Feb 07 2011

Lisa the Lawyer Completely Deflates Conrad Murray’s Defense (UPDATED)

Category: JusticeSeven @ 6:56 am

Lisa the Lawyer Deflates Conrad Murray's Defense

Lisa the Lawyer Deflates Conrad Murray's Defense

A while back, I presented a two-part series by Christy the writer and Lisa the Lawyer which dealt with the extortion of Michael Jackson. It’s a very educational piece that I highly recommend.

Now, Lisa the Lawyer has focused on the Conrad Murray trial and she has completely deflated his defense. I’ve dealt with that subject myself here, and here, but I am a writer, not a lawyer, so it is important to learn Lisa’s take on this issue.

In a piece she just published on Vindicate MJ, it’s clear that any flimsy attempts Murray’s lawyers make at defending the indefensible can be thoroughly discredited – if the prosecution does its job as Lisa has done hers in this piece.

Since it has been decided that cameras will be allowed in the courtroom, we may get to see some of this unless the media simply refuses to film or cover it. It’s pretty much a given that the media(loids) and Murray’s defense will be on the same side in this trial and that they will collectively attempt to deflect attention from Conrad Murray by smearing and placing the blame on Michael for his own murder – once again putting Michael on trial rather than his killer.

The biggest difference will be that instead of the media(loids) making up salacious lies about Michael from outside the courtroom as they did in 2005, they’ll have Murray’s defense inside the courtroom to do it for them. With cameras inside, the ability of the media to lie and distort is somewhat diminished. I expect that we will see that our justice system is a complete sham at worst, and at best we’ll see the prosecution do its job as it should be done. I’ll let Lisa illustrate how it should be done by sharing with you some excerpts from her article. I encourage you to to visit Vindicate MJ to read the entire thing.

Lisa begins:

Less than a week after Michael Jackson died, after allegedly suffering “cardiac arrest,” CNN’s Drew Griffin interviewed Nurse Practitioner Cherilyn Lee. The world was still reeling and Michael’s family and investigators in LA were still sleeping when, at 7:15 a.m., the public first heard the word Propofol. Nurse Lee identified Propofol and speculated it may have caused Michael’s death.

Michael met Nurse Lee and had her recommend vitamins and nutritional supplements. She was familiar with his insomnia and had once assessed his bedroom for levels of stimuli and sleep patterns. But in April 2009, Michael asked her to help him find an anesthesiologist to monitor him. He then told her about Propofol, which he claimed was the only thing that ever worked to provide instantaneous sleep. He described the drug as being administered intravenously and said that he would fall asleep as soon as he received the first drop. When she asked him who administered the drug, he said that a doctor gave it to him “a long time ago.” After consulting with her Physician’s Desk Reference – a comprehensive volume that provides a detailed description of drugs, their side effects, and contraindications – she warned Michael that the drug was dangerous and that she feared if he took it he would not wake up. Michael’s response, after she voiced her concerns, demonstrates why Dr. Conrad Murray’s conduct in monitoring his patient was reckless and, at the least, constitutes manslaughter.

Michael told Lee, “I need to have somebody here to just monitor me. If somebody stay (sic) here and monitor me with this IV then I would be okay. I would be okay because they’re gonna be here twenty-four hours or twelve hours to monitor me so I could sleep eight hours.” Drew Griffin aptly predicted, “Half the people watching this are not going to believe you. They are going to think this woman is just seeking fame.” When asked why she was speaking out now, she responded, “I’m coming forward because the more I watch the news and the more they kept saying drugs and I’m thinking, ‘This is not drugs.’ It wasn’t the drugs they’re saying; the Demerol, it wasn’t that. He kept saying he wanted to have somebody there that could watch him and medically supervise him. That’s what [Michael] said.”

Nurse Lee’s reiteration of Michael’s words show (1) he had not taken Propofol in many years and (2) he understood that when given the drug, he needed to be monitored. With that as a background, Murray’s defense that Michael was a drug addict who, in the absence of his physician, self-administered the fatal dose, is quite thin.

Now, Dr. Patrick Treacy has also corroborated this. Dr. Treacy has asserted in an interview that he also knew from dealing with Michael firsthand that there was no way Michael would ever approve of or ask for any anesthesia without proper monitoring and without an anesthetist present. Dr. Treacy also said that he never prescribed any drugs for Michael other than for colds and the like and that he never saw him use or saw him under the influence of any drugs for the entire time (6-7 months) Michael was being treated by him in Ireland. So not only have we heard from Cherilyn Lee about this, but also from another doctor of Michael’s.

As for the “drug addict” claims Lisa says:

Many will recall Ed Chernoff’s initial diatribe that Murray did not know what other drugs Michael was taking. Problematic with the addict theory is that, according to the toxicology report, Propofol, Lidocaine, Lorazepam, Midazolam, Nordiazepam and Diazepam – all drugs prescribed and administered by Murray – were found in Jackson’s blood samples. No other drugs were found. Therefore, the first defense is a dead end.

Murray’s attorneys must have mounted the second defense – that of Jackson self administering Propofol – once the phone records demonstrated that Murray did not leave his patient alone for two minutes as he told police investigators. But, as the records show, Murray spent up to two hours on the phone before discovering Michael in distress.

