Conrad Murray’s CNN interview on the Fifth Anniversary of Michael’s Death. Part 3. A DISGUSTING SCENE
The purpose of this three-part series about Conrad Murray’s CNN interview is not to try and get to the truth of what happened on the fateful night Michael Jackson died – this will be eventually known to us from the evidence and scientific findings which will one day connect all dots.
The purpose of this series is to show the reason why CNN gave Murray a platform to speak on the fifth anniversary of Michael’s death, and why Don Lemon played such a dummy while Murray was freely relating to us a new series of his lies.
By the end of the interview Don Lemon made this reason absolutely clear and when you read the remaining part of it, it will become obvious to you too.
“WHY WOULD YOU RECORD THAT?”
LEMON: Do you think that he was up to these – this 50 – this mammoth 50-show extravaganza that he was to star at the – in London?
MURRAY: He was not.
MURRAY: Michael was offered initially 10 shows. It went to 31 and then subsequently to 50. But no one knows that he was actually offered 100 shows.
LEMON: OK. This was something – and, by the way, I covered your trial. I was there.
LEMON: I sat right behind the family, right, right behind the mom and the dad. And I want – this was very – when they played it, very emotional in court.
LEMON: All right, you recorded Michael talking about the show. Let’s listen.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) JACKSON: When people leave this show – when people leave my show, I want them to say, I’ve never seen nothing like this in my life. Go. Go. I’ve never seen nothing like this. Go. It’s amazing. He’s the greatest entertainer in the world. (END AUDIO CLIP)
LEMON: Dr. Murray, that is disturbing. Anyone in that condition, why would you continue to give him drugs and then give him Propofol?
Isn’t it interesting how the tape is reproduced by Lemon again and again but always without its most essential part? The part where Michael speaks about God and children, where he calls them angels and says how it hurts him to see them ill. Never will you hear the media play it…
And could someone please explain to Don Lemon that the condition Michael was talking in is actually not that disturbing – any doctor would tell you that it is a normal condition of patients under sedation. Anesthesiologists hear their patients talk like that all the time.
LEMON: And why would you record that?
MURRAY: Well, first of all, I was accused of recording that so that I can take advantage of Michael down the road. And that was not the case. I did not even recognize or realize that that recording was actually on my phone. Michael had asked me, well, as far as I could look back, how much he snores at night. And I would speak to him about that. He wanted to record that, not only on tape, but on camera. I actually had just learned from my daughter who taught me to do talks and one of the apps on the phone.
LEMON: How to work it.
LEMON: But the question behind that is, so you were trying to monitor his sleep pattern, whether or not he was snoring, and that’s how you got that recording.
MURRAY: That’s exactly how that was done when I look back in retrospect, yes.
LEMON: So then why would you continue? Because if he was…
MURRAY: Interestingly – good question. If you look at my – if you listen to that recording, you hear a man that is clearly in the sleep state of going to sleep. But he is alert. His conversation makes sense.
LEMON: His mind is still active, even though he’s in a sleep state.
MURRAY: Yes. But if you look at my statement to the police, I explained to them, to the police, all that Michael Jackson wanted, including the children’s hospital. Michael was just reiterating his dream to me. At the end of that state, of that recording, did you hear what he says in the end? He says, I’m asleep.
LEMON: I’m asleep.
The recording was made on May 10th which was almost immediately after Murray’s work for Michael began. Murray’s previous version why he made that recording was that he pushed the button by accident and didn’t even know that it had been made. And now he says that it was done on purpose and at Michael’s request too.
To explain this glaring controversy Murray says that this is what he remembers “looking back in retrospect” and “as far as he can look back” which suggests that Murray is another of those famous victims of amnesia. These days there are so many of those who suddenly recover their memories about Jackson that it is not even funny any more.
Another question which is not that funny is how come Murray began recording Michael even before he fell asleep if his only purpose was the “snore”? Of course it is another of his lies as the intention was to record Michael speaking and take advantage of him down the road as Murray himself worded it.
However the least funny part of the snore issue is that all patients under propofol start snoring at some point and it is considered by anesthesiologists no fun at all.
Snoring under propofol happens due to muscles relaxation when the tongue falls back and blocks the airway. It is regarded as a very dangerous sign and precursor to a breathing arrest. In a situation like this a proper doctor should act swiftly and lift the patient’s chin to unblock the airway – instead of fumbling with his IPad and recording the patient, of course.
The fact that Murray is clueless that the snore was actually a grave sign of his own negligence shows that his ignorance of the subject is so boundless that he doesn’t even realize that his words may be turned against him as a proof of his incompetence. So the more Murray talks the more he reveals how inadequate he was for the job he so carelessly undertook.
