September 26, 2011


I sent variations of the following letter to the judge and the prosecutors. In the interest of full disclosure and to raise awareness, I am also publishing it here.

During September 23, 2011 voir dire process, Defense Attorney Ed Chernoff objected to the verbiage “victim” used by David Walgren in his questioning of the veniremen. “There is no proof of a victim” Ed Chernoff argued. Consequently, judge Pastor instructed the prosecutor to use the term “alleged victim” instead.

Whilst whether Michael Jackson was a "victim" or not is arguable, pending the verdict
in this Trial, the scientific distinction between sleep and anesthesia isn't open to debate. 

 "It is neither indicated nor approved for use as a sleep aid"
                                   ~ Tony Well, AstraZeneca spokesman

“Propofol sedation is nothing at all like sleep. Sleep is reversible with external stimulation. If you shake somebody, they wake up. Propofol is obviously not like that. Sleep shows
a characteristic pattern of EEG behavior while Propofol does not. Sleep, in general, preserves blood pressure and the ability to breathe and Propofol does not.
They are very different states.” (*2)

“The ‘sleep’ you experience under general anesthesia is different from regular sleep.
The anesthetized brain doesn't respond to pain signals or surgical manipulations” (*6)

“General anesthesia is pharmacological coma, not sleep” (*7)

"Your brain is in a completely different state in sleep compared with being in a coma or general anesthesia and the differences are not subtle. It is apples and oranges.

If you are deeply asleep, I can eventually shake you awake. In a state of general anesthesia that won't happen. Surgery is invasive and traumatic and you need to be in a state that is like a coma to tolerate it. The goal of treating insomnia is to promote natural sleep but sleep is a cycle as your brain moves between REM and non-REM sleep. That is why people who take a sedative may wake up and still feel groggy. They haven't been through the natural stages of sleep necessary for the body to recover. 

We need to be more precise describing what we do. If an anesthesiologist says 'we’re going to have you go to sleep' some might think you could use these drugs for sleep. The bottom line is that when you’re undergoing anesthesia, you’re in a state
akin to a coma. That always needs to be remembered.” (*3)


As I was reading the pretrial testimonies, I noticed that the defense team, particularly Michael Flanagan continuously used misleading terms of “sleep” and “asleep” when referring to the anesthetized state; while he used “wake up” and “awake” when referring to recovery from anesthesia. Having successfully argued a Propofol related Trial previously and presumably, having studied for this particular case, I am confident that
the counsel knows or should know that the anesthetic Propofol doesn’t induce “sleep”.

For the purposes of this letter, I am only using Christopher Rogers’ pretrial testimony.
Mr. Flanagan said to Dr. Rogers “we also have the evidence that between 10:40 and 10:50, Dr. Murray injected 25mg of Propofol which may have been successful keeping the patient awake for a short period of time.” Judge Pastor asked “Awake or asleep?”
Mr. Flanagan replied “asleep” -NOT an accurate depiction of Mr. Jackson’s state.

The use of erroneous verbiage in the upcoming Trial will be misleading to the jurors. The substandard medical care provided by Dr. Conrad Murray to his patient Michael Jackson is the heart of the People’s charge. The use of Propofol for the treatment of insomnia is unprecedented and it is at the forefront of the deviations from the standard of care. Jurors who hear the terms “sleep” “asleep” “wake up” “awake” in connection with Propofol for the entire duration of the Trial will be desensitized to the serious nature of this deviation.
It simply downplays and misstates the clinical effects of Propofol.

Conrad Murray high-profile Trial will be watched by millions across the world. The use of aforementioned terms will misinform not just the viewers here in America but the people around the globe about the use of Propofol as a sleep remedy. Misinforming the public
vis-à-vis Propofol and its indications would be socially irresponsible of the court.

If Casey Anthony Trial thought us one thing, it is that the prosecutors who have extensive knowledge of the case shouldn't assume that the jurors know the particulars of the case. The prosecutors in this Trial should be vigilant about tiny details that will deliver a huge impact. If one of the arguments of the People is that Propofol isn’t used to induce sleep then does it make any sense to use “sleep” while referring to its effect? 

"Only close attention to the fine details of any operation makes the operation first class"
                                                      ~John Willard Marriott

While the continuation of the incorrect usage has adversarial effects on the Prosecution's case and they should be the ones to review and take the necessary legal steps to ascertain proper usage of the medical terms, it ultimately is Judge Michael Pastor's court and he is responsible that his court doesn't unwittingly misinforms a large population about Propofol.


(page 2)


25mg of Propofol would induce sleep for approximately 5 minutes, wouldn’t it?

So within a minute after injection, it would take effect. The person would be asleep. If there was no further Propofol given, you would expect that person to wake up very rapidly, wouldn’t you?

If it was 3-5 minutes and the 25mg was a transcription error, you would expect the patient to go to sleep for a period of maybe 5 minutes and wake up, wouldn’t you?

Now in the event that a person were to wake up after 5 to 10 minutes and ingest Propofol to get—first of all, stomach ingestion is only about three quarters as IV, isn’t it?

First the doctor has to start the Propofol, the doctor has to leave and then at some point, Mr Jackson would need to wake up…..

