Please enable JavaScript in your browser preferences and then Reload this page!!!

Michael Jackson Justice: Michael Jackson Death vs. Illness of Genocide

God: Reconnect to Him

The Conspiracy against God is about "The Word", and the profaning of His Holy Name within us. Adam fell in the garden, breaking the direct connection to God. Jesus, the "last Adam" was a quickening Spirit, the Word made Flesh, and the only one with whom we can re-establish our relationship with God. Michael's story is still unfolding. He is the one who is, is not. But Jesus is the only name given under heaven by which we must be saved. Many are trying to rewrite HIStory. We were given a help to instruct us. Learn more "here".

Tuesday, November 1, 2011

Michael Jackson Death vs. Illness of Genocide


October 31, 2011
Day 21 Conrad Murray Michael Jackson Trial
Trick or Treat, Truth or Dare






Dead of winter dark of night
Read the signs to see the light
Worry over right and wrong
Will not exist if faith is strong

Casual the answers come
Through lyrics of a song once sung
Now in court he has his day
Who’d have thought he’d be at play



God loves children he did say
Strive to be one every day
And don’t forget the ones in need
Oppressed in gluttony and greed

Give from the heart as children do
A gift in love, receive it through
The heart of He who died for you
Stretch out your arms, embrace the truth





Walgren Cross examines Dr. White

- It would be nice the HEAR the answers but OTRC is freezing up constantly, it’s like listening to an audio version of a strobe light on frequent freeze-frame.

- Dr White is forced to answer only according Murray’s taped testimony and not private conversations White has had with Murray.  According to Murray’s testimony only, White says that Murray’s treating Michael of Michael at home with Propofol deviated from the standard of care.

- Walgren goes through the list of equipment that Shafer previously went through that is essential, Dr. White knocks them off as either essential, desired but not essential, and not necessary for light sedation.

- White says he does not agree with Shafer’s assessment that Murray committed a “extreme and unconscionable deviation of standard of care”. Shafer says not keeping records did not contribute to his death.  He describes it as “minor to severe” deviation from care over a period of two months.

- What the hell is Walgren doing asking about White’s money and when it will get deposited?  White states that he is not going to bill them $3500 a day, his normal court testifying fees because he knows they don’t have those resources.  (This ticks me off because the defense did not ask THEIR STATE PAID WITNESSES what they made to be there.  They only asked about witnesses who got paid for interviews on T.V.)  Typical hypocritical bullshit – do as I say and not as I do.

- Walgren is misstating the testimony in asking White if it is his understanding that Murray was paid to provide Propofol for Michael. That is not what Murray was paid for (this suggests a contract to provide Propofol), that Murray was paid to be a personal doctor.  Where is Flanagan?  He should have objected to this.

- Dr White would be more convincing if he didn’t over explain his answers.  Simple yes or no or “not in my experience” would suffice.  He could explain in follow up questions by Walgren or the redirect.  He’s starting to aggravate me, he is probably having the same effect on the jury.

- Bingo . . . We are on the issue of the calling of 911 and the ability for paramedics to access the property once they got there.  As I listen to White testify to his knowledge of this, it has occurred to me that Murray may have had NO IDEA the Michael Amir was not on the property.  Murray is Michael’s doctor he does not know the schedule of security personnel.  Since Amir works with all of Michael’s security and is the go between, he called Amir Williams.  Amir Williams was in the shower and didn’t hear it the first time.  It was taking too long so Murray ran down stairs to have Kai Chase get security and she didn’t do it (because she’s an accomplice?  Doesn’t care about Michael?  Was only thinking of future sums of money and increasing her business with future television interviews because she KNEW what was going on?)

- Walgren and White fireworks over Murray not “allegedly” mentioning to paramedics and medical personnel that he had given Michael Propofol.

- White testifies to a theoretical risk of previously administered benzodiazepines before the Propofol, depending on the time intervals given.

- Ooooh!  Dr. White mentions that he understands Michael had his own supply of Propofol (this is a first!) and that he didn’t know which Propofol Murray had given him judging by his police testimony on tape.  (I would like to know where THIS is going to go!  Remember, I am of the opinion based on my OWN research that Michael is not dead.  What as the purpose of bringing THIS up???)

- Heh!  The judge calls council back and asks the Jury to leave the room for a few minutes.   (here we go!)  Judge fines the WITNESS for bringing up discussions with Dr. Murray.  (why?  This went on CONSTANTLY with prosecution’s witnesses).

