Just as I was getting ready to pick up with Part Two of my review/rebuttal of Conrad Murray’s crockumentary, I happened to see this. It looks as though Murray has ensnared himself in his own trap more than we thought. He just may have destroyed any chance he might have had for a lenient sentence!
Dr. Conrad Murray’s Video Interviews Could Haunt Him At Sentencing Hearing
By Jen Heger
Dr. Conrad Murray’s decision to participate in a documentary about the Michael Jackson death trial could be used at his sentencing hearing on November 29, RadarOnline.com is exclusively reporting.
The convicted felon sat down with the Today Show before being found guilty of killing Jackson on June 25, 2009.
“I don’t feel guilty, because I did not do anything wrong, I am very, very sorry for the loss of Michael… Michael is a personal friend. It’s heartfelt. It’s been painful,” Murray told Savannah Guthrie.
Murray’s interview with Guthrie, and a British reporter, as well as the documentary which aired in the U.S. on MSNBC last Friday, could be played by the District Attorney at the sentencing hearing.
“The DA is considering playing excerpts of Murray’s interviews. It’s admissible, and completely legal. It’s very compelling evidence, as Murray told the investigating officers a very different series of events that took place, than what he revealed during what was aired on television,” a law enforcement source tells RadarOnline.com.
“Walgren hasn’t decided if he is going to play the interviews, but it only makes his case stronger that Judge Pastor should sentence Murray to four years in state prison because of his inability to tell the truth, on a consistent basis.”
As RadarOnline.com previously reported, the executors of Jackson’s estate, John Branca and John McClain, blasted NBC for airing the documentary. The executors fired off a letter to the network which said, “No sooner was Conrad Murray ordered led away in handcuffs after his conviction on manslaughter charges in the death of Michael Jackson than we discovered your MSNBC network inexplicably will showcase him in primetime Friday night as if he is worthy of celebrity.
“Dr. Murray’s victim, Michael Jackson was a loving father, an incredible talent and someone who had much left to give the world. Dr. Murray is a convicted felon who a judge felt compelled to have placed in handcuffs and jailed immediately after the jury delivered its verdict. He is not someone NBC Universal should be giving a platform on a prime-time pedestal.”
The documentary also highlighted the bickering between Murray’s lawyers, Ed Chernoff and Michael Flanagan. RadarOnline.com was first to report that during the trial, things had gotten so bad between the two lawyers, that Chernoff, who lives in Houston, moved out of Flanagan’s Southern California home. Chernoff had been staying with Flanagan to save his client money.
During one shocking scene of the documentary, Flanagan says, “F**k you,” to Chernoff during an argument over the defense strategy. Murray criticized Flanagan by saying, “I take offense when my damn attorney is not prepared for that man,” referring to prosecution witness Dr. Alon Steinberg.
Stay tuned to RadarOnline.com for developments on this story.
That would be the greatest payback of all, for this thing to boomerang on Murray by actually playing into his sentencing. Well, we shall see on November 29th what comes of it. In the meantime, I’ll pick up with where I left off in Part One.
At about the 6:52 mark, the focus shifts to what Murray told the police. I’m a little confused by the line of questioning here (and equally, Murray’s response) since Hewlett is asking Murray why he did not tell police about giving Michael Jackson the propofol. The fact is, Murray did tell police, but claimed the amount given was only 25 milligrams, injected. I’m wondering if Hewlett did not mean to ask why Murray never mentioned giving propofol when the paramedics arrived,which would make more sense. But since Murray never corrects him, I’m really not sure. Murray’s emphatic response is, “They never asked me!” I am no body langugae expert (in fact, this interview would be a great one for this guy to tackle: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO4gUBL464I; he has done a great series on how Michael Jackson’s body language in interviews exonerates him; I would love to hear his take on this Conrad Murray interview!); however, I do feel that Murray’s emphatic gestures and vocal tone suggest honesty in this particular segment. Here, he is very, very frustrated and I believe there may be some truth to what he is trying to tell Hewlett in regard to the police interview. The problem is that Conrad Murray is like the little boy who cried wolf. When one has repeatedly been caught in so many lies, it becomes harder and harder for any version of their truth to be accepted or believed.
The question of whether there was a drip becomes the next big issue. This was a central focus of the prosecution’s case, with Dr. Steven Shafer testifying that a drip was the only viable explanation for the amount of propofol Michael Jackson actually had in his system at time of death. According to Shafer’s testimony, a drip would have continued to infuse propofol into Michael’s body post arrest; because the body at that point was technically dead, the excess propofol was no longer being metabolized by the liver; thus, you get the very high concentration of propofol in the blood that was determined at autopsy.
