Information about Conrad Murray futher trial and sentece

posted by The Fairy on Wednesday, November 30th 2011

Well we have one "earlier" picture of Murray promoting his energy drink in 2005..

The TMZ grey hair pic claims to be from late '90's.

At the Pit Bull "carnival" he doesnt have grey hair and on TMZs pic he does. Naturally Murray could be getting grey for some years and sometimes he could be using hair dye and sometimes not, but it sounds a little weird that the dye can wear off in three weeks and that his eyebrows too.. its possible but is it likely? We probably wont see him at the hearing, so we cant see if the greyish continue or not.....

Monday, July 6, 2009 at 1:56 PM ET
Michael Jackson's cardiologist: Energy drink guru



Life & Style magazine can confirm that Michael Jackson's cardiologist, Dr. Conrad Murray, once promoted an energy drink called Pit Bull.

In 2005, while partying shirtless with models at the Carnival in Trinidad and Tobago, Dr. Murray was hawking his new drink.

Model Maggie Goldstein, 36, who was at the party, tells Life & Style, "The doctor liked to party hard and loved hanging out and flirting with the models at the carnival.

"We were all drinking Pit Bull mixed with gin, and the party went on for 12 hours. He was dating one of the girls who was a lot younger than him."

"I did think it was a little strange for a heart specialist to be promoting an energy drink," Maggie continues, "but he told us he had invested in it, and he had hired all the girls, so I didn't ask too many questions."

posted by ElkeHassell on Wednesday, November 30th 2011

Does it not strike you all funny and strange how TMZ seems to be getting all the GOOD STUFF FIRST!!!!

Every photo so far in this whole saga comes first from TMZ not even to mention the premature "Death Announcement"

I just finished looking at MJ's Mugshot from 20/11/2003 - full stamp of the Santa Barbara Sherrif Stamp, full booking ref. number details, all personal details attached.

Now TMZ posted this basic suit Conrad Murray "Mug Shot" and nothing else to accompany this????? LOL

I watched the MJHE video a little while ago, and of course noticed the comparison to OJ before prison sentence (in suit) and reappearing in court again for further sentencing IN PRISON CLOTHES AND HANDCUFFS!. Somebody said that because Murray's crime is of lesser count its ok for him to turn up there in his suit and no handcuffs. I do not believe this Once a Charged Criminal in Prison, you do not wear a suit and you certainly do not appear or are being carried away without handcuffs, no matter how less the crime! Anybody could have taken that Mugshot of Murray, like Evenstedt for starters, he seems to be good at it being at the scene first!

posted by mjmtc on Wednesday, November 30th 2011 @

I agree Elke... TMZ comes first and the rest of the media runs after them without checking the story...

PerezHilton.com publishes this as "taken moments after the sentence", regardless that Murray was wearing a different suit and tie... this is from the sentence yesterday



The Face Of A Murder: Conrad Murray's Mugshot!



Someone doesn't look very happy to be slapped with a maximum sentence!

This afternoon, Dr. Conrad Murray was officially charged and sentenced for the death of Michael Jackson. This picture was taken of the Doc moments after the judge sentenced him to four years in county jail for administering the drugs that led to the King of Pop's end.

He's certainly dressed nicely in his mugshot. Hey, how come Lindsay always has to wear that horrid orange jumpsuit when she takes her pics?

Part of the media doesnt even realize the pic is NOT from yesterday? Or is it anyone's guess when the pic is from?


TMZ has a large gallery of what they call "Recent mugshots"...

Michael is there as #45

and Bille Jean Jackson (the one who claimed she was the mother of Blanket) is #77

but Murray isnt in this gallery...

The website "mugshot.com" has so far only had what they claim to be an old mugshot of Murray... now they have both of them

posted by Nimue on Wednesday, November 30th 2011

Conrad Murray I'm Glad I Did that Documentary



Conrad Murray doesn't regret for a second doing the documentary that infuriated Judge Michael Pastor, because he wanted the public to hear his side of the story.

Murray -- who declined to testify in his trial -- spoke with friends and family after the sentence. We're told Murray said he knew he was going to get the maximum sentence, so it didn't bother him that he became Judge Michael Pastor's human punching bag over the things he said in the documentary -- in particular, trashing Michael Jackson and not accepting any blame for his death.

And we know more about Murray's reaction to the sentence. He's saying he's "surprisingly upbeat" about the sentence, telling one friend, "I'm just relieved it's finally over," adding, "Don't worry, I'm fine, and I'll be out soon."

http://www.tmz.com/2011/11/29/conrad-murray-reacts-to-sentence-documentary/#.Ttad3VaaDh4

Interesting... he will be out soon..

I am going to take some screenshots and compare but it seems that not only the grey is showing really fast as also some bald spots are missing..