- Walgren resumes examination.  He takes out defense ww and suggests to Dr. White that either he or the defense modified defense WW by taking the venting cap off the tube and putting white substance in the tube to discredit dr. Shafer (when was this brought up during Shafer’s testimony?  It wasn’t!)

- White says the evidence suggests that Michael did not drink the Propofol and a cause of death and that his initial theory he now disagrees with.

- White says he based that initial theory on Dr. Ruffolo’s testimony about oral Propofol in response to a question Flanagan asked him during preliminary testimony.

- White wants to review his preliminary letter (is he purposely playing with Walgren?  He’s not the same, affable Dr. from Friday!)  I can answer these questions better than white and I could put Walgren in his place at the same time.  Come-on White!  Tell him “No, I didn’t TITLE my paper ‘preliminary thoughts’.”

- Walgren is still beating on the preliminary which I thought we established last week that this preliminary report and was expected to be for review by Murray’s lawyers and would not be submitted in court.

- Walgren is asking if White’s preliminary report/letter puts the blame of death on the deceased.  (Where is the BRAIN TOXICOLOGY REPORT?)

- Walgren asks if there are any other theories from his total evaluation, other than attributing the administration of medication to Michael Jackson himself.  (I have!!!)

- Walgren asks about a Dr. Onellis who is a biomedical engineer.  White had asked her to calculate the amount of free Propofol in the urine giving her the information in evidence of what was given.  He did not ask her specifically to create the models, just to calculate the amounts of free Propofol.

- Walgren wants White to answer questions based only on Murray’s statements then asks Dr. White if Murray could have lied and asks him if he assumes everything in Murray’s testimony is the truth – did he go to the SONY school of ethics?  Murray doesn’t look to impressed with White’s testimony either.


Mid Morning break.

Just heard that Miss Katherine has cancelled her trip to London to stay for the verdict.  Joe Jackson and LaToya is sitting in court and Kathy Hilton sat with the family this morning.

Walgren Continues Cross

- Walgren comes back asking why Dr. Onellis didn’t provide the software she used in her models to the prosecution/defense.  (Did we have a copy of Shafer’s software?  No?  Thank you very much).

- White told Walgren that Onellis used the same models that Dr. Shafer used.

- White did not know Onellis before the defense asked White to contact her.

- White explains that Onellis put forth the same hypotheticals given the concentration that Shafer put forth with the same information.

- White corrects Walgren’s misstatement of his testimony.

- Walgren asks if White would give Michael Propofol at his request every night.  White states that he would not consider it and that it was an off-label use of the medication.  Walgren tries to nail him on the phrasing of White’s statement of “I wouldn’t consider it because of the time . . . .” Walgren interrupts him and says “oh, just because of time?”  (where is the defense lawyers objections?  Flanagan asleep?)  White then continues to finish his answer.  However he is floundering here and has been very hedgy in most of his answers to Walgren which gives Walgren an open.   He can’t seem to answer with the same assertiveness he had with Flanagan.

- I see a hint of orange pumpkin on the desk, behind the glass partition with the court guard but only the curve of it.  Funny shortly after I write this I notice the guard moves it back behind the partition, LOL!  (Am I hacked??? Hee-hee!)

- He is asked about the credentials of Ian Glen.  White testifies that Ian Glen through email, told White that in his experience Propofol was not bio-available taken orally through lab rodent models.

- Finally White is punching back, getting a backbone in telling Walgren a number of times “that’s not what I said” and correcting Walgren’s misstatement of his testimony.  (Flanagan is waking up, Objecting to nature of questions, vagueness).  What is wrong with Brazil?  She’s giving White the death stares . . . been watching her.  She’s squinting at him.  For the second time, Judge Pastor has admonished Walgren to let White finish his answer.

- It is White’s opinion that Michael took the Lorazapam pills when Murray was out of the room based on Murray’s testimony, and that Murray was not aware Michael took the pills.

- Walgren keeps interrupting and not letting White finish his answers.  When White tries to state what he actually said, Walgren runs over him with another question or repeats the question.

- THANK YOU- Judge tells Walgren that there IS other evidence admitted in the case that that Dr. White is referring to the phone records in regard to what Murray was doing after he drew the 25mg of Propofol.

- White CAREFULL states that Michael had opportunity to administer his own in that forty minute period that Murray was on the phone and the two minutes he was out of the room.