“I WOULD BE GUILTY AS SIN”
LEMON: OK. Let’s move on. Let’s talk about the drugs, right, more about the drugs. I want to play this bit from my documentary, and then we will talk about it.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DAVID WALGREN, PROSECUTOR: Two bottles of Lorazepam. Lidocaine bottle.
LEMON: DA Walgren added into evidence each vial and bottle found at Jackson’s house one after another.
WALGREN: To take a patient with Valium, lorazepam, midazolam, and Propofol and to leave them unattended in that state is medical abandonment. (END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: Did you abandon Michael Jackson, your friend, medically? Are you guilty of that?
MURRAY: Absolutely not. David Walgren. He is way off-field. Abandonment has a clear definition in medicine, and that’s not the case, neither did I abandon him on anything he was giving. I have said very clearly, if Michael Jackson was in the Propofol infusion, that was a drip for three hours, as Dr. Shafer stated, from 9:00 until 12:00, and I left him with an infusion running, I would be guilty as sin, and I can accept that. But he was not.
LEMON: And this bag that was ripped open with the Propofol bottle laying inside of the I.V. bag?
MURRAY: Interestingly, interestingly…
LEMON: And you talk than on your video.
MURRAY: Yes, Propofol comes with a hanging sleeve. It’s almost like opening a can of soda. You pop it open. You hang the bottle. That bottle was discovered with that device being completely intact. Why would I take something so simple, take a bag of saline, cut it open, empty the fluid, then stick a Propofol bottle inside of the bag, and then take the bag to become the hanging contraption.
LEMON: If you knew all of this…
LEMON: … and I said I was there – and everyone kept saying, is he going to take the stand, is he going to take the stand? Why didn’t you do it at trial? I’m – were you thinking all of this at trial?
MURRAY: Because they had never proven a case. First of all, they needed to have a drip, a continuous infusion. That was not the case. If you look at the numbers…
LEMON: But my question is, Dr. Murray, why didn’t you take the stand in defense of yourself?
MURRAY: Because my attorney and I agreed that they had not proven the case against me, so there was no reason to take the stand. That was the legal advice.
LEMON: Your attorney was wrong.
MURRAY: Well, would it have changed anything, Don? If you look at the DA, the district attorney, Walgren, that altered evidence in the courtroom, tampered with evidence outside of the courtroom also…
Why “Yes” from Don Lemon? I watched every minute of the trial and DA Walgren did not alter any evidence!
In Don Lemon’s place a much more appropriate reaction would be to ask why Murray was tampering with the evidence and collecting the vials, and the call to 911 was not made until the room was tidied up. Lemon could also ask Murray why he was collecting items from the floor even after the body was carried out and the paramedic came back to pick up some of his things.
The appellate court ruling recalled this strange episode too:
- As paramedics prepared to transport Mr. Jackson to UCLA medical center, appellant was observed in Mr. Jackson’s room alone with a trash bag in his hand. He was picking up items off of the floor near the nightstand…. His efforts to clean-up the scene also show guilt.
As regards the evidence of Murray’s guilt the appellate court produced so much of it that the Lawmed site noted that Murray was buried with it and should be embarrassed that he addressed them with an appeal at all:
- “The court buries Murray in the mountain of evidence presented against him. You get the feeling that there is a between-the-lines message “you should be embarrassed to have even tried to claim the evidence against you was insufficient to find you guilty.”
And DA Walgren had a very good reason for producing all those Lorazepam and Midazolam bottles in their abundance. The sleep expert who testified at Murray’s trial said that those drugs were not to be prescribed for treating insomnia at all and their long-term use was even counterproductive for it.
The reason is because the benzodiazepines given by Murray form a dependency which in its turn causes restlessness, agitation and anxiety which was noticed by Murray but was attributed by him to a Demerol withdrawal. Murray’s own witness Dr. Waldman agreed that Michael’s restlessness could be the result of those benzodiazepines.
The appellate court said about it:
- Dr. Kamangar, the expert in sleep medicine, concluded that appellant acted in extreme deviation from the standard of care in his treatment of Mr. Jackson’s insomnia. Dr.Kamangar also explained the physician can use drugs that are approved by the Federal Drug Administration (FDA) to treat insomnia—non-benzodiazepines—and if unsuccessful can use the four FDA approved benzodiazepines in tablet form (Triazolam, Temazepam, Flurazepam, and Prosom). Appellant, however,administered Diazepam, Lorazepam, and Midazolam, benzodiazepines that were not approved by the FDA to treat insomnia.
- He also opined the intravenous form of these drugs that appellant used was inappropriate for long-term treatment of insomnia.
In conclusion the appellate court ruling had the following to say about Murray:
- Appellant’s callous disregard for Mr. Jackson’s health and safety was shown throughout the trial from the manner in which he administered a number of dangerous drugs to Mr. Jackson without the appropriate medical equipment, precautions or personnel in place, and to the manner in which he left Mr. Jackson unattended.