According to Murray, Michael Jackson told him that while treating with other physicians, he had “pushed” the IV line into his veins. Even if he had inserted the IV line on previous occasions, that does not change the fact that a physician always monitored him. Indeed, for Murray to be acquitted, his attorneys would have to convince a jury that a man who understood how Propofol worked, who had stated on other occasions that he knew he needed to be monitored while using the drug, would have self-administered the medication while the doctor he was paying $150,000 per month to watch him was chatting with girlfriends, business associates and other patients.

To advance such a defense, Dr. Murray would have to take the stand. If he takes the stand, he will have to explain (1) why he didn’t keep medical records, (2) why he didn’t perform a physical examination before administering new medication to his patient, (3) why he did not understand the dangers in combining benzodiazepines with Propofol, and (4) why he delayed in calling for help. Then, Murray will have to find other doctors willing to admit that Michael Jackson self-administered Propofol in their presence. This, of course, is a double-edged sword for the defense; even if they can elicit testimony about self-administration, the defense team is highly unlikely to find a doctor who will say that he, too, left the patient unmonitored while under sedation.

Should he take the stand, Murray’s conduct in hiding, destroying and concealing evidence may prove to be the most damning evidence against him.

As for Murray’s squirrelly behavior: talking on the phone as Michael lay there dead or dying, refusing to call 911 for almost an hour, concealing evidence at the scene, initially concealing the fact that he gave Michael propofol at all, refusing to sign the death certificate, disappearing for two days only to return with a passel of lawyers, and his ever-changing excuses and timelines, Lisa concludes:

Given Murray’s elusive conduct, is it too far a stretch to suggest that he could have used Michael’s postmortem hand to place fingerprints on syringes and medicine bottles found at the scene? In either case, Murray will have to explain what he did from approximately 11:56 a.m. – when Sade Anding heard mumbling and coughing – and 12:17 p.m. when Alberto Alvarez arrived.

Don’t miss the rest of Lisa’s article. Read it in its entirety here.

• • •

UPDATE – Lisa has added additional comments to her article in response to questions she has seen regarding Murray’s defense. Her comments are as follows:

I just wanted to add two points that may need discussion.

I’ll begin with the caveat that I don’t have a medical background. And, while I defended doctors in malpractice cases years ago, I obviously never encountered Propofol before. But, I have heard that since there was no equipment to control the Propofol drip, by the time Murray found Michael, even if he was still alive, based on the levels of Propofol found, he would have been overdosed such that nothing could have saved him.

The presence of Propofol in Michael’s stomach – although thoroughly explained by Lynette – may have gained some momentum for the “self-administered” theory because the media has reported that finding and that there were audible gasps from the Jackson family when Dr. Ruffalo testified that he made a mistake when he measured the amount of Propofol found in the stomach.

But, I cannot help to think of Sade Anding’s testimony that she heard “coughing and mumbling.” Again, isn’t it possible that Dr. Murray added some Propofol to Michael’s juice and gave it to him to sip on? I guess my point is that I don’t believe any aspect of the self-administration theory because Michael knew how the drug worked and that it could not be drunk. But, Murray’s delay in calling for help, gave him the necessary time to “doctor” (pardon the pun) the scene.

My second point is the defense’s most recent publicized strategy of Michael’s declining health. On that note, Conrad Murray will have to explain why he lied to Bob Taylor less than an hour before he found Michael in distress.

Prosecutors called Stephen Marx at the recent preliminary hearing. Mr. Marx was a computer forensic examiner for the DEA. He has since retired and now extracts computer evidence to present it at trial. He conducted an examination of Dr. Murray’s iPhone, which was recovered on July 28, 2009. Specifically, he analyzed screen shots from the phone to track when Dr. Murray reviewed incoming or created outgoing data.

Mr. Marx recovered a 5:54 am e-mail, with the greeting of “Hi Conrad,” with signature, Bob Taylor, of Bob Taylor’s Insurance of London. The e-mail specifically inquired about Mr. Jackson’s health. Mr. Taylor also needed to confirm that Dr. Murray was the only physician consulted during that period, and that his records dated back to 2006 when he first met Mr. Jackson. Conrad Murray responded to Mr. Taylor’s e-mail at 11:17 am. In a lengthy e-mail, Dr. Murray denied Taylor access to Michael’s medical records. Murray wrote, however, that press reports about Michael’s health were false to say the least.

Murray has said that he was excited to go on tour with Michael and closed his practice because he could now make more money than he could have with his own practice. If Michael was in failing health, the e-mail to Bob Taylor demonstrates that Dr. Murray is willing to lie for money.

Now, Murray’s freedom and professional licenses are on the line. Is he telling the truth or is he lying? Can we believe anything that Dr. Murray says?

Tags:

32 Responses to “Lisa the Lawyer Completely Deflates Conrad Murray’s Defense (UPDATED)”

  1. carina for mjj says:

    The stomach had a few mucosal heamorhages . The propofol was found even in his eyes, the vitreous humor=the tranparent tissue with no blood wessels that fills the eye balls.It must have ended up there by diffusion, the same with stomach contents.

  2. carina for mjj says:

    This especially for Lisa the Lawyer. What do you think about the decision to add
    N.Guirijian to murrays dedence team? Personally I don´t like it at all and see it as a continuation of the “royal” traetment given to murray through out. Murray line of defence will naturally be to blame the victim.

Leave a Reply