TIAI September 27

[melody]

Who is this? Is he part of Murray's defense team?

[wishingstar]

Who is this? Is he part of Murray's defense team?

I have wondered that myself....he sure likes his laptop.  Is this the guy that Murray turned to yesterday...I missed that whole thing.  Is there internet access from inside the courtroom.....either for just the lawyers, or everyone?  I wouldn't think that would be a good idea for some reason.  Maybe just the lawyers...maybe.  But if everyone has access wouldn't too much information leave  the court right away etc? I thought people had to surrender or at least turn off their cell phones. There seems to be a lot of active computer use in the court....does this really happen in cases like these? 
Just wondering...............thanks for posting the pictures, hope we find out who it is.

Blessings Always

[The RPM]

Heyya again everyone.May i give my apologies to all as its been long time since i posted (hectic life at the moment)but i have to say i have been reading the forum whenever i can and ,you guys,all i can say is wow,the work everyone has put in is incredible.Truly,truly mind blowing and heart warming at the same time.        I think that decisive moment is stepping   closer and closer into the spotlight (moonlight?)and the popcorn and champagne is on standby.Thought id share a video posted on TMZ.Dr murray being caught and having a bit of chat with a tmz journalist (if this has already been bought up please accept my apologies for the repeat)You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login                                                 
My sister,a fellow believer and forum follower told me about this video and we both found the subject matter quite interesting,The comments about the prosecution "pulling a fast one"by opening the propofol bottle's sleeve,and then having to sign a stipulation with regards to if it had been previously opened.This sounds very similar to the incident with mr sneddon during the arvizo case involving the infamous pornagraphic magazine incident.As we all know sneddon used this approach to put fingerprints on the magazine in the hope it would help convict michael.Are we seeing an echo of the previous trial.I have to admit my reaction when i heard it was to shout the words "script"at the screen lol.


The other thing i couldnt help but notice was the rather obvious namedropping with regards to the "conrad murray was living in a pharmaceutical never never land",the fact they then used the words in history just sweetened the deal and made me sit back and again feel i was listening to a script (one that is a masterpiece may i add,the fact that they can slip in this little clues into a daily "drama"and a large chunk of the world literally doesnt realise.I seem to recall a court case in the UK recently were (if im correct on this)a police officer got into a rather large heap of trouble when it was discovered during a testimony for a court case,he had slipped several famous song titles into his time on the stand.So slipping the words "living" "neverland"and "history" (i feel these are the most important words)is either a little bit a bold move,hoping it wouldnt be noticed,or another little clue,As we get closer and closer i have to send my respect,admiration to every single one of you,you are all incredible,and have opened my eyes to not just hoping,beLIEving that michael will return.Until the next time or until that long awaited BAM day,i have to send you one of theselove and peace y'all

[Im_convincedmjalive]

Who is this? Is he part of Murray's defense team?

I have wondered that myself....he sure likes his laptop.  Is this the guy that Murray turned to yesterday...I missed that whole thing.  Is there internet access from inside the courtroom.....either for just the lawyers, or everyone?  I wouldn't think that would be a good idea for some reason.  Maybe just the lawyers...maybe.  But if everyone has access wouldn't too much information leave  the court right away etc? I thought people had to surrender or at least turn off their cell phones. There seems to be a lot of active computer use in the court....does this really happen in cases like these? 
Just wondering...............thanks for posting the pictures, hope we find out who it is.

Blessings Always

That is Dr. White who is supposed to testify for the defense. He and Dr. Shafer have known each other for 30 years. They supposedly were White (Professor) and Shafer (Student) but Shafer denied that today. They both have written studies together and seperate. Dr. White rolled his eyes today at Dr. Shafer's testimony.