We also have evidence that between 10:40 and 10:50, Dr Murray injected 25mg of Propofol which may have been successful keeping the patient awake for a short period of time

If Dr. Murray gave a 25mg injection of Propofol over a period of 3-5 minutes, you would expect it to produce sleep, would you?

And the sleep, if it has been based upon Propofol, would be very short-lived, wouldn’t it?

A person would be totally reasonable in assuming that after 5 to 10 minutes of sleep, that the sleep is no longer being produced by Propofol?

Now, she also says if it were only a bolus injection, sleep would not have been maintained due to the short action of Propofol, do you agree with that, too?

But you would agree that if the patient was being kept asleep by Propofol and the only injection the doctor gave was between 10:40 and 10:50, would you expect the patient to be awake within 5 minutes?

In the event that you get Propofol level to the blood levels we see here, you would anticipate a rapid onset of, I don’t know If call it sleep, deep sleep or anesthetic state, you would expect a rapid onset, wouldn’t you?

And so in the event that the doctor gave that kind of bolus to get to that number, you expect him to go to sleep in a minute

So even if Dr. Murray gave more than 25mg between 10:40 and 10:50, we still have the same result. Mr. Jackson would be awake at 11:00 if he was being kept asleep by Propofol, correct?


September 23, 2011


September 21
  • Judge asked if the Prosecution has a response to the defense’s motion for admitting Michael Jackson’s O2 Press Conference video. People are not ready, at this time, to address the defense’s motion
  • Prosecution shared some discovery with the defense re: study in Chile and Dr Schaffer. The defense just got it so they have not reviewed it yet
  • Judge Pastor referred to Conrad Murray as “Dr. Brown” by mistake. Prosecutor David Walgren stepped in to correct the judge.  Ed Chernoff, known for his dry humor said “too many doctors, too little time”

September 22
  • Judge asked if there is any matter to be discussed in open court
  • Prosecution replied that there isn’t.  Prosecution would like to meet with the defense team to see if they have any agreements in regards to "for cause"
  • Judge Pastor apologized again for his “blunder” yesterday, calling Murray “Mr. Brown”
  • Prosecutors and the defense lawyers conferred in closed session on a mutual agreement about which potential jurors in a pool of 145 were too biased based on their answers on 30 page questionnaire

"Both sides want to get a fair jury that hasn't made up their mind and is willing to make
a decision based upon the facts" said defense attorney, Michael Flanagan to reporters

September 23

Conrad Murray Not Cooperative

The prosecution filed this motion today to “admit evidence of law enforcement attempts
to conduct follow up interview with Conrad Murray”. The motion lists 4 separate failed attempts by law enforcement to reach Conrad Murray for an interview.
June 30, 2009 LA Coroner investigator Elissa Fleak left a message at Conrad Murray’s office, requesting a follow-up interview

July 09, 2009 Detective Scott Smith emailed Ed Chernoff and left messages at Chernoff’s cell and home phones requesting follow up interview with Conrad Murray

July 17, 2009 LA Coroner investigator Elissa Fleak emailed Ed Chernoff, requesting
a follow interview with Conrad Murray

July 21, 2009 LA Coroner investigator Elissa Fleak left a message for Ed Chernoff, requesting an in-person interview with Conrad Murray

The defense team maintained that Conrad Murray was forthcoming and cooperative
with the law enforcement. The unreturned phone and e-mail messages will likely be used to counter the defense’s claim about Conrad Murray’s full cooperation and the motion alludes that the authorities tried repeatedly to get in touch with Murray to no avail.

The defense pointed that Murray willingly spent two-hours talking to law enforcement
on June 27, 2009. They argued that it was only AFTER information from this interview leaked to the public that Conrad Murray decided to invoke his Fifth Amendment.
"It was only after Dr. Murray learned that information was 'anonymously' leaked
to the public that Dr. Murray decided to invoke his right to remain silent”
                                                ~Ed Chernoff
The defense asked the judge to reject the motion, arguing that it "would create substantial danger of undue prejudice, undue waste of time, confuse the issues, or mislead the jury."

The judge has yet to rule this motion. He will likely consider this issue on Monday.

Voir Dire

Today was the final phase of selection process for the jurors who will hear and consequently hand down a verdict in the Conrad Murray trial. The jury was empanelled after less than six hours of questioning by the judge, defense attorneys and prosecutors.

Ed Chernoff previously had stated that they don’t have the money to assign a jury consultant but it seemed that somehow they overcame that snag. The defense retained a jury consultant to help evaluate the juror questionnaires. The prosecutor's office has used such consultants in the past but decided against it for this trial due to financial constraints.

@ 6:20 “Can’t afford one, we don’t have any money” had said Ed Chernoff

On September 8 and September 9, 145 jury candidates filled out a 30 page questionnaire, answering relevant questions posed by the prosecution and the defense. Both teams had a week to review the questionnaires. Today the candidates were summoned to the court for an in person questioning based on their answers on their questionnaires.

Bailiff led 84 potential jurors into Judge Michael Pastor's courtroom in LA Superior Court for an in-person questioning based on their answers on 30-page questionnaires they had filled out 2 weeks ago. Of the 84 veniremen, only 6 were African American.