- The evidence demonstrated that Mr. Jackson was a vulnerable victim and that appellant was in a position of trust, and that appellant violated the trust relationship by breaching standards of professional conduct in numerous respects.
- The evidence also showed that the crime involved planning and sophistication. Appellant ordered large amounts of drugs from out of state, and kept no records of his treatment of Mr. Jackson.
- Appellant also engaged in a pattern of lies and deception before and after the crime. It appears that he attempted to clean up the crime scene and failed to provide accurate information to first responders and hospital personnel. Appellant gave the police incomplete and misleading information during his interview.
- Finally, the evidence presented at sentencing showed that appellant failed to take responsibility and displayed a lack of remorse throughout the proceedings.
Indeed, guilty as sin.
“THEY HAVE ADDED TUBINGS”
MURRAY: … yet, still, jurors are sitting there and watching a prosecutor alter evidence to make his case, to win, and they would still find a man guilty.
LEMON: Quickly, you go through all of these claims about altering evidence, about coercion and collusion of witnesses and all of that.
MURRAY: Yes. Sure.
LEMON: The appeals court has said they will not rehear your case, that it’s been proven, open-and-shut case. What are you going to do now?
MURRAY: Well, the appeals case made a mistake. They have added tubings. There were no two tubings, as Dr. Shafer stated in this case. (INAUDIBLE) There were three tubings. I have never given Michael Jackson anything with three tubings.
MURRAY: And my next step, if California does not help me to right this wrong, I’m going to the Supreme Court, the law of the land. I must believe that our judicial system does have integrity somewhere.
LEMON: Stay with me, Dr. Murray, because, in some ways, you knew Michael Jackson better than anyone. You were the last person to see him alive. When we come right back, we are going to talk about who Michael was behind those closed doors.
While they are in a commercial break let me say that in his recent video lecture Murray claimed something we hadn’t heard before. As could be easily expected this is a new theory again and will therefore be covered here in detail, but before that let me remind you what those “three tubings” were all about.
Those who watched Murray’s trial know that the prosecution first proved Murray’s guilt on a scientific basis and in theory only.
1) They recalculated the traces of propofol left in MJ’s urine into the amount initially infused into his blood. It turned out to be more than 2000mg (200ml) which is enough for several hours of general anesthesia. This refuted Murray’s theory of 25mg as ridiculous and proved that Michael was on a long drip for many hours.
2) Computer simulations showed that the propofol dripping into Michael’s blood eventually reached the level when his breathing stopped. Since Murray was away there was no chance he could notice it, and even if he had been in the room but not closely monitoring his patient he could have overlooked it too.
It is extremely sad to imagine it but when breathing slows down and eventually stops the process is silent and in the absence of monitoring equipment is easy to overlook. This is why having the necessary equipment was so essential.
3) The amount of propofol found in the urine and computer simulations of the process corresponded to each other and once again showed that Michael was on a continuous infusion of propofol and died under a drip.
Now the only thing that remained to be done was demonstrate how Murray did it and what arrangement of tubings he had on his IV stand.
The IV stand had two saline bags on it – one with a saline solution, and the other one with a slit in it and an empty propofol bottle inside. This second bag was taken off the IV stand by a bodyguard and hidden in the bag following Murray’s orders.
The tubings on the IV stand had a Y-arrangement – each bag had its own tubing which joined at some point and from there on the two liquids (saline and propofol) flowed together.
The lower part of the tubing did show the traces of propofol, the upper part from the saline bag did not, and the upper part from the propofol bag was missing – at least at the moment the police arrived.
The prosecution argued that the missing tubing had been hidden by Murray in the same way he wanted to hide the bag itself (only it was too big to go into his pocket and was therefore thrown into a trash bag from which it was later retrieved).
And now in his video lecture Murray solemnly declares that he never used the second bag at all and consequently there could never be a second tubing in principle.
He now says that he took one saline bag, injected or drained propofol there, shook the bag to mix the solution and then put Michael on a drip of this diluted propofol.
This way the concentration was minimal (1mg of propofol per 1ml of saline), the sedation was light and there was no danger to the patient.
“What if I wanted to give 1000mg of propofol in 1000ml of saline? I would take one of the large bottles, I would drain it into the bag or I would extract by using the syringe multiple times. I would then shake it together and I would have a concentration of 1mg of propofol per 1ml of saline”
To look into this new Murray’s theory I first needed to check whether the method allegedly used by him was okay to use at all. The available information was controversial – some said it was possible to mix the two liquids in one bag and some said that it wasn’t. A very long and thorough check-up finally rewarded me with detailed instructions which dotted the i’s and explained on what strict conditions the method could be used.
1) The first condition arises from propofol’s ability to quickly generate bacteria and says that it is okay to inject propofol through a special port in a saline bag but only if every possible aseptic precaution is taken – cleaning the propofol seal and port of the bag with an alcohol pad, using the syringe only once, etc.