Even if we give Murray the benfit of the doubt here, and believe his story, then we know something doesn’t add up. The effect of the propofol (if only 25 milligrams injected) should have worn off in about ten minutes, just as he says. At that point, though the patient may continue to sleep, the potential for any dangerous side effects from propofol such as respiratory arrest should be greatly diminished (but still, should not excuse leaving the patient totally unmonitored). But what the prosecution has maintained all along-and many believe-is that Michael was out for much longer than just the ten minutes or so that Murray claims. And that Murray actually, in fact, planned to have Michael out for much longer.
This explanation makes much more sense when we also take into account other indisputable evidence-not only the concentration of propofol in the blood, but also the presence of the condom catheter and the amount of urine retained in the bladder at time of death.
In fact, the biggest clue of all that Murray’s account of events is bunk could well be…well, for lack of a more delicate way to put it, the Full Bladder Theory. This was something I had wondered about ever since I first read the autopsy report. Not long ago, I came across a great article from Nikki Allygator’s blogsite From Atop The Branches of the Giving Tree that explored this topic in depth. Since I have not asked permission to quote from the article, I will simply provide the link here, but I urge everyone to check out this article and see if you don’t agree that it’s a far more plausible theory than anything put forth by Murray or his defense:
My boyfriend and I read the autopsy report together. When it came to the part that stated Michael had 550 grams of urine in his bladder, my boyfriend (who tends be a very blunt person who just says it like it is) commented, “That’s a lot of p_ss.” Well, yes. It is. Which then begs the question: If Michael had been fully awake and conscious, complaining all morning about being unable to sleep, as per Murray’s story, he wouldn’t have had 550 grams of urine stored in a painfully distended bladder at time of death because that urine would have been voided. As Nikki Allygator’s blog points out, had Michael been awake and conscious enough to be complaining to Dr. Murray right up until 10:50 am, he also would have been well aware of those 550 grams of urine in his full bladder (in short, he wouldn’t have been lying in bed complaining; he would have been going to the toilet!). And even had he been simply unconscious (but alive) his bladder would have automatically voided into the condom catheter. Which really points to a far more disturbing possibility…that he might have lain there, dead, for who knows how long before being discovered! (Or, depending on whether you adhere to any conspiracy theories, before Murray decided it was safe to take action).
Of course, I don’t have a medical background, nor claim to. It would be interesting if any readers with a medical background would weigh in, as I would be very interested to hear your take on this. But I do think it’s all the more compelling evidence that Michael Jackson was left, untended and unconscious, for a much longer period than Murray claimed-or is continuing to claim here. Which also points to the much more likely scenario that Michael was indeed hooked to a drip and being administered a slow infusion.
The topic next moves to the absence of medical records. Murray never denies that he failed to keep records while he was treating Michael Jackson in the spring and early summer of 2009. But he tries to argue this away by saying that the lack of medical records did not cause the death. Well, no, but obviously, a lack of medical records would make it all the harder to get to the bottom of what happened in the event of an emergency or worst case scenario. Whether Murray wants to admit it or not, this is culpability on his part. It makes it seem as though something very shady and underhanded was going on-which it was! Just the very fact that he was administering propofol on a nightly basis in a home setting is incriminating enough. But it’s also another grave admission on Murray’s part (which makes one further question if this guy is dealing with a full deck!). There is a good reason why a doctor has a responsibility-to himself and to his patient-to keep accurate records! What if something goes wrong? What if another physician needs access to those records in order to provide treatment for the patient? What if the doctor is sued by the patient? One would think that, at the very least, Murray would have wanted to look out for his own interests by making sure his butt was covered in the event something happened. Myself, I am no doctor, but even in my profession (teaching) we are taught the importance of keeping accurate records. When I was in grad school doing my student teaching, I remember that our supervisor had a very good name for it. He said to always keep a CYA file-and I’ll let you guess what CYA stands for; it shouldn’t be too hard to figure out! He told us, your CYA file may be the only thing you have if a student tries to sue you or if any problems arise, even years down the road.
For a doctor to not keep records is simply unethical, inexcusable-and very stupid. Unless the doctor has reason to know that keeping records would be far more incriminating for him than to not have them. Hmmm, wonder which category Murray fell into?
In response to a question regarding his alleged payment of $150,000 a month, Murray says he has yet to receive a dime of it. I don’t doubt this is true, largely because all of the loose ends on the business side of things insofar as Murray being hired by AEG were not yet finalized at the time of Michael’s death. In fact, Michael had never even signed the document stating that Murray had been hired as his doctor. And additionally, let’s not forget one very important detail-Michael Jackson died under Murray’s care! So, does Murray honestly think he is still entitled to his $150k? Now that he’s so thoroughly enmeshed in his own culpability, and a convicted felon to boot, he’s not going to come out of this with even one thin dime to his name.