By the way, did Murray also miss his glasses from the 90's to now?

posted by The Fairy on Thursday, December 1st 2011

Flanagan saying the judge doesnt want the truth out... talking about how the appeal will go... and funny part when he says "Murray gave a private interview, not a public one.."
watch vid at

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-500202_162-57333569/lawyer-murray-resigned-but-fighting-sentence/
Lawyer: Murray "resigned," but fighting sentence



November 30, 2011 8:25 AM

(CBS News)

One of Dr. Conrad Murray's defense lawyers, Michael Flanagan, said on "The Early Show" Wednesday that his client is doing "OK" since he received the maximum sentence -- four years in prison -- for his involuntary manslaughter conviction in the death of pop star Michael Jackson.

"(Murray's) resigned himself to his position and he'll come through it," Flanagan said.

Murray got a stern lecture from the judge in addition to his sentence, reports CBS News national correspondent Ben Tracy. In a blistering rebuke, Judge Michael Pastor called Murray's actions a disgrace to his profession, giving Jackson the powerful anesthetic propofol in exchange for $150,000 per month.

"Dr. Murray became involved in a cycle of horrible medicine," said Pastor. "Some may feel this was a medical malpractice case. It wasn't. It was and is a criminal homicide case."

Flanagan deemed Pastor's treatment of Murray "very harsh."

"He acted like it's an intentional act done by Dr. Murray," Flanagan said. "At the best-case scenario or worst-case scenario, depending upon how you're looking at it, it was an unintentional accident.

posted by Nimue on Friday, December 2nd 2011

It is not over....

Conrad Murray Appeals Manslaughter Conviction



Dr. Conrad Murray has just filed an appeal, challenging his conviction for involuntary manslaughter in the death of Michael Jackson ... TMZ has learned.

Murray filed the document in pro per -- which means he's representing himself instead of using a lawyer.

On the portion of the document where a lawyer will usually state his or her firm's contact information -- Murray lists "Men's Central Jail" ... and includes his booking number.

While he is representing himself, Murray is still communicating with one of the lawyers who repped him in the manslaughter trial, Nareg Gourjian.

Gourjian tells TMZ ... "This case presents a gold mine of issues for any appellate lawyer. Dr. Murray is confident that the Court of Appeal will vindicate him."

http://www.tmz.com/2011/12/02/conrad-murray-files-appeal-involuntary-manslaughter/#.Ttl9V1aaDh4

Interesting, the only lawyer left helping Murray, is Michael's ex-lawyer.....

posted by ElkeHassell on Friday, December 2nd 2011 @ 7:50 PM

Quote :

Gourjian tells TMZ ... "This case presents a gold mine of issues for any appellate lawyer. Dr. Murray is confident that the Court of Appeal will vindicate him."

http://www.tmz.com/2011/12/02/conrad-murray-files-appeal-involuntary-manslaughter/#.Ttl9V1aaDh4

Again isn't it amazing how TMZ seems to get all of insides and outs of this matter first before anybody else???? Its almost mind blowing

posted by mjmtc on Saturday, December 3rd 2011

Quote :

Quote from Nimue: Interesting, the only lawyer left helping Murray, is Michael's ex-lawyer.....

Yes and the Murray documentary made sure that we saw how much Flanagan and Chernoff were fighting over the case and how hard it was for Chernoff to be away from his home practice. At times the documantary seemed to be more about them than about Murray. It was like we were prepared to see them get out of the case. Also interesting that Murray seems to be representing himself. Does that mean he will speak in court this time?

Quote :

Quote from ElkeHassell on Friday, December 2nd 2011 @ 7:50 PM

Again isn't it amazing how TMZ seems to get all of insides and outs of this matter first before anybody else???? Its almost mind blowing

Yeah and the rest of the media often copies TMZ without sourcechecking... Here is some additional info...


Michael Jackson doctor files appeals notice in LA

(12-02) 16:37 PST LOS ANGELES, CA (AP) --

The doctor sentenced to four years behind bars for causing Michael Jackson's death has filed a notice that he intends to appeal the conviction.

Conrad Murray signed a one-page document that was filed in Los Angeles on Friday seeking all records and transcripts from the case. The filing does not indicate the basis on which Murray will argue to overturn his conviction or sentence.

The 58-year-old was sentenced Tuesday to four years in jail for his involuntary manslaughter conviction, but the term will be automatically cut in half.

Murray's challenge will be heard by a state appeals court in Los Angeles, assuming he files an opening brief at a later date.

Superior Court Judge Michael Pastor blasted Murray's conduct on Tuesday, calling him a disgrace to the medical profession.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2011/12/02/national/a163731S74.DTL#ixzz1fSQSsYPG

My comment:

Quote :

The filing does not indicate the basis on which Murray will argue to overturn his conviction or sentence.