2) The second condition is that propofol can be diluted with saline only in a very specific proportion and its concentration should be no less than 2mg of propofol per 1ml of the saline solution.
The instructions said about it:
- Propofol can be used for infusion undiluted or diluted. The maximum dilution must not exceed 1 part of Propofol with 4 parts of 5% w/v glucose solution, 0.9% w/v sodium chloride solution, 0.18% sodium chloride & 4% dextrose solution (minimum concentration 2 mg propofol/ml). The mixture should be prepared aseptically (controlled and validated conditions preserved) immediately prior to administration and must be administered within 12 hours after preparation.
- Final propofol concentration must not be below 2 mg/ml.
Why not to be below 2mg/ml?
The reason is an extremely serious one. Propofol is a fat emulsion, and saline is a water solution, and fat does not mix with water and if propofol is diluted too much, the commercially made emulsion becomes ‘unstable’ and this means that fat and water will separate into layers leaving propofol floating on top of the saline water (see picture C).
For a many-hour drip this is a fundamental issue. If the diluted propofol is unstable and separated all the more so, the drip into a patient’s blood will also be unstable.
First it will contain a thinly diluted propofol and at some point it will suddenly change into a high-concentration propofol floating on top of the mix, thus drastically changing the dosage of the drug dripping into the patient’s blood.
So if we are to believe Murray’s new story, it will actually prove only one thing – that he was terribly risking the life of his patient by subjecting him to an unbalanced solution which could bring about a stop in his breathing at any moment in time.
The unstable emulsion is a threat to a patient’s life and this is why the actual label on propofol does not even allow diluting it. The instructions do allow it but on a very strict condition that the minimal solution should not be lower than 2mg of propofol per 1ml of saline, while Murray says he routinely made the concentration twice as low.
Of course he invented this story to show that he was giving Michael minimal sedation, but in his zeal to lie and justify himself a little bit overdid it.
But even this is not all yet. If you analyze his theory further, things will become even worse.
He claimed that he injected and drained propofol into the bag. To inject Murray would have to draw propofol from a vial ten times and inject it into the 1000ml saline bag ten times too, each time keeping to the top aseptic rules (which I highly doubt he did, knowing Murray’s negligence and filthy sanitation habits).
And if he drained propofol into the bag, well… I don’t know how he would do that.
Inspection showed that the saline bag is sealed on all sides, so the only remaining option for draining something inside it would be making a cut in it and pouring propofol in.
And if done this way all aseptic precautions could be thrown out of the window, of course.
What I mean by this small exercise is that no matter what new lie Murray comes up with, it doesn’t make his life any easier. It only raises more questions about his adequacy and competence, and the standards of care he as a doctor was supposed to adhere to (but didn’t).
In short, whichever way Murray tells his story it always comes to one and the same thing – the type of care he was providing to Michael Jackson was making the killing of his patient an inevitable outcome.
DR. MARKMAN USED PROPOFOL FOR 5 YEARS
LEMON: Michael Jackson was loved by millions of people all around the globe, but no one was a part of his world the way Dr. Conrad Murray was. And he is back with me now exclusively. You were the last person to see Michael Jackson alive.
LEMON: So I want you to take us inside of that room, and I want you to tell us about your relationship with him first. But I want you to hear from some of your patients, what they said about you. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
GARY CAUSEY, PATIENT OF CONRAD MURRAY: He saved my life, and we have grown close over the last 11 years.
ANDREW GUEST, PATIENT OF CONRAD MURRAY: We’re all alive today because of Dr. Murray. He is a great man.
DENNIS HIX, PATIENT OF CONRAD MURRAY: He is the most compassionate man that I have ever met, best doctor I have ever had. (END VIDEO CLIP)
LEMON: What is your reaction to that? Do you miss practicing medicine?
MURRAY: Of course. I have never worked a day in my life, because I have enjoyed doing it so much and making the difference in the lives of many.
LEMON: You realize that you’re vilified around the world, right? I’m sure you realize that.
MURRAY: That may be so. But I’m not a villain. I can tell you – just let me take you back just briefly.
Dr. Shafer stated that I was reckless, that I used Propofol at home and that should never be done. All of the doctors who testified in the trial. Yet all the while I was being vilified by Dr. Shafer, he was protecting Dr. Robert Markman, a doctor who had used Propofol 500 times or more over five years for general anesthesia for his daughter for external gentilia pain. And I was using Propofol for about sixty days for just (INAUDIBLE). He defended that doctor as if there was nothing wrong with him.
Contrary to Murray’s expectations this news makes me jubilant. I’ve always been of an opinion that under certain circumstances propofol can be administered outside the hospital setting without harming the patient and for a prolonged time too – if only it is done by a qualified physician and in the presence of all necessary monitoring equipment.