Prosecution and the defense had stipulated on anonymous jurors so the prospective jurors wore number tags. Their badges didn’t have names on them and their identities are sealed. This prevents the attorneys conducting background check on the jurors.

Judge Pastor quickly excused 10 of the 14 jurors who expressed hardship which prevented them from serving as a juror in the five-week trial.

Remaining 74 candidates were questioned in groups of 27 who sat in 3 rows of 9 in the jury box. The judge questioned the prospective jurors first. The prosecutors and the defense lawyers were given only half of the normally allotted time to question the panelists due to the extensive nature of the questionnaire. Each side had only 20 minutes per panel of jurors. After the first batch of 27 people was qualified as unbiased, each side then exercised its peremptory challenges to dismiss people without stating any reason. Each side had a limit of 10 peremptory challenges in total. As jurors were dismissed, those seats were filled with new would-be-jurors.

Defense attorney Ed Chernoff for Conrad Murray

Edward Chernoff asked the group if there is anyone who've never read, heard or seen anything about Michael Jackson or Conrad Murray. No one raised their hands.

Chernoff asked the group if anyone wanted to be a juror in this Trial because of either Michael Jackson or Conrad Murray. No one raised their hand.

"Part of this trial, frankly, is going to be about Michael Jackson’s life. We're not going to drag up stuff that happened that people may not want to hear about” declared Chernoff, signaling that the defense will point fingers at the victim.

Chernoff noted that "there is a lot of publicity involved in this case" and that it
"may be an interesting case" that may be "fascinating" for those who like "science."

Chernoff started questioning by asking the would-be-jurors how they remember Michael Jackson. One woman said “I think of him as a child with the Jackson Five”. Chernoff then followed up by asking her ‘Was he so childlike that he was incapable of making decision?’ “No” answered the woman who DID end up as one of the selected jurors.

"Anybody here believe that Michael Jackson is less capable of making decisions than anybody else his age?" Chernoff asked.  Jurors shook their heads no.

“Does anybody think that Michael Jackson should be held to a different standard of responsibility?” Chernoff asked. No one raised their hands.

A nurse who got emotional during questioning by Chernoff was dismissed by the judge.
An African-American woman who began crying during questioning was also dismissed.

Prosecutor David Walgren for The People

Prosecutor David Walgren joked with prospective jurors that this process seemed like
"the courtroom version of speed dating, trying to get the most information in a short time."

Mr. Walgren focused his questions on whether the candidates could convict Conrad Murray if they found that Michael Jackson contributed to his own death. Walgren asked the group to consider a hypothetical situation where a drunk driver runs a red light and kills a pedestrian who was “not being safe as he could be and steps out in front of a car. You could say the driver is not 100% responsible but he did play a substantial role?
Could you find him guilty?”

All said they could but one man who asked if the pedestrian had used a crosswalk was dismissed by the prosecution. One woman said she would "prefer not to be in a position where I would have to judge” but she assured the judge that she could be a fair juror.
"If I have a job to do then I finish it" she said. The prosecution dismissed her.

David Walgren noted that a man wrote, in his questionnaire, that he knew very little about the case. The man said that he always changed the TV channel with news coverage on Michael Jackson’s death so it would be easy for him to be fair since "everything I hear would be for the first time." The prosecution dismissed him.

2 African-Americans amongst the first 27 candidates were dismissed by the prosecution.

To the question about whether she had seen 'This Is It' documentary, one candidate responded "No!" on her jury questionnaire. David Walgren asked her why she had put an exclamation mark. "That was an emphatic no. I wasn't interested" she responded. She was dismissed by the defense team.

Ed Chernoff objected to the term “victim” during David Walgren’s questioning. “There is no proof of a victim” Chernoff complained. The judge asked Mr. Walgren use the term “alleged victim” instead.

Prominent civil rights attorney Connie Rice was amongst the first 27 prospective jurors. She has criticized LAPD policies and filed class-action lawsuits over law enforcement misconduct. Judge Pastor asked her if she could be impartial in this case, she replied yes. Still, the prosecutor opted to use one of their peremptory challenges to strike Connie Rice.

A man in his 50s disclosed that he met Michael Jackson in the 1980s while working on Captain EO. This man DID end up being selected as a juror (Juror #70) in the Trial.

Also in the jury pool was a woman who is the secretary to an appellate justice who, weeks earlier, handled an appeal by Conrad Murray defense request for jury sequestration. In her questionnaire, she wrote that she saw Conrad Murray “convicted” on television. She clarified and said that she meant she saw him charged, not convicted.

The Jury for Conrad Murray Trial in In

Seven men and five women were selected as jurors, with 5 alternates

One alternate juror dismissed

At the last minute, one of the alternate jury was dismissed by the judge. The reason
for her dismissal is sealed although one court spectator overheard that the woman acknowledged that she had dealings with one of the defense attorneys several years ago. She failed to mention this connection during the jury selection process but a man who had just been dismissed as a prospective juror gave this information about the woman to court officials. Consequently, judge Pastor dissmissed her. Trial will proceed with 5 alternates.

"It seems like a good jury panel" said defense attorney, Michael Flanagan.