So it could be on the grounds that medical recoreds werent brought in from other doctors, that he was misrepresented, that AEG has a part... interesting he didnt indicate the basis

Reading the law is never easy.
I am posting info on appeal from Wiki and I have attempted to add my own comments in the specific case of Murray but there is a lot of "ifs" because there are many choices, both in terms of what kind of case it is but also very much so on which grounds Murray is appealing and that he didnt indicate in the filing. I am not a lawyer, so this is entirely the opinion of a layperson (layfairy)...

Appeal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Generally speaking the appellate court examines the record of evidence presented in the trial court and the law that the lower court applied and decides whether that decision was legally sound or not.

>They can view it generally as to whether the decision was sound

The appellate court will typically be deferential to the lower court's findings of fact (such as whether a defendant committed a particular act), unless clearly erroneous, and so will focus on the court's application of the law to those facts (such as whether the act found by the court to have occurred fits a legal definition at issue).

>They will not necessarily look to determine if Murray is guilty, unless they can find obvious errors. "To fit a legal definition" in this case would be whether Murray's crime falls under the term of "Involuntary Manslaughter"

If the appellate court finds no defect, it "affirms" the judgment. If the appellate court does find a legal defect in the decision "below" (i.e., in the lower court), it may "modify" the ruling to correct the defect, or it may nullify ("reverse" or "vacate") the whole decision or any part of it.

It may, in addition, send the case back ("remand" or "remit") to the lower court for further proceedings to remedy the defect.

>If they find grounds for appeal they can choose to modify the ruling (different term than 'Manslaughter' or different sentence). Or they can nullify the decision, indicating Murray is innocent or send the case back to court which would indicate a 'retrial' in the same court.

Sometimes, the appellate court finds a defect in the procedure the parties used in filing the appeal and dismisses the appeal without considering its merits, which has the same effect as affirming the judgment below. (This would happen, for example, if the appellant waited too long, under the appellate court's rules, to file the appeal.)

>It is really important that no mistakes are made in the filing of appeal and it is surprising that a layperson such as Murray is filing this "on his own" as mistakes could mean there is retrial or consideration of the court's ruling.

No trial

Generally, there is no trial in an appellate court, only consideration of the record of the evidence presented to the trial court and all the pre-trial and trial court proceedings are reviewed—unless the appeal is by way of re-hearing, new evidence will usually only be considered on appeal in very rare instances, for example if that material evidence was unavailable to a party for some very significant reason such as prosecutorial misconduct.

Code:

prosecutorial misconduct is a procedural defense; via which, a defendant may argue that they should not be held criminally liable for actions which may have broken the law, because the prosecution acted in an "inappropriate" or "unfair" manner. Such arguments may involve allegations that the prosecution withheld evidence or knowingly permitted false testimony. This is similar to selective prosecution.

Murray could argue that he should not be charged with the crime because David Walgren acted in an "inappropriate" or "unfair" manner (this holds a number of possibilities as we have heard how Flanagan and Chernoff argued that Walgren was "unfair" in several occasions.

"Withholding evidence" or "permitting false testimony" could be David knowing some of the witnesses were lieing (suggesting Alberto Alvarez lied when he said he helped Murray remove evidence?). Interesting if Murray will go down that road as he could actually also claim that Randy Philips gave false testimony.

In some systems, an appellate court will only consider the written decision of the lower court, together with any written evidence that was before that court and is relevant to the appeal. In other systems, the appellate court will normally consider the record of the lower court. In those cases the record will first be certified by the lower court.

The appellant has the opportunity to present arguments for the granting of the appeal and the appellee (or respondent) can present arguments against it. Arguments of the parties to the appeal are presented through their appellate lawyers, if represented, or pro se if the party has not engaged legal representation.

>The question is if Murray will face appeal alone (pro se) or assisted by Gourjian or someone else

Those arguments are presented in written briefs and sometimes in oral argument to the court at a hearing. At such hearings each party is allowed a brief presentation at which the appellate judges ask questions based on their review of the record below and the submitted briefs.

In an adversarial system, appellate courts do not have the power to review lower court decisions unless a party appeals it. Therefore, if a lower court has ruled in an improper manner, or against legal precedent, that judgment will stand if not appealed - even if it might have been overturned on appeal.

>If Murray hadnt made the appeal then the ruling remains even if errors were made. Murray and his representation are the only ones who can appeal.

Specifically for the United States

The United States legal system generally recognizes two types of appeals: a trial de novo or an appeal on the record.
Trial de novo

A trial de novo is usually available for review of informal proceedings conducted by some minor judicial tribunals in proceedings that do not provide all the procedural attributes of a formal judicial trial. If unchallenged, these decisions have the power to settle more minor legal disputes once and for all. If a party is dissatisfied with the finding of such a tribunal, one generally has the power to request a trial de novo by a court of record.

