viel ignoriert ...

ja, das finde ich auch sehr gewagt ... all die anderen Experten hielten es schlichtweg für unwahrscheinlich, dass MJ sich das Propofol selbst injiziert hätte ... und Dr. White behauptet einfach MJ hätte es sich selbst gegeben ... aber ich schaue bzw. höre mir den genauen Wortlaut nochmals an ...
nicht dass man da doch was falsches rein interpretiert ... :D :D

auf jeden Fall wird es ab Montag ein spannendes Duell geben ...

hast du dir die Juroren-Liste nochmals angeschaut ???? und die müssen zu einer einstimmigen Entscheidung kommen ... ich hoffe zur richtigen ... :D :D :D

also beim Spiegel hat man es etwas "vorsichtiger" ausgedrückt ... MJ könnte die Todesspritze selbst gesetzt haben ... von Dr. White natürlich auch nur eine Theorie ... während die anderen Experten, u. a. Dr. Shafer, zwar die Möglichkeit der Selbstinjizierung eingeräumt haben, aber diese für unwahrscheinlich halten ...

Dr. White hat genau die Ausdrucksweise gewählt, die die Verteidigung ja dringend brauchte ... :)
und da das Kreuzverhör noch nicht stattgefunden hat und das Wochenende "dazwischen" kam, bleibt erst mal diese Äußerung so im Raum stehen ... :(

Michael Jackson könnte Todesspritze selbst gesetzt haben

29.10.2011


REUTERS
Sachverständiger Paul White: Jackson könnte selber Betäubungsmittel genommen haben

Wie bekam Michael Jackson die tödliche Dosis an Betäubungsmittel zugeführt? Über diese Frage sind sich Sachverständige im Verfahren gegen Leibarzt Murray uneins. Nach einem neuen Gutachten könnte der Popstar selbst seinen Tod verschuldet haben.


Los Angeles - Der Experte Paul White erklärte am Freitag im Prozess gegen den früheren Leibarzt von Jackson, Conrad Murray, Jackson habe sich vermutlich selbst eine Dosis des Betäubungsmittels Propofol verabreicht, nachdem eine erste, die ihm Murray gegeben habe, abgeklungen sei. Zudem habe Jackson seien Berechnungen zufolge ein weiteres Beruhigungsmittel genommen. Zusammen könne das "tödliche Konsequenzen" haben, sagte White.

Es war die Aussage, auf die die Anwälte Murrays seit Monaten in dem Verfahren hingearbeitet hatten. Die Aussagen von White beruhen nach Angaben der Verteidigung auf kürzlich durchgeführten Tests an Proben aus Jacksons Autopsie und der Simulation des Zusammenspiels von Propofol mit einem weiteren Beruhigungsmittel. White legte dazu im Gericht eine Reihe von Diagrammen vor, die er in den vergangenen Tagen erstellte.

White erklärte, er glaube Murray, wenn dieser ausgesagt habe, dass er Jackson nur 25 Milligramm Propofol gegeben habe. Das hätte aber nur 10 bis 15 Minuten ausgereicht, sagte White auf Nachfrage. Eine weitere Dosis könne sich Jackson dann selbst verabreicht haben. White widersprach damit der Aussage eines anderen Experten, seines früheren Kollegen Steven Shafer, der es ausgeschlossen hatte, dass Jackson selbst die tödliche Dosis genommen haben könnte.

Die Anklage erklärte danach, sie brauche mehr Zeit, um das Computerprogramm zu überprüfen, das White genutzt habe, bevor das Kreuzverhör beginne. Dem stimmte Richter Michael Pastor zu, der sich überrascht von den verschiedenen Angaben der Experten zeigte. Die Verhandlung sollte am Montag fortgesetzt werden.

Die Anklage hielt es bislang nur für möglich, dass Murray Jackson das Mittel verabreichte und den Raum verließ, als er glaubte, der Sänger schlafe. Murray ist wegen fahrlässiger Tötung angeklagt. Ihm wird vorgeworfen, durch die Verwendung von Propofol den Tod Jacksons herbeigeführt zu haben. Der Arzt hat sich für nicht schuldig erklärt. Bei einem Schuldspruch muss er mit vier Jahren Gefängnis rechnen.

Vor White war der Suchtspezialist Robert Waldman zu Wort gekommen, der die Ansicht vertrat, Jackson sei schon Monate vor seinem Tod von dem Schmerzmittel Demerol abhängig gewesen. Dieses Schmerzmittel wurde dem Popstar zwischen April und Juni 2009 verabreicht, weil er an den Folgen von Botox- und anderen schönheitschirurgischen Eingriffen litt.

abl/dapd/AFP


http://www.spiegel.de/panorama/justiz/0,1518,794788,00.html (Archiv-Version vom 30.10.2011)

das sind die Videos vom 20. Verhandlungstag vom Conrad Murray Prozess ... :D

Conrad Murray Trial - Day 20, part 1

Conrad Murray Trial - Day 20, part 1

Externer Inhalt
Durch das Abspielen werden Daten an Youtube übermittelt und ggf. Cookies gesetzt.

Conrad Murray Trial - Day 20 - 28.10.2011

Testifying:
-Anesthesiologist Paul White

/There was no sound on the livestream the first 3:12 minutes/

Conrad Murray Trial - Day 20, part 2

Conrad Murray Trial - Day 20, part 2

Externer Inhalt
Durch das Abspielen werden Daten an Youtube übermittelt und ggf. Cookies gesetzt.

Conrad Murray Trial - Day 20 - 28.10.2011

Testifying:
-Anesthesiologist Paul White

Conrad Murray Trial - Day 20, part 3/last/

Conrad Murray Trial - Day 20, part 3 /last/

Externer Inhalt
Durch das Abspielen werden Daten an Youtube übermittelt und ggf. Cookies gesetzt.

Conrad Murray Trial - Day 20 - 28.10.2011 /end of Day 20/

Testifying:
-Anesthesiologist Paul White