And the fact that this woman is still alive and happily survived through 500 times of propofol administered to her for 5 years and Michael died after only 2 months in the hands of his criminally negligent doctor is the best proof that it isn’t propofol which is to blame.
It is the doctor who is.
Dr. Markman’s case was looked into by the Californian medical board only recently, in autum 2013. He is a retired anesthesiologist who used propofol at home for his daughter to block her nerve which was giving her extreme pain and didn’t allow to walk.
Dr. Markman administered 600 mg (60ml) by IV infusion every three days and kept medical records (1200 pages worth) of his treatment sessions and the treatments provided by other doctors for 17 years prior to that, all of which proved ineffective.
He was of course heavily reprimanded for using propofol outside the hospital setting, but in contrast to Murray his treatment room was fully equipped with monitoring equipment, propofol was administered by a pump, and considering these circumstances Dr. Shafer concluded that propofol was a reasonable last resort treatment for chronic pain and that Markman did not represent a danger to his daughter and neither did his treatments.
- “The evidence shows, without contradiction, that there is no evidence that Ms.Markman has, as of this time, suffered any ill effects from the treatment. Under these circumstances, it is not necessary to deprive Ms. Markman of the only treatment that has consistently afforded her any meaningful pain relief in order to address valid concerns about where and how propofol is administered to her. These concerns can be satisfactorily addressed through appropriate monitoring and reporting requirements”
- “The safety of Ms. Markman will be protected if respondent is permitted to continue to treat Ms. Markman with propofol under appropriately controlled conditions and if respondent is also subject to other appropriate terms of probation, as set forth in the Order, below.”
What an impressive conclusion. So the 500 infusions of 600mg of propofol given to the patient every three days did not provide any ill effects and since this treatment was found to be the only one to alleviate the patient’s condition, propofol was even advised by the board to be continued!
Wow, I simply can’t believe it. This case is a great proof that if propofol had been given to MJ in the same quantity, at the same rate and with the same standard of care, there wouldn’t have been any ill effects either and he would have perfectly survived it.
Michael was right. He would have been safe if he had been properly monitored, and if it hadn’t been for Murray the events would have taken a totally different turn.
LEMON: And you talk about that again, in Dr. Conrad Murray –
MURRAY: Absolutely. All the details are sure.
LEMON: OK, so let’s talk about Michael since we have you here. I want to hear about this person you call your friend. You say you knew him better than anyone towards the end of his life – than anyone, correct?
LEMON: Did he share secrets with you?
MURRAY: Of course. The most hidden treasure trove of his life is with me. But have I protected Michael up until now.
LEMON: Up until now?
MURRAY: Of course. Of course. I’ve said nothing that has been inflammatory about my friend. I protected Michael. You see, when I had – the officials, and they pointed to Michael, the guy who could not pay me for months after taking care of him, and it’s sad that he could not pay for the Popsicle his daughters were using, the toilet paper that they were using to wipe their private areas, that he was penniless, I was shocked. It was that time when Michael came to me trembling and trying to get me away from the AEG official who was Randy Phillips.
I was shocked. I should have just picked my bottles up and leave had I been looking for money. But there wasn’t money. It was about the love of Michael.
I have suffered a lot. There is no doubt about it. But I don’t hate Michael. Michael did not do me wrong. He did not want this to happen to me. Whatever happened to Michael when I was not there is probably his own misjudgment. And I believe that that clearly happened because he was illogical, he was irrational, and he was in the withdrawal state from Demerol that Dr.Klein was feeding him.
LEMON: You said that he gave himself the drugs. You believe he gave himself the final dose?
MURRAY: The premises cannot be breached. It was not breached. There was no one else in the house, in the upper chambers but Michael and myself. I was away from him. The phone records shows that.
LEMON: But again I ask, should you have been with him?
MURRAY: No. That’s a good question. Because I gave Michael Jackson 25 milligrams of Propofol over three to five minutes. All of the doctors, seven doctors in the test trial, assured there could be no Propofol effects after 10, maximum 15 minutes by Dr. Rogers, which is what I told police. If I give Michael Jackson between 10:40 and 10:50, 25 milligrams of Propofol, the effect of the drug would be gone by 11:00.
MURRAY: If I monitor him, (INAUDIBLE) by 11:20 –
LEMON: You believe, according to medical standards, that you were reasonable with that.
Just a moment please. What’s that I wonder?
- “It was that time when Michael came to me trembling and trying to get me away from the AEG official who was Randy Phillips”.
“That time” must have been June 16th when Randy Phillips threatened that Michael would lose everything, even his kids. The next days Michael looked very frightened but stoic using Karen Faye’s expression. She learned of that scene on June 18th when Kenny Ortega was enraged that Michael came to a rehearsal very late and told her of their decision to play tough love on him every since.
And now we find that Michael was trembling all over after those threats and even tried to get Murray away from Randy Phillips.