In such a proceeding, all issues and evidence may be developed newly, as though never heard before, and one is not restricted to the evidence heard in the lower proceeding. Sometimes, however, the decision of the lower proceeding is itself admissible as evidence, thus helping to curb frivolous appeals.

>In a "Trial de Novo", Murray can introduce new evidence (including written correspondance with AEG) or maybe the missing surveaillance tapes will resurface or house security will testify that someone else was in the house. But the appeal court has to decide its relevant.

In some cases, an application for trial de novo effectively erases the prior trial as if it had never taken place. The Supreme Court of Virginia has stated that '"This Court has repeatedly held that the effect of an appeal to circuit court is to "annul the judgment of the inferior tribunal as completely as if there had been no previous trial."

>"As if it had never taken place"... yeah....

Appeal on the record

In an appeal on the record from a decision in a judicial proceeding, both appellant and respondent are bound to base their arguments wholly on the proceedings and body of evidence as they were presented in the lower tribunal. Each seeks to prove to the higher court that the result they desired was the just result.

>If it is not classified as a "Trial de Novo", Murray CAN NOT introduce new evidence, but the appeal would only consider if the ruling on the basis of the evidence already presented was just.

Precedent and case law figure prominently in the arguments. In order for the appeal to succeed, the appellant must prove that the lower court committed reversible error, that is, an impermissible action by the court acted to cause a result that was unjust, and which would not have resulted had the court acted properly.

Some examples of reversible error would be erroneously instructing the jury on the law applicable to the case, permitting seriously improper argument by an attorney, admitting or excluding evidence improperly, acting outside the court's jurisdiction, injecting bias into the proceeding or appearing to do so, juror misconduct, etc.

>Murray would have to prove errors in his trial, either that judge Michael Pastor instructed the jurors wrongly (this reminds me of the police interview of Murray where the judge told the jurors that some parts of the interview was left out and they shouldnt consider these parts or guess what they could have been. Or when he overruled or sustained this or that objection from either Walgren/Brazil or Flanagan/Chernoff.

"Injecting bias" (the judge was careful not to act in a bias way until after the jury had reached its verdict and the reason he acted in a bias way and was being harsh to Murray was mainly because of the documentary). This documentary seems to be playing an important role.

"Juror misconduct"? Hmmm... we didnt hear anything that would indicate that, They seemed very well behaved as the judge pointed out almost daily.

The failure to formally object at the time, to what one views as improper action in the lower court, may result in the affirmance of the lower court's judgment on the grounds that one did not "preserve the issue for appeal" by objecting.

>Again it is really vital that Murray handles this appeal in the right way or he will lose all the grounds for appeal. Why is he apparently refusing assistance of a lawyer apart from Michael's former lawyer, who didnt do much in Murray's trial.

Was he being so passive because he was planned to do the appeal after Flanagan's and Chernoff's "show" of disagreement? It strikes me as odd that they had so many open fights on camera.. why wasnt it edited out of the documentary? It doesnt really make them look good. Was it staged? Also we have seen how in one version of the documentary we hear Flanagan and his wife really bashing Michael and in the other version that is edited out.

In cases where a judge rather than a jury decided issues of fact, an appellate court will apply an abuse of discretion standard of review. Under this standard, the appellate court gives deference to the lower court's view of the evidence, and reverses its decision only if it were a clear abuse of discretion. This is usually defined as a decision outside the bounds of reasonableness. On the other hand, the appellate court normally gives less deference to a lower court's decision on issues of law, and may reverse if it finds that the lower court applied the wrong legal standard.

In some rare cases, an appellant may successfully argue that the law under which the lower decision was rendered was unconstitutional or otherwise invalid, or may convince the higher court to order a new trial on the basis that evidence earlier sought was concealed or only recently discovered. In the case of new evidence, there must be a high probability that its presence or absence would have made a material difference in the trial.

>If Murray presents new evidence he really has to show that it has an importance, so it would have to be major new evidence. It can be evidence which was concealed or recently discovered. Like medical records or surveillance tapes? Will his own records surface? We know that witnesses say they saw two women remove boxes from Murrays storage facilities...

Another issue suitable for appeal in criminal cases is effective assistance of counsel. If a defendant has been convicted and can prove that his lawyer did not adequately handle his case and that there is a reasonable probability that the result of the trial would have been different had the lawyer given competent representation, he is entitled to a new trial.

>This is where Murray could blame Flanagan and/or Chernoff. Again it makes sense why Gourjian was so passive. If Murray decides to have him represent him in the appeal, Gourjian can distance himself from the criticism of Flanagan and Chernoff. And we know from the documentary that Murray was really upset with how Flanagan represented him.