- Walgren asks if White would assume that Murray wouldn’t notice the syringe left in the y-port of the I.V.

- (???) White gives some explanation of the meaning of “knocked out” to include someone hitting someone in the head with a hammer . . . makes no sense.

- Walgren uses White’s own referenced chart to get White to explain light sedation and normal response to verbal stimuli and if that makes sense that Michael would hire Murray to put him to sleep, not light sedation.  White is not directly answering and Walgren is again not letting him finish his answer.

- Walgren asks if it is White’s opinion that Murray used a bolus followed by a drip all the other days and only a bolus on the date of the 25th  (he never got to finish it?  Bag and tubing had other fingerprints, remember).

- White makes a point that the two days prior Michael had no propofol from Murray’s statements to police.

- Judge mentions the exhibit “230” at exactly 2:30 my time (pm).  This is a quotation from an article White co-wrote years ago.

- Walgren is submitting articles that White wrote in the past concerning standards of care with use of Propofol in various settings, with and without use of other sedatives and the purposes for which Propofol is used from minimal to deeper sedation.  Monitoring equipment varies but is present in all his articles.

- White in answering a question tells Walgren he would like his quotes on his articles to not be taken out of context (a constant and major problem not just in the court room – EVERY comment is at risk for this).

- Dr. White is drinking a lot of water.  If he keeps it up he will have to take a bathroom break himself.

- Camera focuses on book of “Intravenous Anesthesia”.  It looked like it was spelled wrong but my picture wasn’t clear . . . Top text bar on cover is on pink and makes it very hard to read.  Miller’s Anesthesia” is another book the camera does a close up of.  Quote is that patients getting light sedation should get same monitoring care because of the risk of slipping into deeper sedation.

- No one has addressed home medical care (I have seen a virtual hospital set up at home for elderly and infirm) nor have they addressed VIP patients and their privacy needs as to being administered at home.

- After all those articles White states what he has stated before, he would not administer Propofol in a bedroom in a private residence.  This to me the the hinge of the whole case, however, Michael Jackson can’t just go to the hospital without being in danger of people breaking security or (no one has brought up the threats on his life yet.)

- Walgren asks if the monitoring standards should apply equally even in an off-label use of Propofol.

- Walgren goes down the list in one of his articles.  White is giving Walgren a hard time in answering if non-anesthesiologists can administer Propofol.  White (FINALLY) addresses patients that are on home care or hospice care to use these drugs in a home environment and the requirements would be different than an office based setting.

- Walgren rephrases the question to, would White expect the same SAFETY requirements to be available in a home care setting and White says “yes I would.”

Lunch Break



Walgren Resumes Cross Examination

- Walgren is still going over medical texts for standard of care.  I don’t agree with him using or comparing examples of Propofol giving for procedures with Propofol given for sedation/sleep with NO procedures.  However, White using way too much explanation to tell him this.  Listening to White answer is like reading a IRS manual and he talks himself out of his own answers.  Completely unnecessary.  In doing this he is not giving me or the jury confidence that he is concerned with standard of care.  He sounds like he is trying to protect Murray which is the polar opposite of the prosecutions doctors who were going out of their way to crucify him on evidence not presented.  This is that the prosecution wants .

- Murray looks worried.  Interestingly he is also writing down notes.  Walgren is taking a minute to organize something.

- Walgren shows simulation by Ornellis.  25mg dose administered by Murray at 10:40 or 10:50 and a dose administered by Michael at 11:40.  White answers no, that she came up with this by watching Shafer’s testimony on television.  White only asked her to calculate the free Propofol in the urine and she came up with the models.

- Walgren shows White a model concentrating on self administration by Michael at 11:40am.  (Mom calls, who the heck knows what was said, someone fill in please?)

- Expanded view of Dr. Ornellis model, people’s 241, expands to the time frame by ten minutes.  White says that is what it is but with a different time axis.  White says Michael’s circulation would have had to have stopped within ten minutes after giving himself the bolus (if he self injected). 

-Walgren goes to Murray’s testimony transcript.  Michael had a strong heart, no heart problems.  White says he doesn’t find any problems in the report with the heart but that it doesn’t preclude any arrhythmia.  On page 63 at the bottom Walgren references, he said Murray stated that he looked at the pulse oximeter and Michael’s heart rate was 122 beats.  Page 64, Where Murray states he felt a thread pulse.  White concurs.