Now look here. To be able to get Murray away from Phillips, Murray must have been very close to him in the first place. And Murray’s slip of the tongue reveals that this was indeed so and Michael knew about it. No wonder he didn’t trust Murray and was looking for another doctor. So he did realize that Murray was working for AEG and not him…
LEMON: So you said you haven’t shared any secrets of Michael’s until now. Do you plan to? Is there something you want to tell us?
MURRAY: I would not share with you any hidden secrets of Michael. Not at this time. We don’t have that in summary.
LEMON: But how long you going to be silent?
MURRAY: How long am I going to be silent? As long as I wish to. I really –
LEMON: One day will you tell?
MURRAY: I can’t answer the question, to be totally honest. And I don’t know. I still protect Michael.
What a disgusting scene. The media represented by Don Lemon is bargaining with doctor Conrad Murray to open a certain “treasure trove of secrets” his patient could or could not confide in him (veracity of information is not the point here), and all this bargaining is done in the open, in everyone’s view, with someone who is supposed to be a doctor who by the very definition of his profession is obliged to preserve his patient’s privacy.
The Seller is advertising the goods (“The most hidden treasure trove of his life is with me”).
The Buyer is impatient and dying to know when the secret will be available (“You haven’t shared any secrets of Michael’s until now. Do you plan to? How long you going to be silent? One day will you tell?).
However the Seller is bargaining and with a defiant expression on his face says that he will keep silent “as long as he wishes to” thus making it clear that he is not going to sell it cheap and will wait for the highest price.
And all that is said by a doctor?
And after that Murray wants the Superior Court to restore him in the medical profession?
We should send them this CNN transcript as the final argument that it is simply out of the question.
Now let us be practical about what we’ve just seen here.
Considering Murray’s personality there is little hope that the sale and purchase deal can be avoided, and it is then that we can expect Conrad Murray to tell some unspeakable lie about Jackson. And I can even guess what kind of a lie it will be.
The subject is a very well-known one. What else can it be besides “boys”? Especially considering the fact that Wade Robson was seeking contact with Murray and wanted to cooperate with him in his lawsuit? So the story this despicable person is planning to tell us will be something along the lines of the alleged dark secret allegedly revealed to him when Michael was allegedly under sedation.
Let us brace ourselves for the prospect and remember that Murray is a monstrous liar.
And also remember that his word of lie will be directly contested by Michael Jackson’s word of truth – his testimony which was obtained by this scumbag of a doctor in a highly fraudulent way. And was given to him by Michael in exactly the same half-conscious state which Murray is now evidently planning to describe.
Given that Michael didn’t know that he was being recorded and couldn’t control his thoughts it can be regarded as his truest testimony and on the Bible too.
I’m naturally talking about the recording made by Murray when Michael was already half asleep and could hardly move his tongue. And where Michael said that God wanted him to take care of children and that kids were angels, and that it hurt him very much to see their pain, and that he dreamt of being able to heal them in a hospital of his own – from their ills and their depression. And where he revealed that his songs “Lost children”, “Heal the world” and others sprang from his real pain because this is what really hurt him since his own lost childhood.
He also revealed his sadness at having no more hope in these people due to their psychological degradation and that it was possibly only the next generation that would heal the planet from its ills.
For psychological degradation I address you to the media and Dr. Conrad Murray as a vivid example of it, and for Michael Jackson’s deepest secrets I address you to his dreams of healing children and the world, which were so inherent to his soul that he spoke of them in the moments of his greatest possible candor.
“MY MONUMENTAL GRIEF”
The remaining part of Murray’s interview is a cheap and sentimental show intended for complete imbeciles.
In this part you will learn of Murray’s monumental grief for Michael and his children, and that Murray was Michael’s only family, and that he was the only one to ever hug Michael’s children, and that Janet Jackson hugging the tearful Paris on stage was actually shutting her up this way, and that the poor criminal doctor wants to serve humanity now.
Don Lemon is playing up to Murray in their sentimental duet:
LEMON: What is your life like now? Everywhere you go, today you went somewhere, and I saw a picture of you, and they had a picture of you drinking, getting milk, and they said oh, that’s what Michael Jackson called Propofol, milk. And that must be some sort of, you know, there is a message that you’re sending.
MURRAY: Tabloids will twist anything. You know, milk. They have called Michael all kinds of names. I have not. My life is certainly a struggle. I’m doing the best I can to put it back on track –
LEMON: You get depressed?
MURRAY: Me? No.
LEMON: How do you take care of yourself?
MURRAY: Family and friends, the goodness of my family and friends.
LEMON: The kindness of family and friends.
MURRAY: Kindness, yes. Exactly.
LEMON: So you have no job. I know you’re working for the Trinidad Medical-
MURRAY: I am not working for Trinidad medical government. I have volunteered to bring cardiac surgery for the pediatric children more available. I have helped with their program, which took about seven weeks.