After an appeal is heard, the mandate is a formal notice of a decision by a court of appeal; this notice is transmitted to the trial court and, when filed by the clerk of the trial court, constitutes the final judgment on the case, unless the appeal court has directed further proceedings in the trial court. The mandate is distinguished from the appeal court's opinion, which sets out the legal reasoning for its decision. In some U.S. jurisdictions the mandate is known as the remittitur.

posted by Nimue on Saturday, December 3rd 2011

I wonder about the relationship of these lawyers and all this case/documentary went on. Ed from Houston is hired, but he is not qualified for the CA board and Flanagan is hired, because he is from CA and won a case about propofol (a nurse).

Before the trial start a long time ago ( think after Feb 2010), Flanagan says: "Murray will tell his version in one way or another, through the court or though the media" (the documentary).

So Flanaflan, knew the documentary was up.

None of them Ed or Flanagan was upset with the cameras, even allowing them to go inside of the house or bedroom in hotels.

However, we only see Nareg Gourjian the 3rd lawyer at the courtroom.

This lawyer came on scene almost at the end, when the trial was about to start. He does not work for Chernoff firm, he does not work from Flanagan firm.

This lawyer came out of nowhere, for no apparent reason. The only connection we were able to make was with the charges on Michael in the past, since he worked for Michael as a lawyer.

In the documentary, Murray speaks badly about his lawyers, Flanagan specifically. For someone supposedly with no money to pay lawyers for his case, that would be a bad move.

Still, Murray's "allowed" the documentary to be aired with all this on it.

Now, Murray is representing himself, but Nareg Gourjian the quieter lawyer in the team is still helping him, even after the damage of the documentary...

Is there something we overlooked here?

posted by The Fairy on Saturday, December 3rd 2011

Quote :

Quote from Nimue on Saturday, December 3rd 2011 @ 1:49 AM

Is there something we overlooked here?

I think we posted at the same time.. and we have some of the same observations. As I indicated in my previous post, I think the whole thing was staged with the arguement on camera and the passive role of Gourjian, but knowing Michael Im sure we are in for some surprises...

posted by Nimue on Sunday, December 4th 2011

David and Brazil interview.



At 5:20. He says: the sheriff does not considere Murray elegible for house arrest.

At 6:40. he talks about Katherine saying Murray lied about talking to her at UCLA

At 7:40. About the errors made during the investigation

At 11:00. The reporter makes reference to Michael's trial at 2005



At 0:25 About Nicole Alvarez and her instrument, and the Nicole had an agenda. Brazil implies that Murray did what he did because Nicole wanted to be a celebrity.

At 3:03. About the recording. David says the recording couldn't be done by accident, since it is an application bla bla..

At 7:40 About them to be on spotlight, the airplanes flying outside the 17th floor with banners and about Michael's fans.



0:50 about his considerations to put Michael's children on the stand.

2:06 - about the autopsy photo and why he did displayed it. To show Michael was healthy????

9:06 - what would he ask to Murray if he had testified.

posted by The Fairy on Sunday, December 4th 2011

Quote :

Quote from Nimue on Sunday, December 4th 2011 @ 3:58 AM

2:06 - about the autopsy photo and why he did displayed it. To show Michael was healthy????

Thank you for posting Nimue..

Yeah what he says about the autopsy photo doesnt make sense. It didnt make sense at the time either, that it was supposed to prove that Michael was healthy. It reminds me of the fake ambulance photo which looked like the person was very much alive, which is quite a challenge to display on a still picture, which is supposed to show a dead person.

Walgren talks about what to me looks like an attempt to prove that Michael is dead: "This is a homicide case and one of the essential elements of a homicide is obviously that there is a death"....

Hmmm yeah.... for there to be a case of someone who died, you would need a dead body or at least a pic supposidly to be of that dead body

posted by Nimue on Sunday, December 4th 2011

Well.. Maybe David used Murray's mugshot at his closing arguments.. but... who knows?

posted by Nimue on Monday, December 5th 2011

Thanks for the video Fairy, as I said before it could be from Feb 2010, but SerenityDreams got better pictures than I.

She has good points..


Conrad Murray's Delusional Appeal: What It Means

While sitting inside his 5x8 ft jail cell, Dr. Conrad Murray should be repenting for his crime. Instead, he's plotting his escape by filing to appeal his conviction. Even after a jury found him guilty of involuntary manslaughter, Murray is still convinced of his own innocence, convinced he is the victim of some sort of conspiracy by the prosecutors and the public.

Even more delusional than his belief that he is innocent is his belief that he can successfully represent himself. Even more offensive than his total lack of remorse is his expectation that the public foot the bill for his appeal.

Murray is most likely representing himself because he no longer has the money to pay his attorneys. While his defense team is required to represent him through the trial, even if they weren't getting paid after some point, they are not required to represent him on appeal. Since Murray cannot afford an attorney, the public has to pay for the transcripts of the trial and any other costs to build up his case. So not only is Murray plotting his escape, but he's doing it all on the taxpayer's dollar.