Presiding judge, Michael Pastor swore in and empanelled the jury. Before excusing them,
the judge advised them not to "read, listen to or watch any news report or any other commentary about this case from any source" and to "keep an open mind throughout the trial." He then instrusted them to return to court Tuesday morning for opening statements.

Conrad Murray Trial Jurors

As mentioned earlier, the jurors will remain anonymous. They were assigned numbers.

Juror #127 Mexican-American female, 54 years old, property manager, she has a daughter who was an alcohol and drug user 5 years ago and she thinks famous people -- notably Paris, Britney and Lindsay -- are treated differently in court. She loved Michael Jackson music as a girl

Juror #145 White male, 45, partner in management consulting firm, wife is pediatric nurse at a hospital. He served twice on a jury before (murder and rape cases), watched "This is It" on Netflix

Juror #61 White female, 57, unemployed, worked in past for Red Cross, divorced, listens to NPR, followed the OJ Simpson case, her younger brother uses drugs, served 5 times as a jury

Juror #70 White male, 54, college professor of animation and art, created characters for motion pictures at Disney, followed OJ trial, convicted of DUI, thinks celebrities aren't treated the same by police and can bend rules. He is a Michael Jackson fan

Juror #44 Cuban/Mexican-White, watches History Channel, Pawn Stars, Sons of Anarchy and Modern Family, listens to Howard Stern, has family members with alcohol addiction, served as a civil jury, Michael Jackson fan, especially Thriller

Juror #49 White female, 43, head of communications for international marketing firm, watches NCIS and Hawaii Five-0, and motor sports/speed channel, worked in medical marketing, serves as a juror in criminal child sexual abuse case involving incest, doesn't think cops are more lenient with celebs

Juror #100 white female, 48, paralegal for 30 years, watches Big Brother, Survivor, Amazing Race, watched Casey Anthony trial, brother is an EMT, thinks that people of wealth and fame treated differently in court system

Juror #52 Mexican male, 51, UPS letter carrier, watches Law and Order, wife is back-office medical assistant, Michael Jackson fan

Juror #99 Hispanic male, 42, school bus driver, father was addicted to alcohol, father-in-law died from alcohol abuse, served on a jury, Michael Jackson fan

Juror #38 Hispanic female, 36, customer service representative, filed for bankruptcy, listens to Ryan Seacrest on radio, watched Casey Anthony trial because it involved a child, former employer is a doctor, father was an absent alcoholic, she was shot in a drive-by shooting in 1993, served as a jury on a DUI cause, Michael Jackson fan

Jury #128 African American male, 54, technical director for TV, his cousin is a judge and another cousin is a lawyer, his dad died of alcoholism, served as a juror on 3 cases, loved the Jackson 5 as a kid but his taste changed as he got older, now likes Jay Z

Juror #108 Male "Wasp," 32, book seller, watches So You Think You Can Dance, Project Runway, girlfriend, in U.S. Army National Guard, grandparents attended AA, brother got DUI recently, thrown from a horse once, juror in civil trial, trained actor, Michael Jackson fan

 Conrad Murray is changed with involuntary manslaughter. 

The prosecution and the defense will present contrasting portrayals of Michael Jackson in his finals days. Prosecution will argue that Mr. Jackson was healthy, vibrant and optimistic man capable of handling 50 shows. The defense will argue that Michael was frail, sickly and distressed man incapable of performing 50 shows. The defense will also point fingers at Mr. Jackson as a drug-addict who kept Conrad Murray in the dark about medications that other doctors had prescribed to him.

Prosecutors will argue that Conrad Murray used a makeshift intravenous drip to administer anesthetic propofol and other sedatives without proper monitoring and resustitation equipment. They will argue that Conrad Murray’s medical practices violated the standard of care and led to Michael Jackson’s death.

Although Conrad Murray is NOT charged with an intentional crime but merely for medical negligence, expect the defense to try to cloud the purpose of the Trial by slandering Mr. Jackson's character. According to Defense attorney, Ed Chernoff, maligning the victim in this case will be "the crux of the defense". Chernoff reiterated their defense strategy to prospective jurors, declaring that "part of this trial, frankly, is going to be about Michael Jackson’s life. We're not going to drag up stuff that happened that people may not want to hear about”  The defense will argue that Michael Jackson drank Propofol whilst Conrad Murray was out of the room, causing his own demise.

The defense will declare that the reason Conrad Murray didn’t keep written records of
his treatment was because Michael Jackson requested secrecy. During a status hearing, Judge Pastor was appalled at Conrad Murray’s claim and said:

 “I don't know if my doctor would honor my request not to write medical records.
I think my doctor would say 'Go elsewhere.'"

If convicted, Conrad Murray faces a maximum of 4 years in prison, consequently, he is likely to lose his medical licenses. His lawyers expressed that Murray is more concerned about losing his medical license than prospect of imprisonment.

The opening statements will commence next Tuesday, on September 27 at 8:45am PT

Related Link:

September 21, 2011

4 HOLES IN CONRAD MURRAY DEFENSE re: Michael Jackson Health

Today, Conrad Murray defense team filed a motion to enter as evidence 
“Michael Jackson’s Press Conference at O2 Arena”

This material is relevant and should be admitted to the trial” defense motion stated
the Press conference allows jurors to see Mr. Jackson’s mental and physical condition back in 2009. It illustrates how adamant he felt about performing only 10 concerts.” 