LEMON: So you have no income?
LEMON: None at all?
LEMON: So I have to ask you this. Michael Jackson’s children.
LEMON: Some of them are doing okay. Some of them are suffering horribly. His girl tried to commit suicide according to reports. What do you say? They were there that night or that afternoon watching their father, – if not dying, already dead.
LEMON: What do you say to them?
MURRAY: Oh, my gosh. The loss is monumental. I grieve for Michael every day. And I grieve for those children. I was the only person that Michael brought to his attention of all his families and friends who were still hugging his children. They would come into my arms every day. That warms his heart. His father had never done that. His mother and sisters were never embracing the children.
I was at the hospital the day that Michael passed away. And they did not put an arm around the children. The only time I saw an arm around Paris is when she cried on stage, and I saw her aunt place her (INAUDIBLE) hands over her mouth (ph). Was she trying to shut her up or was she really trying to comfort her? I don’t know.
But I love those children. And you know what? Maybe there will be a day when they would like to speak with me. And I am quite open. I have nothing to hide.
LEMON: Do you have anything to say to his family, to his mother?
MURRAY: Michael loved his mother of the only other relatives that he had. Prior to Michael’s death, he announced to me he had four family members besides himself – Paris, Michael, and Prince Michael, Blanket and Dr. Conrad. That was his family. Everyone else was totally absolved from his life.
He used his mother only because she may be the only chance of maybe having some way to pacify things between the differences in the family. But not – but he did not have a relationship with any members.
So Murray claims that Michael used his mother to pacify things within the family and makes it look like this was only reason why he associated with her? Of all Murray’s crazy ideas this one sounds to me the craziest and most insulting of all.
And this picture shows the moment when Paris rushed to Janet Jackson and Janet hugged her during the memorial service which Conrad Murray is describing in a unique and exceptional manner of his own, suspecting Janet of “shutting the girl up” – while all Janet is doing is giving Paris a hug of genuine love and protection.
Is there anyone here besides Murray who also thinks that Janet was shutting her up?
Well yes, it may look like it, but only if you see this picture for the first time, haven’t witnessed the scene with your own eyes and don’t know the context of it …. which incidentally gives us an interesting insight into the way things can be taken out of context and interpreted by Conrad Murray and presented by him in a totally twisted way.
It is indeed an interesting example, so let us make a mental note of it as the rest of his stories are similarly false, crooked and twisted.
The more Murray speaks the more he reveals a pathological side to him typical of all sociopaths – their super ego, callousness, inability to have real sympathy for other people and a cynical disbelief that others may have real feelings. They also try to exhibit sweet emotions – care, love and concern for others, but inside there are none. All of it is simulated, and hence a huge discrepancy between what Murray says and does, and his ability to change within seconds from a declaration of sweetest love to a severe hatred raging inside him and shown each time people aren’t fooled by his tricks.
The interview is finally drawing to its end:
LEMON: And yet you’re the only one people hold responsible for his death, and you went to prison.
MURRAY: You know, I have been hurt. There is no doubt about it. But I carry no anger. I would not allow them to do that to me. I would like to hopefully one day use my testimony so that it can prevent others who have undergone injustice; innocent men go to prison all the time. Maybe they should wear one of the shoes.
Now let me say something about the fans, for example. There are all kinds of fans. There are those who are diehards and have their reasons, and there are many who have. I am Michael’s fan.
MURRAY: But regardless –
LEMON: Okay. Do you think you deserve a second chance? Anew beginning? You would like to practice medicine again.
LEMON: Sometime second chances, though, are new beginnings. You can’t go back and do what you did before. Maybe you’ll have to do something else.
MURRAY: I will serve humanity.
LEMON: Thank you, Dr. Conrad Murray. Appreciate you. Best of luck.
MURRAY: You’re welcome.
Conrad Murray is going to serve humanity now? Oh Lord, please save us from the danger of it.
ONE STEP AHEAD
Some people may think that this talk about Murray is untimely – and will be utterly wrong in thinking so.
The reason to talk about Murray now is his obvious plan to tell some horrendous lie about Michael and the media’s readiness to play up to him.
This plan was convincingly demonstrated by Don Lemon’s interview where he swept under the carpet every piece of unwelcome truth about Murray and gave full reign to his lies. The goal of this whitewashing is an attempt to turn Murray into someone presentable and convince the public that he can be trusted.
Why does the media want it? Because this so-called doctor is in an exceptional position of telling any lie about Jackson his crooked mind is capable of inventing and no one will be really able to check it up. Don Lemon’s insistent questions do not leave a doubt that they are looking forward to it as it will fit someone’s agenda and give the media something to talk about till the end of times.