However, Murray's delusional appeal attempt is, for the most part, a lost cause. The odds are, Murray will be out of jail before the Court of Appeal is even able to rule on his case. It takes several months just to put the record and transcripts for an appeal together, and it usually takes about two years for the Court of Appeal to rule. While Murray has been sentenced to a four-year prison term, in all likelihood, he will spend just two years behind bars due to prison overcrowding in California, so he probably will never get to argue his case.

However, if Murray is still behind bars when the Court of Appeal hears oral arguments, he'll get exactly what he wants: his moment in the spotlight... but not completely. While the press can attend, cameras are not allowed inside the Court of Appeal.

As Murray spends his days inside the LA County Jail's law library writing up his appeal, Michael Jackson's family must grapple with the fact that their son's killer still refuses to own up to his crimes.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mari-fagel/conrad-murrays-delusional_b_1129102.html?ref=tw

posted by Nimue on Tuesday, December 6th 2011

I am breaking down the probation officer report to the judge. This will be the first post. Very interesting..

This the document I am working on:

http://tmz.vo.llnwd.net/o28/newsdesk/tmz_documents/1129_murray_2.pdf

The probation officer report

At the beginning he starts making a sumary from the documents and statments, using LAPD report, DA and the court.

Around page 5:



Interesting, in this part it is said Murray called Amir and since the security didn’t respond he ran downstairs to the kitchen to ask for the chef for Prince.



"The hands were blue"… According to this the paramedics said the hands were blue, but no blue hands can be seen on the UCLA picture or autopsy picture used by the prosecution.



Here, at 2010 Murray spent 17 days on jail.

Keep it in mind, so spent time there already.



This part is about what the family said to the probation office. First, Katherine and the children, note the victims are not applying for restitution.

Anyway, Katherine says:



Their world collapsed when Michael LEFT. This sentence interesting when we look at the next sentence: “his daughter was crying and state “I WANNA GO WITH YOU”.

Michael left and Paris want to go with him. She does not state she wants to go with her father but “you”, like talking to Michael.



Number of victims = 5 (Katherine, Joe, Paris, Prince and Blanket????)

It is unknown he Murray has insurance



Here is about the children working with Michael to make films after 2010, the end of the “music” tour, not the tour but the MUSIC tour, and now at 2011 Paris is an actress in an animated movie.

To be continued......

posted by Nimue on Tuesday, December 6th 2011

Dr.ConradMurraySeeingChaplainInJail

After being sentenced to the maximum four years in jail for his role in Michael Jackson’s death, RadarOnline.com has exclusively learned Dr. Conrad Murray has been seeking hope from the jail chaplain.

According to an insider, Dr. Murray was sitting next to Celebrity Rehab alum British producer/writer Duncan Roy last week in the Los Angeles County Jail when he summoned the chaplain to discuss his future.

“Tears welled up in his eyes as he sat across from the chaplain,” the source exclusively told RadarOnline.com. “The chaplain told him, ‘You need hope.’”

Dr. Murray and Roy — who is being held on $35,000 bail for a felony attempted extortion charge — are both being segregated from the rest of the jail because of their “celebrity” status.

“Conrad is reaching for whatever he can right now to get him through this,” the source said.

Just four days after his sentencing, Dr. Murray formally filed documents to start the appeal of his involuntary manslaughter conviction, and he’s representing himself.

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2011/12/dr-conrad-murray-seeing-chaplain-jail-anita-mcaffee

What kind of insider is that? They can get info from inside the jail with details about what was said!!!!

Now about Roy:

Former 'Sex Rehab' Star Arrested for Attempted Extortion

Duncan Roy, a film director who appeared on "Sex Rehab with Dr. Drew," was arrested this week
on charges of felony attempted extortion ... TMZ has learned.

Roy was busted on November 15 by the Los Angeles Sheriff's Department. He's being held at Van Nuys Jail on an immigration hold -- which usually can happen when non-American citizens are arrested on felony charges. Roy was born in Whitstable, Kent, England.

He is due in court on November 23.

Roy appeared on "Sex Rehab" back in 2009 with other stars like Kari Anne Peniche and Phil Varone.

http://www.tmz.com/2011/11/20/duncan-roy-arrested-extortion/#.Tt4UrVaaDh4

I thought Murray was in another jail...

posted by The Fairy on Tuesday, December 6th 2011

Quote :

Quote from Nimue on Tuesday, December 6th 2011 @ 5:29 AM

I thought Murray was in another jail...

Yeah RadarOnline has a vivid imagination and I wouldnt put too much faith on their "insiders", so to speak... But interesting that there seems to be confusion as to where Murray is actually held.