The motion declares that as per Michael Jackson makeup artist Karen Faye’s testimony
Mr. Jackson was furious when he learnt that he had to perform 50 shows and he felt that he would not be able to physically complete them all. Mr. Jackson told Ms Faye ‘it wasn’t supposed to be this way. Why can’t I choose?’”
The Prosecutors will argue Michael Jackson was vibrant, optimistic and physically capable of handling O2 Tour. The defense will argue that he was in frail health and was stressed out about performing in 50 shows, thus, took his own life by chugging Propofol.

There are 4 holes in Conrad Murray defense which renders it mute

1- “Michael Jackson drank Propofol” defense may be plausible to those who are NOT familiar with how the drug is metabolised in human body but medical professionals will attest that when digested orally, Propofol has no effect. If Mr. Jackson drank Propofol, 
%99 of the drug would have been eliminated by the liver before it is released to blood.
Blood levels on the autopsy report is NOT indicative of oral digestion.

Prosecution witness, Dr Steven Shafer who will testify during the Trial said “the rapid hepatic (liver) metabolism of the drug makes it impossible for Michael Jackson to have received a fatal overdose by drinking Propofol. There is zero possibility that Propofol was orally digested

2- How do you claim that Mr. Jackson’s health was in bad condition without impeaching your client who repeatedly claimed that Michael Jackson was healthy?

By impeaching Murray, the defense will paint their client as a liar. And if Conrad Murray lied about Michael Jackson’s health, how can his veracity on other issues be trusted?

3- If Michael Jackson was a frail man with declining health, what does it say about the medical judgment, more accurately, lack thereof, Conrad Murray exhibited by subjecting his fragile patient to an untested treatment of insomnia under dangerous circumstances?

Treatment of insomnia by Propofol is unprecedented in the history of medicine. Murray not only invented a medical treatment but also crafted an “Propofol insomnia machine”
(saline bag with propofol vial, gravity dripping without an infusion pump)

"It is neither indicated nor approved for use as a sleep aid"
~Tony Jewell, AstraZeneca Spokesperson 

"Murray’s case involves a doctor that didn’t practice medicine but some kind of twisted experimentation without any medical precedent.  Never before had Propofol been used to treat insomnia.  Only Murray’s distorted thinking and poor judgment created such a high-risk procedure, acceptable to no one but him.  Murray concocted his own way of treating insomnia by anesthetizing Jackson with a fast acting operating room anesthetic. His Propofol insomnia machine defined gross negligence by a licensed physician, creating
his own dangerous procedure for treating Jackson’s insomnia" ~Dr JOHN CURTIS

"The only thing more reckless Murray could have done was taking Jackson up in an airplane and pushing him without a parachute" ~Dr BARRY FREIDBERG

The defense’s contention that Michael Jackson was unhealthy only increases
Conrad Murray’s culpability. How do you, on one hand, say that the patient was frail, on another, you ADMIT to treating him under circumstances that 'shock the conscious'?

"The incident was so egregious as to shock the conscious. Defendant was trusted
to practice medicine with the utmost respect for his patient's welbeing. Instead he demonstrated extremely poor medical judgement and ultimately took the life of his patient. His conduct is unprofessional and reckless. This is conduct from which the public should be protected. Murray's criminal conduct and reckless actions taken in the care and treatment of his patient, Michael Jackson, makes him a danger to public"
~CA Medical Board

4- When I look at the video of Michael's Press Conference at O2 arena, I see a man who is elated by the love and adulation by his fans. A man who is exuberant, happy, healthy and pumped up. Yes, the number of shows was increased from 10 shows to 50 shows. No, Mr. Jackson wasn’t happy about it. The shows were increased on March 12, 2009. Why would he wait 3 months to suicide? Why even invite Murray to come over if he was going to chug Propofol? Murray himself said that he was asked to help Mr. Jackson sleep.

Had Mr. Jackson decided to withdraw from his O2 Tour, he had
a second business proposal by AllGood Entertainment who was practically begging Jackson to perform 1 day in Texas for $15mil

If the defense argues that that he didn’t mean to take his own life, it was an accident
where was Conrad Murray?

"American system of justice provides for the presumption of innocence until guilt is found. By publically stating 'I gave Michael Jackson propofol' and 'I left the room' Murray has confessed to the most egregious of anesthesia errors: patient abandonment. Because of his public statements, he can no longer be afforded the customary presumption of innocence" -Dr. Barry Friedberg

MICHAEL FLANAGAN: If the doctor didn’t put the Propofol in Mr. Jackson,
                                            it is not a homicide, is it?

LA CORONER, CHRISTOPHER RODGERS: Based on the medical care, I would still call this a homicide even if the doctor did NOT administer the Propofol to Mr. Jackson

Kudos for the defense to conjure up inventive ways to defend the untenable actions of their client but why rely on a video to gauge Mr. Jackson’s health? After all, Michael Jackson’s health was Conrad Murray's purview. He would be the go-to guy to inquire about Michael Jackson's health.