-OMG, I’m outta here.  Now White is stating that Murray’s statement about feeling a pulse could have been his own pulse since he said it was weak and thread. Walgren points out that it’s because it doesn’t match up with his assumptions that Michael died and his circulation stopped shortly after the 11:40 time in the model.

- Walgren taking shots mentioning White’s report including the drinking of Propofol when White already stated his opinion had been modified after viewing studies.

- Walgren has also called Dr. White by the name of Dr. Shafer at least twice today.  What’s up with that?  Walgren and Flanagan need to stop drinking the same water.

- Walgren asks by the diagram he presents, if it shows the effect site and White says he doesn’t SEE the effect site shown (effect site is the brain.  Been waiting for this but I am again to be disappointed).  Walgren said “what does Propofol effect, in the blood or in the brain?”  White replies depends on what effect you are looking for, but it’s a neurological effect so it would be the brain. 

- Walgren shows a chart simulation with the plasma and brain levels of Propofol (where did these come from?  Not in the autopsy report!)  Instead of asking this himself White tells Walgren he doesn’t put much stock in those numbers because they are subject to wide variations.

This is the chart Walgren Refers to
Using Simon’s Article that Ornellis Created


Walgren asks and Judge grants mid-afternoon break.


Walgren resumes


- Walgren is trying to discredit White using models he did not create.  The way he words his questions leads the jury to believe that this is what White testified to when it was NOT his testimony but ORNELLIS’S MODELS using articles of medical study from 1988.

- Walgren berates White about the less than .03% could also be zero.  White answers twice and Walgren keeps coming back to the question based “on this article” and finally Flanagan objects to the question being answered.  Judge sustains, Walgren states “the question has not been answered you’re honor” and the judge responds “It has. Next question please.”  Walgren is the only attorney that wants to argue with the Judge.

- White again explains that he has not in detail reviewed the articles in which the models were made (by someone else).  White also states that there is information in articles that he is not an expert on, in which Ornellis used to create her models.  He states for the second time that he is not a pharmacologist which is why he had her make the models.  (Defense should be looking out for their witness.  I give them an “f” for this).

- Walgren is splitting hairs on articles that White has not read or studied for viability, that Ornellis’s models were only supposed to focus on urinalysis.

- What is Walgren doing?  He’s pulling up articles off the internet that White didn’t look at and is trying to make him look bad because he didn’t cite every single article that could possibly exist on the internet when White TOLD HIM he was looking for articles on HUMAN STUDIES not ANIMAL STUDIES. 

Walgren is beginning to look like SNEDDON - vindictive.  After the Judge sustains a couple of objections, Walgren proceeds to CONTINUE to try to ask him about articles he did not review nor would have any reason to be familiar with them (this is childish!).  Finally the judge tells him he has to ask the witness about articles he is familiar with.  (Thank you Judge – Flanagan finally objects.  He must be a three cup of coffee in the morning person and didn’t GET HIS SHARE!)

- Walgren is still at it and White says “Sir, I didn’t RESEARCH this topic.”  He states that all he did was ask a question to find out what the levels of free Propofol in the urine would be.


Flanagan redirect

- Flanagan asks White in a hypothetical if he was a doctor who needs assistance with his patient, It’s a large house within a secured fence and locked gate, would it be reasonable for him to tell the employee in the house to get security to make sure an ambulance can get into the property.  White responds that he would as opposed to leaving the patient to run and find security himself, but he would as a doctor try to resuscitate the person first.  (This is what Murray testified to doing).

- White says he would sustain that attempt for three or four minutes before attempting to call 911 or yell for someone to call security.

- Walgren asks what he would do if the patent’s mouth and eyes were open.  White says if he had a thready pulse but he wasn’t breathing, mouth and eyes open he would question if the patient was even alive and the possibility that the patient would already be deceased.  (with a pulse??? Did I hear this right?)

- Flanagan asks, if the patient is already dead is there any assistance he could call for that would have changed that.  White says unlikely.  Flanagan asks if the patient was already dead, would records have changed that.  White says no.  Flanagan asks if he thought he should have called 911 first instead of trying to rescussitate him first.  White replies “it would not have changed the outcome of this case.

-Flanagan asks if he came in and found his patient presumably dead, would he have any reason to believe that Propofol caused that death.  Walgren objects to “assumes facts not in evidence”. (??? So now he didn’t die from Propofol?)