Here we have the document of the appeal, released by CNN:

It says "Mens Central Jail", LA

posted by Nimue on Wednesday, December 7th 2011

Continuation.. probation officer document part 2:



Hmmm… the cemetery where Jackson WAS buried. Maybe is my poor English but isn’t he anymore?

[img]https://i.servimg.com/u/f58/18/53/73/51/murrpr18.jpg[/img


It means all the months before Jun 25 no one in the family knew about Murray.

Now about Joe.




Joe didn’t make any statement and it is unkown if the asked for restituition.

Joe didn’t want to say anything about his loss and still is charging Murray in a lawsuit.. I wonder why?

Murray:




Murray has not previous record as an adult so it means that the old mugshot about domestic violence is not the same Murray.



I wonder what does it mean?: “the defendant was not interviewed in accordance with court orders"????



Classified as Mentally Disturbed and suicidal????



No information about his marital status or previous marriage.. no children listed



Only Nicole and her son are mentioned here, nothing about his other children. What interview was that? Murray or Nicole?

to be continued...

posted by Nimue on Wednesday, December 8th 2011

Continuation.. last part

This is interesting:


About his formal education they have nothing; Isn't he a physician?

They talk about his occupation as “personal physician but nothing about the education.



Gang activity?? Unknown??? hehehehe:



So, Murray didn’t have an interview with probation officer.

This is from Smith statement to the probation officer:



I don't recall if he ever had said that in court; which his investigation revealed the victim was not breathing for more the 1 hour and half.



Interesting that in his considerations the probation officer he takes in account Michael’s fans (community).

On thing is odd. He lists 2 points in favor to the probation and one against but the recommendation to the judge was, jail:



Maybe Calvin is a MJ fan... hehehehe

posted by Nimue on Thursday, December 8th 2011

I thought TMZ would stop posting about Murray after the trial and I wonder why it still is going on.

It has always a TMZ camera ready to shoot, even at the jail. Are they keeping Murray on watch?

media removed

Dr. Murray You Have a Couple of FEMALE Visitors

Inmate #2926725 may have gotten a visit from a couple of special ladies today ... when Conrad Murray's baby mama Nicole Alvarez (above left) AND his own mother (below left) rolled over to Men's Central Jail to check in on the doc.

It's unclear how much time the ladies were actually allowed to spend with Murray ... if any.

Murray has been locked up for 31 days now ... ever since he was sentenced for manslaughtering Michael Jackson.
http://www.tmz.com/2011/12/08/conrad-murray-you-have-a-couple-of-female-visitors/#.TuEfTFaaDh5.

posted by The Fairy on Friday, December 9th 2011
Jailed Michael Jackson doctor Conrad Murray gets a prison visit from girlfriend Nicole and mother Milta

By Eleanor Gower and Hugo Daniel

Last updated at 7:44 AM on 9th December 2011

He has been behind bars for 31 days now after being found guilty of the involuntary manslaughter of Michael Jackson.

But Conrad Murray's loneliness may have been eased a little earlier today when he was visited by his girlfriend Nicole Alvarez and mother Milta Rush.

Alvarez, 29, wore a green sweater and checked scarf and chatted on the phone as she arrived at the visiting area at the Men's Central Jail in Los Angeles.


Visiting hours: Nicole Alvarez and his mother Milta Rush headed to the men's Central Jail in Los Angeles to visit Conrad Murray

She was also spotted chatting to Murray's mother at the gates as they left, with both women looking sombre.

According to TMZ, it's unclear how much time the ladies were allowed to spend with Murray, if any.

Alvarez is the mother of one of Murray's children.

Earlier this month, Murray revealed his intent to appeal against his conviction, after being jailed for four years at the end of November.

Murray, 58, signed a one-page document, filed in Los Angeles on Friday, seeking all records and transcripts from the case.


Sombre: Both women looked serious after they left the jail

Meanwhile, Michael Jackson's former personal chef Douglas Jones has called on fans to forgive Conrad Murray - voicing fears the killer doctor will die behind bars.

Douglas Jones worked for Jackson until two weeks before his death and liaised with Murray on a daily basis.

Now he’s decided to speak out and he believes Murray will struggle to come to terms with his actions and is in grave danger in prison.

He warned: 'Dr Murray dropped the ball in a serious way. It was negligence. It’s now a very heavy burden he will have to live with every single day for the rest of his life and I’m wondering if ultimately he can survive that.

'I think it will be too much for him to deal with. I really pray for that man. If they put him in a major prison population he’s going to be in grave danger. He’s a target.


Courtroom drama: Dr Murray was sentenced to four years in prison last month after being found guilty of involuntary manslaughter


Mug shot: Murray has filed his intention to appeal his conviction

'There will be Michael Jackson fans in prison and when he gets out - people who harbour hatred towards him for what happened, people who don’t wish him well.'