On June 19, 2009, Kenny Ortega sent Mr Jackson home from rehearsals because he didn’t seem fine. Prosecutor: Had you seen Michael in that kind of condition previously?
                          Kenny Ortega: No

On June 20, 2009 a meeting was called at Mr. Jackson’s home. Randy Phillips, Paul Gongaware, Kenny Ortega, Conrad Murray, Frank Dileo and Michael Jackson attended.
Kenny Ortega said of the meeting “Dr. Murray was upset that I had sent Michael home and didn’t allow him to rehearse the night before.  And also because I had voiced my concerns about Michael’s health THAT EVENING. Dr Murray told me that this was not my responsibility and asked me not to act like a doctor and to be the director of the show and to leave Michael’s health to HIM
Q. What was Dr. Murray’s demeanor as he is saying these things to you?
Ortega: Scolding 
Q. Towards you?
Ortega: Yes
Q. Did he elaborate? Did Dr. Murray elaborate at all in regard to what your role was in relation to Dr. Murray’s role as it pertained Michael Jackson?
Ortega:  Just that it was better for all that I focus on directing the show and NOT concerning myself with Michael’s health because he said Michael was physically and emotionally fine and capable of handling all of his responsibilities with the show

Following the June 20 meeting, the crew had a three-day-break due to Father’s day. Rehearsals resumed on Tuesday June 23. By all witness accounts, Michael was energetic, happy and his brilliant self during June 23 and June 24 rehearsals.
Kenny Ortega said of June 23 rehearsals “it was fantastic. Michael was in great form. It was like the Michael we all knew and loved. He was excited, he was in delightful mood
Kenny Ortega recalled his last conversation with Michael at the end of June 24 rehearsal:
Michael asked me if I was happy, I said ‘I am very happy’. I asked him If he was happy. He said he was very, very happy. I talked to him about the next day’s rehearsal. He was very excited because we were going to rehearse an illusion

Michael's personal Assistant Michael Amir Williams on June 24 rehearsal:
Q. What was Michael’s general demeanor on June 24?
A.He had a great spirit that evening. I thought it was extraordinary but he would say     ‘oh brother Michael it is just %30, %40. I just don’t go %100 until the show time’ But I personally thought it was great

Michael's security Faheem Muhammad on June 24 rehearsal:
He had high energy. He looked good. He was probably as energetic as I had seen him throughout the entire rehearsal process

Richard Sennef, LA paramedic, attended Michael Jackson on June 25, 2009
Q. Did you ask him [Conrad Murray] what the underlying medical condition was?

A. I did. He didn’t answer. I repeated the question and he said ‘there isn’t any.
He doesn’t have a problem. He is fine. I’m just treating him for dehydration'

On June 25, 2009 at 5:54AM Bob Taylor of Robertson Taylor Insurance (broker for Lloyd’s of London) sent an email to Conrad Murray inquiring about Michael's health.
On June 25, 2009 at 11:17AM Conrad Murray responded to Bob Taylor:
“As far as the statements of his health published by the Press,
let me say they are all fallacious”

UCLA, Emergency Doctor Richelle Cooper recalls her conversation with Murray:
"I asked 'what happened'. Dr Murray reported the patient had been in his usual state of health, not ill, but he had been working very hard and he though he may be dehydrated"
Q. So he said he had not been ill, is that right?
A. Correct

Christopher Roger, LA coroner, performed the autopsy on Michael Jackson
Q. Can you explain your conclusions in regard to his general health?
A. His general health was excellent    

"My client did some blood tests, he did some physical examinations of him as you would expect any doctor to do. He came back within range,
he seemed to be fine. He had no heart condition. Nothing that would've uh...evidence to red flag that there need to be some special precaution" ~ED CHERNOFF, Conrad Murray defense Attorney 

Related Links:


His defense team has pulled all stops to portray him as a responsible man with “loving soul”. He has been pictured whilst playing the loving father role to his newborn son but you won’t see him with his other 6 children from whom he hides money via corporate accounts to avoid paying child support all the while financially supporting strippers. His attitude with women, children and his finances speak volumes as to how Conrad Murray really lives his life: RECKLESS and DUPLICITOUS

Publicity Stunt

On January 7, 2011 pretrial hearing, three Conrad Murray women took the stand. The defense counsels seemed highly sensitive about the testimonies of these witnesses.

Sade Anding

@3:51 "So he is still married? WOW! He told me he was divorced"

From the get-go, most questions by the prosecutor were objected by Ed Chernoff

Q. Ms Anding, in February of 2009, where were you employed?
Anding: At Sullivan’s Steakhouse
Q. What was your position?
Anding: I was a cocktail waitress
Q. Describe Sullivan’s Steakhouse for me
Anding: When you first walk in, it’s a dining room and to your right, there is a lounge
Q. Were you working in the restaurant portion? The lounge portion?
Chernoff: Objection!
Q. Which part of Sullivan’s Steakhouse did you work as a cocktail waitress?
Chernoff: Objection!
Q. While working at Sullivan’s steakhouse, did you meet with Conrad Murray?
Anding: Yes
Q. And Mr. Murray was a patron in the restaurant?
Chernoff: Objection!
Q. Did your meeting with Conrad Murray stand out in your mind?
Chernoff: Objection!
Q. Was there something significant about your meeting with Conrad Murray?
Chernoff: Objection!