- Flanagan asks if the patient was asleep and snoring would there be any reason to believe that the patient was having an adverse effect of Propofol.  White says no after explanation that is not necessary.

- Flanagan asks if the paramedics get permission to call the patient dead and terminate the call, was there any chance that further treatment would revive that patient.  White says, “I would say there was no chance.”

- Flanagan asks if there was a Propofol overdose it would be readily apparent.  White explains that yes, that Propofol is a lipid substance and would rapidly absorb into the fatty tissue.  With infusion the elimination phase takes on a greater role.

- On Slow bolus by the end of the infusion, White says you can tell usually by the end of the infusion if the patient is in distress.

- IV Line (ww) Flanagan asks if the line has been altered and White says that it looks like the vent flap has been torn or cut off.  (close up reveals Flanagan is wearing a Masonic ring.  Just like Grandpa’s!)

- Flanagan introduces “quad w” exhibit with the unharmed flap over the venting port.  The one without the flap looks like it was cut.  Flanagan asks about Walgren’s assertion that White tore it off to confuse Dr. Shafer.  White states he’s never seen it before.  White says he doesn’t understand why anyone would remove the flap to control it because you have the roller clamps to control the flow and the removable clamps to stop it altogether.

- Flanagan says let’s assume that Murray did use the flapless port to administer the Propofol, White states that if you wanted to conceal the bottle and the tubing by rolling it up and putting it in your pocket as opposed to a medical bag, you would have a very wet pocket with liquid draining out and going everywhere.

- Flanagan asks about the prelim report that White wrote up pertaining to the ingesting of Propofol (Walgren objects, Judge over rules) and White states that it wasn’t an opinion it was just one of the possibilities he looked at.

- Flanagan asks White who contacted him to testify.  White testifies that Walgren did contact him to be THEIR witness and White states that he had already been contacted by the defense and he hadn’t made a commitment yet as he was still gathering information.  White said it was an email from Walgren first, then a phone call.  He said it was a short pleasant conversation.  White stated Walgren made inquiries as to whether he was going be paid and asked him could the defense afford to pay him.  (Whoa!  Good shot Flanagan!  Shows motive for vindictive treatment on the stand).  Brazil looks a little pissed.  Walgren a little red in the face.

- Flanagan begins asking about the level of sedation for open abdominal surgery (as per one of the articles Walgren originally began asking White about before all the objections) and if moderate sedation would be used in the case of abdominal surgery.  White replies that certain procedures pertaining to the surgery could be done with moderate sedation but not intracavity surgery, that deep sedation would be used.


Judge asks Flanagan about it being a good time to break for the day.


My Thoughts:

I will tackle some of the underlined in blue.

First, I want to credit Micheline as she noticed the camera now pans over the judges head whenever there is a break where the jurors leave the room.  However as the camera zooms in close to the seal, an image instead of the actual seal and background is spliced into the camera.  I don’t know how this is done on live T.V, but there is a definite difference In the images.

The subject of Dr. White’s paid testimony was a cheap shot that backfired on Walgren.  All of the state’s witnesses are paid except one (allegedly), yet Walgren went after White on this issue including asking if he got paid yet.  It was incredibly distasteful to the point where White testified that he doesn’t take care of the finances, his wife does.  This has no place in this court.

However, on Flanagan’s redirect, we learn that the prosecution actually did call White to be one of THEIR witnesses.  White testified that Walgren had contacted him not once but twice, once via email and once via phone follow up.  White stated that Walgren asked if the defense was paying him and could they afford him.  This smacks of an attempt at a bidding war, trying to buy a witness away from the defense.  Is this how California wins it’s cases?  Is this how Sneddon obtained his witnesses against Michael, by bribing them with cash? 

Is this how the Arvizos went from Michael’s witnesses to Sneddon’s witnesses?  Walgren SHOULD be hanging his head!  In my opinion this added a lot of weight to the vindictive nature of Walgren’s questioning.

 - taking his published quotes out of context
 - Accusing him of being a paid expert witness (they all were save one)
 - Accusing him of tampering with an IV port vent when he had never even seen that piece of evidence.

 - Berating him on articles outside his area of expertise even after explanation
 - Berating him on articles outside the focus of his investigation
 - Trying to discredit models based those of the prosecution that they used before.