However Douglas, a dedicated Christian, also said Murray only had himself to blame - citing his greed.

The 53-year-old said: “From watching the court case it seemed that he was urging Michael to get off the drug but at the same time he was still administering it and giving into his requests – I think that was because of the money factor.

'This man was being paid a huge amount and I’m sure it’s hard to walk away from that.

'If he was really strong in his ethics he would’ve walked away but obviously this man had never earned this kind of money in his life.'

Douglas only worked for Jackson for five weeks, quitting two weeks before the Thriller star died.

In that short space of time he did not have one day off and developed an intense relationship with Murray and the rest of the Jackson staff.


Led away: Murray blew a kiss to his loved ones in the public gallery after he was led away to start his four year sentence last month


Visit: Nicole Alvarez, who testified in Murray's trial, was spotted visiting Murray in prison today

Speaking about his first impressions of Murray, Douglas said: 'He was a no-nonsense type. He always looked very serious, like he did in court. But once he warmed up he had a very pleasant demeanour.'

He remembers Murray carrying down empty oxygen tanks from Jackson’s bedroom once but just assumed it was part of the health care he needed.

'However the chef was kept completely in the dark over the nature of Jackson's health problems.

He said: 'I talked to Dr Murray on a daily basis and I would prepare him food as well.

'I knew Michael wasn’t 100 per cent healthy for whatever reason but only based on the fact he was under the care of a doctor. He would often have to rest and Dr Murray would say to the kids not to bother him.'


Fears: Jackson's former personal chef Douglas Jones has spoken out about his worries for Murray in prison


Gone too soon: Michael Jackson died back in June 2009

Douglas remembers Jackson would always keep the nervous Murray on his toes.

Whenever Michael wanted something, he just had to focus on it and he would go to him right away. He seemed nervous.

'Murray would speak excitedly about the upcoming This is It tour.

Douglas said: 'He would give me positive feedback from Michael, that he liked the taste of my food and the presentation.

And would ask me "are you going on the tour with us?" and he would say "it’s going to be fun." He seemed to be very excited about it.'

Painting a picture of life at Jackson’s Holmby Hills mansion – Douglas described how piped music would constantly be playing.

He added: 'They would also have the regular radio on too and when Michael’s songs came on the children would get excited and say "that’s dad."'

Speaking about the family’s eating habits, Douglas said: 'Michael would have breakfast by himself in his room. He would always eat it all and thank me when I came to get his tray.'

Scene of the tragedy: Douglas worked for two weeks at Jackson's Holmby Hills mansion before his death

When Michael was around he would dine with the children Prince, Paris and Blanket and they would often delay dinner to wait for him to come home.

When Douglas started he was briefed the family only ate chicken and fish and organic healthy food and he would shop for ingredients at Whole Foods and Santa Monica fish market.

Douglas described how Jackson used to play with his children in their game arcade room and watch movies with them in their personal cinema where they would feast on popcorn and sweets.

He said: 'His kids were treated like royalty, whatever they wanted they would get and if they didn’t like a member of staff, Michael would get rid of them.

'But they were very well grounded and seemed to be well adjusted. They would always dress very smartly and had an Ivy League look. They had a nanny with them at all times monitoring them.'


Treated like royalty: Jackson's children Prince, Paris and Blanket were in the audience with Jackson's mother Katherine at the X Factor last week

After watching the Murray case unfold the LA-based chef is also angry with Jackson for his part in his own death.

He said: 'After the court proceeding and discovering how deep he was in to the addiction I became very angry and I was angry at Michael because ultimately he was responsible for his own life.'

He added: 'Many people wanted to help him, especially his family but he wouldn’t let them,' citing a time he arrived at work and Joe Jackson was refused entry to the house.

The chef also said he was not surprised when Jackson died.

'There were so many performance dates added and in my opinion he didn’t seem in any condition to deal with that. It was too much for him.

'He was a very humble and generous person and I am grateful I had a chance to work for him.'

posted by GailShaw on Friday, December 9th 2011

Here are a couple of videos of this former chef.So he must have left around the 9th June 2009,and was only there for the month of May and part of June 2009.Does this mean that Kai Chase was only there for 2 weeks?

Why wasn't he called as a witness?

Here are 2 videos of his interview in November 2009.



Here is part 2.



Here is part of the TMZ article that didn't add up.......

Murray has been locked up for 31 days now... ever since he was sentenced for manslaughtering Michael Jackson................

Wasn't the sentencing on the 29th November 2011.....well that only makes it 10 days[today being the 8th December in America] and
counting the 29th?Where is the other 21 days?

And whats with this manslaughtering Michael Jackson..
..............thats a very weird way to word it.

Here is part 3 of the Chefs interview.