Keep Watchin'  :mrgreen:

[~Souza~]

This was a very interesting day. Ed is very well on the way creating reasonable doubt. I definitely need to rewatch since I had to do some other things in the meanwhile, but Shafer had to admit that all he did for 3 days was give his opinion. His outcome is a theory, based on testimonies and medical orders. Apparently he also found it more reasonable that Murray (let's not forget that Murray is supposed to be a cardiologist) would throw a propofol bottle in a cut IV bag instead of administering it the proper way, than that Alvarez might have given a false testimony. Alvarez's testimony didn't add up in the first place, so why would the bottle-in-bag theory be more reasonable than Alvarez lying? He also alleged that Murray might have hidden evidence (one of the IV lines) because according to his theory, Murray must have used an extra one, because he purchased such a thing (4 times over 3 years). Yet if Murray wanted to hide evidence, why was all the other stuff still on the ground and did he even pointed the police to the bag in the closet? Funny how he says that extreme claims need extreme proof, yet he had no extreme proof at all that his theory was in fact what really happened.

Also interesting that Katz was named. I wonder how this will play out Monday. I have one or two thoughts about it, but I want to see what happens next. Lat thing we learned was that there was no propofol in the brain according to the AR, so I would like to review Dr. Shafers theory sheets again.

And I also would like to know if it's allowed for witnesses to have laptops at hand or attend other testimonies. Seems a little strange to say the least.

[PureLove]

Who is this? Is he part of Murray's defense team?

I have wondered that myself....he sure likes his laptop.  Is this the guy that Murray turned to yesterday...I missed that whole thing.  Is there internet access from inside the courtroom.....either for just the lawyers, or everyone?  I wouldn't think that would be a good idea for some reason.  Maybe just the lawyers...maybe.  But if everyone has access wouldn't too much information leave  the court right away etc? I thought people had to surrender or at least turn off their cell phones. There seems to be a lot of active computer use in the court....does this really happen in cases like these? 
Just wondering...............thanks for posting the pictures, hope we find out who it is.

Blessings Always

That is Dr. White who is supposed to testify for the defense. He and Dr. Shafer have known each other for 30 years. They supposedly were White (Professor) and Shafer (Student) but Shafer denied that today. They both have written studies together and seperate. Dr. White rolled his eyes today at Dr. Shafer's testimony.

Keep Watchin'  :mrgreen:

Thank you for the info Im_convinced. It is going to be interesting to see him testifying.  :mrgreen:

[fordtocarr]

This was a very interesting day. Ed is very well on the way creating reasonable doubt. I definitely need to rewatch since I had to do some other things in the meanwhile, but Shafer had to admit that all he did for 3 days was give his opinion. His outcome is a theory, based on testimonies and medical orders. Apparently he also found it more reasonable that Murray (let's not forget that Murray is supposed to be a cardiologist) would throw a propofol bottle in a cut IV bag instead of administering it the proper way, than that Alvarez might have given a false testimony. Alvarez's testimony didn't add up in the first place, so why would the bottle-in-bag theory be more reasonable than Alvarez lying? He also alleged that Murray might have hidden evidence (one of the IV lines) because according to his theory, Murray must have used an extra one, because he purchased such a thing (4 times over 3 years). Yet if Murray wanted to hide evidence, why was all the other stuff still on the ground and did he even pointed the police to the bag in the closet? Funny how he says that extreme claims need extreme proof, yet he had no extreme proof at all that his theory was in fact what really happened.

Also interesting that Katz was named. I wonder how this will play out Monday. I have one or two thoughts about it, but I want to see what happens next. Lat thing we learned was that there was no propofol in the brain according to the AR, so I would like to review Dr. Shafers theory sheets again.

And I also would like to know if it's allowed for witnesses to have laptops at hand or attend other testimonies. Seems a little strange to say the least.

I have found an article about Dr. Shafer and Dr. Katz on anethetics...it's a doctor Nathaniel Katz.  I posted in under the Dr. Katz thread if it will help you.  I hope you find me wrong.

About the witnesses in the courtroom, I ask ABC7 covering the trial and they said that the defense ask the judge to allow him in there...and he did.  Otherwise, they usually don't allow it. 