Judge called a sidebar meeting…..

Prosecutor Deborah Brazil: The witness testified that when she first met Conrad Murray, they struck up a conversation and she remembers him because he tipped her extremely well. The financial relationship they had started from the very first meeting.

“Your honor, nothing outside of June 25 is relevant in this case. If they want to explore what they were talking about on that day, that might be relevant. But as far as what they talked about in May or April, whether they went to bed together, that is not relevant. This is designed to prejudice you against Doctor Murray due to relations he might have with other women” argued defense attorney Michael Flanagan

“The nature of this relationship is relevant because it highlights the priorities Dr. Murray was placing at the time his focus should have been on his patient when instead at 11:51, he is making a phone call to a cocktail waitress in Houston. It is relevant as to what he finds to be important that overrode his concern for his patient” retorted David Walgren

“It’s not a coincidence that the prosecution put all these alleged girlfriends, acquaintances and cocktail waitresses together all in one day. It is designed just to be prejudicial” bemoaned Ed Chernoff

“I am not going to spend the rest of the day dealing with this. I am going to allow the questioning but I don't want to hear details of personal relationships” said judge Pastor

Q. From that first meeting of acquaintance with Dr Murray, did you see him after that?
Chernoff: Objection

Ed Chernoff objected to almost every question throughout the testimonies of Sade Anding, Bridgette Morgan and Nicole Alvarez- women Conrad Murray was courting simultaneously while he was married.

On May 23, 2009 Conrad Murray took Ms Anding out to eat and upon returning, he gave a check for $500. According to a motion filed by the prosecution, this check is representative of their relationship.

Prosecution motion stated that Conrad Murray told Sade Anding that he was Michael's personal doctor, thus breaking patient/doctor confidentiality “for his own benefit. This is a stark contrast to his withholding of relevant patient information when it was most critical at the time of Michael Jackson’s death”.

Bridgette Morgan

Before Bridgette Morgan’s testimony on June 07, 2011 the defense requested another sidebar meeting because they filed a motion. “Her involvement as an exotic dancer at various a variety of clubs in Vegas. That information, I am seeking to exclude because it was six years before the events in 2009” argued defense attorney, Joseph Low.

Chernoff: The last witness, they asked how they met. I think it is reasonable to expect that they intend to ask (the same question to Bridgette Morgan) as well

Deborah Brazil: Yes, I intend to ask how and where they met

Chernoff: They know they met at a topless club. They are intending to ask her that
                 and it is irrelevant

“They met at a club and it is a social relationship. I don’t need to know the particulars of the club” said judge Michael Pastor.

“I hear you addressing the club but again even characterizing it as a club…why they can’t they meet out of town? Can’t they meet in public? Why can’t it be social?” complained defense attorney, Joseph Low.

Conrad Murray met Bridgette Morgan in 2003 at Cheetah's Club in Las Vegas. The two dated until 2005, after which time they exchanged occasional phone calls. The two had lunch in Los Angeles 3 weeks before Michael’s death and during lunch, Murray disclosed to Ms Morgan that he was Michael Jackson’s personal doctor.

“Conrad Murray had a pattern of informing selected people about his working relationship with Michael Jackson. He had a pattern of revealing confidential information when it suited him but he was unwilling to reveal patient information at the most critical time” stated the motion filed by prosecutors.

During the aforementioned lunch date, Conrad Murray offered to buy a plane ticket to Las Vegas for Ms Morgan’s birthday. To follow up on this offer, Ms Morgan called Murray twice on the morning of June 25, 2009. “Dr Murray put no limitations as to the time period when his acquaintances could call him. He was receiving personal phone calls during the hours when he was supposed to be completely focused on the care of Mr. Jackson” declared the prosecution motion.

Nicole Alvarez

Yet another sidebar meeting before Nicole Alvarez’s testimony on January 7, 2011 because the defense feels that how and where she met with Conrad Murray is irrelevant to the Trial. The judge allowed her to be questioned on the nature of the relationship considering propofol orders were delivered to her apartment.

Nicole Alvarez and Conrad Murray have a son together. Murray was staying with Alvarez's Santa Monica apartment when he would fly in to LA to "treat" Michael. She refused to cooperate with the police and she was a very difficult witness during the preliminary Trial. She mostly replied “I don’t recall” and she kept asking the prosecutor to repeat questions as if to stall for time or just to annoy prosecutor Brazil. At some point, she had Ms. Brazil repeat a question 3 times. The judge then interjected "okay, we've got to pay attention because we are repeating and repeating and repeating"

Q. Miss Alvarez, when did you meet Conrad Murray?
Alvarez: Perhaps in 2005
Q. Where did you meet him?
Alvarez: I met him in Las Vegas
Q. Specifically where in Las Vegas?
Ed Chernoff: Objection
Judge: Overruled, you may answer
Alvarez: In a club in Las Vegas
Q. What type of club?
Alvarez: A Gentleman’s club

Nicole Alvarez met Conrad Murray in Crazy Horse Too. She danced for Murray in a private VIP lounge and Murray paid her $3500. He continued seeing Alvarez once or twice a month, he regularly paid her $2700 per month rent for her Santa Monica apartment.