This is not a political debate this is a court case about someone’s life (and death).  While I would like to believe that this is about finding the truth we know it is not.  They don’t care who killed Michael Jackson, or ALL THE EVIDENCE would have to be considered, and it is not.

If Murray could testify, we might learn that Murray really had no clue that security was where they were supposed to be and that Amir Williams was late for work.  Murray doesn’t know the schedule of security, so this point coming up, along with White’s suggestion that Murray as a doctor should try to revive the patient first for at least a couple of minutes before calling for help.  If Murray assumed security was where they were PAID to be, and Kai Chase had the same urgency to get security as Murray did, who knows what the outcome would have been?

White gets fined for twice referring to private conversations with the defendant.  Why this is not allowed I don’t know. Seems like a lot of things in this trial are off limits, like EVIDENCE.  Personally I would want to know EVERYTHING that Murray talked about to get answers.  White states that Murray told him Michael had his own supply of Propofol.  If that were true why didn’t Murray bring it up?  How did Murray come about this information?  Did someone else bring Propofol into the house with the intent to use it and Murray found it thinking it was Michael’s?  I would want to explore these things.

The judge fines the WITNESS?  Why are the prosecution’s witnesses allowed to talk about the conversations they’ve had with their side but not the defense?  We also have a collusive press in the court room who is privy to conversation between defense and council, defense and Dr.White and takes a comment they overhear, spread it across the media and Dr. White is the one held in contempt?  What about the member of the press who leaked it?

Walgren gets away with outright accusing the defense witness of breaking off a flap to an IV port vent to “confuse” another doctor and neither the judge nor the defense council say anything about it.   Is this what Michael had to put up with in the court room?  If it were me, I would have told Walgren, “perhaps it was careless evidence gathering?  Perhaps YOU did it?”

Twice the judge has had to tell Walgren to let Dr. White finish his answer.  He has also had to tell Walgren twice to let White answer on other evidence in the case and to stop asking the witness to comment on articles he has not read.  Walgren consistently berates White to answer why he couldn’t find articles on testing on the internet when White told him repeatedly that he was searching for studies done on HUMANS not ANIMALS.  Walgren also repeatedly, even after the judge told him twice, kept asking White to comment on articles Ornellis read when White told him they were articles she used for her models, and that pharmacology was not his area of expertise.   

During closeups of the tubing Flanagan is showing Dr. White, I notice he is wearing a Masonic ring.  Nice.

If I were the Jackson family, I would want to know who really killed him, and they know who wanted him dead.  But we can’t expect this from a bunch of state-paid lawyers who’s only real goal is the District Attorney’s seat . . . or the Attorney General’s seat.  As long as we have a court full of bribable judges who legislate from the bench, and attorneys who run for office in the court room instead of seeking justice, there just won’t be any for Michael Jackson, or anyone else that is not a stamped and approved establishment insider.

*************  End of Trial Comments  ******************

While this court case has been going on (and the Lindsay Lohan case, and the “Baby Lisa Case”, here is what has been going on in the world:

Governor Jindall in Louisiana bans cash transactions for all used/second hand dealers and stores.  It also requires “For every transaction a secondhand dealer must obtain the seller’s personal information such as their name, address, driver’s license number and the license plate number of the vehicle in which the goods were delivered.  They must also make a detailed description of the item(s) purchased and submit this with the personal identification information of every transaction to the local policing authorities through electronic daily reports.     Source

Israeli daily Ha’aretz reported on October 27, 2011 that large numbers of high quality Russian-made anti-missiles looted from Libyan army storage facilities by the pro-US rebels fighting along with National Transitional Council (NTC) have been sold to Palestinian Islamic Resistance Hamas.Source

Another “false flag” this time accusing Iran of planning to assassinate a Saudi Arabian ambassador – “President Barack Obama said today that Iran will "pay a price" through sanctions and international pressure for its recent hostile behavior including the alleged Iran-directed plot to assassinate the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the U.S. in Washington, D.C.  Source

Obama and Syria – “President Obama on Thursday for the first time told Syrian President Bashar al-Assad he must step down.  “We have consistently said that President Assad must lead a democratic transition or get out of the way. He has not led,” Obama said in a statement made some five months after Syria’s uprising began. “For the sake of the Syrian people, the time has come for President Assad to step aside.””  Source

Obama and Uganda – “President Barack Obama announced Friday he is dispatching about 100 U.S. troops — mostly special operations forces — to central Africa to advise in the fight against the Lord's Resistance Army.”  Source  This is the same situation that our missionary friend in Uganda told us is a lie.  Our “special forces” are teaching the youth over there how to riot to overthrow the government because their president won’t changes his policies to include abortion, amongst other issues.  He said the LRA has not existed over there as an organized group for over two decades.