I also HLN, and they answered me on TV and said that "people wanted to know why he's in the courtroom" and it's because expert witnesses are allowed to listen to other witnesses testamonies.  Which is NOT the same as the other people said about the judge allowing it.
To me...there have been a few experts..so that don't make sense. 

I also ask them about the Dr. talking to the media...and they answered on tv again with this huge thingy about there may be a big problem with that issue by him doing that.  We'll see

[/b][/i][/font][/color]

[MJ_ForeverandAlways]

And I also would like to know if it's allowed for witnesses to have laptops at hand or attend other testimonies. Seems a little strange to say the least.

Souza....I don't know what it's like in other areas of the world, but here in our little city in Michigan.....No one is allowed to take any electronic device into the courtroom. You have to go through a metal detector (just like they showed Michael going through during 2005 trial) and any cell phones either have to be taken to your car or left at the metal detector check in. I know this because my Mother in Law works at the courthouse as a court recorder, and my hubby works at our county jail as a corrections officer. My hubby can not even go into the courthouse with his cell phone...he has to leave it in our vehicle. I also have never heard of other witnesses being allowed in the courtroom while other testimony is being given....and they surely would not be allowed to have a laptop!  It might be different in other courts, but that's how it is here!Love & Blessings to You All        bearhug

[paula-c]

Murray out of UCLA "the day of the death "of Michael. We can see in the display the date and time, June 25, 2009 to the 16:38 pm                    
 
 
 
 ... .. where this all people??                     

[Mish1981]

And I also would like to know if it's allowed for witnesses to have laptops at hand or attend other testimonies. Seems a little strange to say the least.

Souza....I don't know what it's like in other areas of the world, but here in our little city in Michigan.....No one is allowed to take any electronic device into the courtroom. You have to go through a metal detector (just like they showed Michael going through during 2005 trial) and any cell phones either have to be taken to your car or left at the metal detector check in. I know this because my Mother in Law works at the courthouse as a court recorder, and my hubby works at our county jail as a corrections officer. My hubby can not even go into the courthouse with his cell phone...he has to leave it in our vehicle. I also have never heard of other witnesses being allowed in the courtroom while other testimony is being given....and they surely would not be allowed to have a laptop!  It might be different in other courts, but that's how it is here!Love & Blessings to You All        bearhug

Here in Virginia it is the same regarding cell phones or any electronics. When I have to go to court I don't even bother bringing my cell phone in with me, I keep it in the car. A friend of mine forgot to take her Ipod out of her purse and she wasn't allowed to bring it in so she had to make another trip to the car. I can only imagine that if it's a strict rule about cell phones and little things like Ipods that they would be this way with all electronics. I hope this helps.

[~Souza~]

Makes sense. Now it looks like as when the prosecution or the defense asks a question, the witness can say 'Hold on, let me Google that for you'...

[Mish1981]

Makes sense. Now it looks like as when the prosecution or the defense asks a question, the witness can say 'Hold on, let me Google that for you'...

lolol/

[paula-c]

In the autopsy report  not mention the two cicatrizes of Michael, the burn in the head or the bite of a spider, but this if it is displayed in the photo of the forensic

[scorpionchik]

@RPM interesting theory about comaprison of MJ's finger prints on magazine and pre opened propofol bottle. I am confused again, many members believe that Muttay should be in hoax, I don't. If Murray in hoax, why would Michael needs to set him up. The fact you mentioned says to me that Murray is guilty fall guy used by killers to assassinate MJ and that is what this hoax about.
 
Since Alvarez testimony does not add up, could he be one of the fall guys and "secret intruder" who might tried to kill MJ. He seemed very shady indeed. I believe that people can fall that bad for money, as our Michael sings "anything, anything for money".

[scorpionchik]

Perhaps we missed something, but I believe the expert witness has an exception to bring electronic device, not connected to internet, just has a file he was working on in it, to answer questions based on his notes and observations since he can't memorize all details.