Ms Alvarez was asked if Conrad Murray paid her March 2009 rent. She replied yes. When prosecutor asked her how much her rent was, he replied “I don’t recall”. Brazil pressed for an answer and Alvarez replied “perhaps it was around $2,500”

Q. Ms Alvarez, when you began a relationship with Conrad Murray, were you aware
that he had six other children?
          Chernoff: Objection!

Q. At some point during your relationship, did you find that Dr. Murray was married
while you were having a relationship with him?
         Chernoff: Objection!    

Nicole Alvarez’s response to a later question reveals that she DID know that Conrad Murray was married.

Q. Where would you consider his dwelling in April 2009 to be?
Alvarez: I assumed that would be in Las Vegas with his wife

Conrad Murray’s relationship with Nicole Alvarez is notable because he and his wife, Dr. Blanche Bonnick Murray had left their practices in San Diego and moved to Las Vegas to escape a similar situation with Nenita Malibiran, with whom Conrad Murray had an affair with and had a son out of wedlock.

Michelle Bella

Murray and Michelle Bella met at Spearmint Rino Gentelman’s Club in Las Vegas where she worked as a stripper. Ms Bella said of their meeting "he came in there with his scrubs and he was there with like a client of his. We were just sharing medical knowledge, and
I know he was intrigued with me" (she was studying to be a chiropractic assistant).
The day the two met, Conrad Murray paid her $1100 for her services.

On June 25, 2009 at 8:30AM Conrad Murray sent a text to Michelle Bella who told the police "I mean his schedule was obviously, you know -- I know that he was like up all hours because of his work so when -- so when he called, you know, he sounded tired and he was like I'm gonna get some sleep"

On June 16, 2009 Conrad Murray left a voice message for Michelle Bella telling her that he was currently working as an “exclusive medical director” for a person whose name he mentioned in a prior text message. Prior to this voice message, Conrad Murray texted Ms Bella that he was working as Michael Jackson’s doctor.

“Similar to the evidence regarding Dr. Murray’s disclosure to Sade Anding, this evidence shows Dr. Murray’s obvious willingness to breach patient/doctor privilege for his own benefit. This is a stark contrast to his withholding of relevant patient information when it was most critical at the time of Michael Jackson’s death” stated prosecution motion.

On April 7, 2011 the defense team filed a motion to “exclude evidence of strip clubs”.

“Prosecution seeks to introduce evidence related to Dr. Murray’s visits to strip clubs and the amount of money he spent while frequenting strip clubs” stated the defense motion

Another motion was filed on the same day to “exclude evidence of Conrad Murray’s children and extramarital affairs”

Zufan Tesfai: FIRST WIFE

Conrad Murray's first wife. They were married in Harris County, Texas on October 17, 1984. Their got divorced on August 26, 1988 in Dallas County, Texas.  She is now a pharmacist living in New Jersey.

While married to Zufan Tesfai, Conrad Murray had an affair with and had a daughter with Patricia Mitchell.

Patricia Mitchell

Murray's girlfriend and mother to his first child. They met while Conrad Murray was married to Zufan Tesfai. In November 1985, Patricia Mitchell had Murray arrested for "Fraudulent Breach of Trust,” meaning she accused him of stealing or misusing money or property entrusted to him. Murray who was a medical student in Nashville at the time posted a $2,000 bond the next day and the case was dismissed in January 1986.

Dr. Blanche Yvette Bolick Murray: WIFE

Dr. Blache Murray and daughter Camilla Murray

She is Conrad Murray's second and current wife.  When they met, they were medical school classmates at Meharry Medical College School of Medicine. They got married in 1989. They have two children together, born in 1990 and 1996

The marriage bliss didn’t last long. Conrad Murray can’t seem to keep it in his pants!

Janice Adams

In February 3, 1994 Conrad Murray was arrested for attacking Janice Adams at an Arizona home they both shared. This was when he was a cardiology fellow at the University of Arizona. The incident report noted that after she accused him of having an affair, Conrad Murray pushed Janice Adams to the floor. He stood trial in July 1994 and was acquitted of domestic violence

Nenita Malibiran

Nenita Malibiran is a Hispanic-American nurse who met Murray when they both worked at Sharp Memorial Hospital in San Diego. Both Nenita and Conrad were married to other people when they were dating. They have a son together.  She now lives in the Sacramento suburb of El Dorado Hills with her now 13 year old son.

In 1999, Nenita Malibiran and Conrad Murray fought in court over child support and he acknowledged in a deposition that he had a history of fathering children and then leaving their mothers. During the trial, Conrad Murray cried on the stand about missing his son, even though he had made little attempt to visit him. After winning this case, Malibiran had to sue Conrad Murray several more times for failing to pay child support.

Conrad Murray didn’t pay his children support 1999-2007. He was sentenced 25 days imprisonment in 2007 and 25 days imprisonment in April 2009. On both occasions, it was for nonpayment of child support for his son with Nenita Malibiran. On both occasions, Murray evaded prison by obtaining a stay and eventually paying up.