But the defense Murray is trying to use here to throw off the line of questioning-that he was not an enabler or supplier because he never received a dime of the promised 150k-doesn’t hold water. The fact is that regardless of whether he had received the money or not, he was acting on the premise of expectation. He expected to receive that amount in the very near future, so therefore was doing whatever necessary to keep his position. That he did not receive it doesn’t change anything-and it definitely does not absolve his culpability.
At this point, Murray evades answering any further questions. “Part Two,” he says smugly, getting up and walking out. Apparently he was operating under the assumption that he would be acquitted, and would sit down for Part Two. It did not happen.
So now, finally, getting into the meat of this: The actual mockumentary. It starts with all the usual teasers: The announcement of the 02 shows; the news reports of the death; then proceeding to clips from the trial and vociferous fans outside the courthouse. All very predictable by now, to the point of even being cheesy. What matters is what is going to transpire over the next hour as Murray attempts to exonerate his own role in Michael’s death. The very first quote from Murray is chilling:
“Michael was an incredible human being, the greatest performer of all time. We were friends, and I can never, ever betray his trust in me.”-Conrad Murray
A couple of things stand out to me immediatly in that quote. The first two clauses are probably the only truthful and sincere thing this man has uttered in the whole two years since all of this went down. But also note that while referring to Michael as an incredible human being and his “friend” he adds the old cliche’ about him being “the greatest performer of all time.” This seems to have become a standard cliche’ for those who wish to make a distinction between Michael Jackson the human being with that of the ARTIST and PERFORMER. Even Joe Jackson was guilty of it (as the media did not fail to point out, and reminded us at every opportunity, telling us snidely that Joe Jackson did not appear to be grieving the loss of his son, but the loss of an icon!). But at the same time, media “journalists” themselves use this tactic all the time. For instance, when discussing the allegations, they will say, “He was the greatest performer of all time BUT…” or when discussing what they perceive as the downward spiral of his life, “He was the greatest performer of all time, BUT…”
It is really just a sneaky way of saying, yes, Michael Jackson was the greatest performer of all time BUT…and then you know the rest! From that vantage point, they are going to proceed to tear down Michael Jackson, the human being! In Murray’s case, he uses this setup/teaser tactic to let the audience know that even though he could never “betray” Michael Jackson, he is nevertheless about to do just that!
It’s the same duality and “attachment syndrome” that has cursed so many of Michael’s friendships and acquaintances. Because of the attraction of celebrity, few could resist the temptation to be part of his inner circle; everyone wanted that! But by the same token, a precious very few have been unable to resist the tempation to then sell out that acquaintance. Murray wants us to somehow believe he is an exception, while his very actions prove he is not! He wants us to believe that it is only circumstances-being accused of Michael Jackson’s homicide-that have led him to betray Michael’s confidence.
But let’s go back to this:
There was some initial debate as to whether Michael was under the influence of something Murray had given him, or if Murray simply ‘found” him in that condition due to drugs administered by some other doctor. In either case, the bigger ethical issue was, Why did Murray record him in that condition to begin with? For what purpose?
Defense attorney Michael Flanagan was quoted as saying that “This is what happened when Murray wasn’t around to treat him.”
But in his Today Show interview with Savannah Guthrie, Murray admitted that Michael was under propofol at the time of the recording, which also is a VERY strong indication that most likely it was Murray who had administered the propofol and was thus, directly responsible for Michael’s drugged state in that recording! Listen to what he says here at 5:45:
So it looks as though, yes indeed, this was exactly what would happen when Murray was around to treat him! Then, having gotten him into that condition, he proceeded to record the conversation! One can only surmise for what purpose, but it seems evident that an eventual “betrayal” was already in the planning stages!
Getting back to the program, we come to the next interesting quote. “My story is one of David and Goliath,” Murray says. “I’ve seen the whole world coming at me; that is Goliath.” He also seems to be implying that he was David when he became ensnared in the “Goliath” that was Michael Jackson’s life and AEG. But one can just as easily look at that situation and ask if Michael Jackson wasn’t the David in this picture! Between the relentless pressure of AEG, fighting insomnia, dealing with the overall stress of the shows, and being subjected to Murray’s nightly “treatment”-which, regardless of whether he asked for it or not, was neither in the best interest of his health or well being-who was really David and really Goliath in this picture?
Anyway, Murray’s analogy doesn’t quite hold up because at the end of the story of David and Goliath, David emerges victorious-despite great odds. That’s the whole point of the story. Maybe Murray still envisioned at the time of his statement that he would emerge victorious also. But it doesn’t look to me as though there are any “Davids” here at all. Michael Jackson is dead, and Murray is facing possible prison time. No giant has come crashing down. In short, I think Goliath won.
“It’s not for others to judge,” Murray says. But he has been judged-and the verdict is Guilty.
In Part Three, I will conclude my review/rebuttal, and will show conclusively that the only thing Murray has succeeded with this little scheme has been the further tightening of his own noose.