However the plan is facing a problem – Murray has proven himself an exceptional liar and to be able to sell some dirt about Jackson the first thing they need to do is make Murray believable.
This is why not a single Murray’s word was challenged in this interview and not a single of his multiple lies was refuted. Not a single inconvenient question was asked and all we saw was a sweet flirting with this personality.
The despicable Murray also knows where the most money is, so the media and Murray’s interests fully coincide here and all that remains to be done now is settling the price of the deal.
Given that Murray also suddenly engaged himself in an extraordinary video activity, all this is a sure sign that we are already on the verge of this campaign.
So those who are ready to work for the truth about Michael Jackson are requested to please walk just one step ahead of it and tell everyone what Conrad Murray really is.
And he is a PATHOLOGICAL LIAR with a CRIMINAL SIDE to him who is in DIRE STRAITS now and suffering from an INSATIABLE THIRST FOR MONEY too.
And if we show people the extremes Murray is ready to go to in his lies and slander of Michael Jackson, there is a slight chance that we will ruin the scams of those who count on making a huge profit out of a new character assassination of an innocent man.
This is part 2 of the post about Conrad Murray’s interview with Don Lemon of CNN who had the exceptional grace of giving the criminal doctor a platform to speak right on the fifth anniversary of his patient’s death.
We start where we left Murray talking about his phone calls (made at the time when Michael Jackson was dying). Read more…
As you know on June 25th 2014, the fifth anniversary of Michael Jackson’s death, Don Lemon, a CNN anchor invited Conrad Murray, the doctor convicted for MJ’s manslaughter, for a friendly talk.
Below is the CNN transcript of their conversation with some of my comments. Murray promised to speak candidly and honestly, so see what has come of it and what else Conrad Murray is now up to. This will be the first part of the post as there is a lot to say about new Murray’s tricks. Read more…
Five years after Michael Jackson’s death the most painful thing the media and public say about him is not even the allegations about ‘boys’ – this will slowly fade away with every new book telling us what a big kid Michael himself was – but a lie that Michael was a drug-addict.
He was not. There was a time when he did get addicted to Demerol – in 1993 when he went to a rehab and in the 2000s when he relapsed due the bridge fall and other circumstances – but both times he managed to overcome the habit, and even though technically he could be called an addict he was definitely a recovered one.
However MJ’s drug-addiction is still propagated by too many people including his family and this is where it hurts most. The public is inclined to think that if the family holds to this opinion then who should know better than they do?
These days we see an avalanche of revelations about sex abuse crimes committed against children.
The Sandusky and Savile cases, the scandal of the Labor party officials hushing up child abuse in the UK back in the 90s, Corey Feldman speaking of pedophilia as the Hollywood number one problem, Woody Allen’s daughter accusing him of molestation and the recent accusations of director Bryan Singer and other top executives of sexual crimes against youngsters – one case is piling up on top of another suggesting that what we see now is only the tip of an iceberg.
On a background like this a legitimate question arises – if the scope of the problem is that big how come it was only Michael Jackson that the media has always been busy with?
Shouldn’t they have noticed anything else around them besides the allegations against Jackson?
A possible answer to this is that the media was never really interested in uncovering the problem of child sex abuse and was simply making permanent use of Michael Jackson as a means to raise their ratings, entertain the public and make money by publishing something scandalous about him which was not necessarily true but was sure to grab public attention and increase their sales. Read more…
Revisiting the scene outside the courthouse at the Michael Jackson trial – with a film of Dana Gedrick and Barry Shaw
Okay, guys, as you can see, this post was meant to be published on June 13, on Michael’s acquittal day, but for some reason I published it today by accident. I’m sorry for that, but since it happened now I leave it there since we have only 6 days left.
(Today) is the 9th anniversary of Michael Jackson’s official acquittal. Although June 13, 2005, was a happy day for the MJ fan community, in the long run the trial in 2005 had so many after-effects on Michael Jackson that I am convinced it contributed to a large extent to his death 4 years later.
This year we learned about a film that was made by two filmmakers of Santa Barbara – Dana Gedrick and Barry Shaw – who went to the trial in 2005 to observe the behavior of the fans, but ended up with observing the behavior of the media because they witnessed that the media and anti-fans behaved much more freaky and crazy than Michael and his fans. Read more…
Originally posted on Turning the Table on the Chandler Allegations:
September 19, 1972 –At 28 years old (born 1/25/1944) Evan registers his dental license with the New York Dental Board. It’s unknown what address he used in 1972 but his license is currently listed with the board at the address he committed suicide in. He meets June at NYU’s free clinic (Ray says ‘73 when finishing school)
1973- Evan Chandler moves to West Palm Beach to practice dentistry– changing his last name to Chandler. According to Mary Fischer’s source he felt Charmatz was too Jewish sounding. But feeling that Chandler might have changed his surname for a more sinister reason, I requested information…
View original 15,420 more words