Obama and South Africa – Rioting youth congress - Source

Obama and Britain murder Quaddafi – “"But I think it obviously sends a strong message around the world to dictators that people long to be free, and they need to respect the human rights and the universal aspirations of people." Source

Obama and EU Debt Plan - Source

Obama and protesters in the U.S. – “Barack Obama, US president, offered more support for protesters against the global financial system after a weekend of demonstrations in cities around the world, but called on them not to “demonise” those who worked on Wall Street.  Source

Acorn behind the scenes of Wallstreet Movement, paying people from shelters to protest - Source, Source and Source

Is it safe to assume that Obama, who has now started a total of four wars, with another three in the wings, plus the protests here in the U.S. can now be considered the most WARING president we have ever had?

Impeach is a good word!  Maybe Syria would like to send  their youth over here and protest HIS BUTT out of the Whitehouse?  See how accommodating he is about “revolution” then?

There’s more.  This better be worth it.  Somehow Propofol doesn’t seem all that freaking important, does it?

I wonder if the Jackson's ever get tired of being used as a distraction for world events?  Not one person on here has mentioned a concern about anything going on in the world . . . maybe that's my fault.  This really sucks turpentine.
Between the orange ties and matching pumpkins, bloodshed is taking a backseat . . . AGAIN.  Disgusted . . . We have more of the below to come for sure.  I'm still struggling I guess, over Michael wanting to even ASK for propofol, knowing what was coming and that THIS is going on in the world.

Disgusted and in PAIN!  I want it to stop.  Now.


18 comments:

  1. Bonnie,
    I am still reeling from the autopsy photo, and then I saw Gadaffi, half alive, being dragged around covered in blood, as headline on teatime news. It's a lot to deal with, as I know I'll never be able to forget these images. I'm not ignoring world news, just in shock....

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bonnie – what do think about Dr. White’s opinion that he said Michal got up with his IV and condom catheter on him and found the syringe that has the propofol in it and went back to the bed and administered the killer Propofol himself?

    Dr. White also said Dr. Murray drew the Propofol in the syringe and put it somewhere in the room before he left the room. Michael couldn’t be able to draw the Propofol from the bottle to the syringe since it’s difficult to do if you are not trained to do so.

    Where is the alleged syringe? If there is one, where are Michael’s finger prints on it? I am completely hurt by Dr. White claim or opinion that Michael was actually did this.
    Mimi

    ReplyDelete
  3. @Princess -

    I didn't even see THAT, just heard about it. When I posted that article above it described the horror of it and Obama's reaction to it was robotic. I want to know what the difference between Obama and the supposed DICTATORS he takes so much pride in brutalizing and killing? He's too young to have worked for Hitler or Stalin but I wish someone would take his Evereadies out of the back of his head and put him back in storage . . . or melt him down and construct him into something a bit less destructive!

    ReplyDelete
  4. @Mimi -

    That whole scenario that Walgren asked Dr. White about was STUPID and FALSE. But this is a scenario Walgren put together that he was asking White to answer. We don't know that Murray left a syringe anywhere. We don't know if someone else came into the room with their own syringe because NONE of these unidentified fingerprints have been addressed.

    All of it of course leads back to Murray leaving the room. That in itself would not have killed Michael. My own doctor left me in an emergency room for seven hours while my abdomin was filling up with infection cause by HIS surgery only five days prior and they didn't consider that neglect either. Doctors walk out of room housing sedated patients every day. It's not a crime.

    My opinion on this, Mimi goes outside the courtroom also. I'm not a juror so I have the luxury of not confining my view of the evidence to the SUBMITTED evidence only. I know there is evidence they are not allowing discussion on and THAT is just as revealing as the evidence they HAVE allowed discussion on.

    I'm not hurt by what Dr. White said because I know Michael would not have done that. I know Michael would not have signed a contract with AEG for financial reasons because he has NEVER done anything for just financial reasons . . . HE DIDN'T HAVE TO. He wasn't broke.

    Supposedly the last witness is being called today (not Murray) and that is Onellis - the one that created the models discussed the last two days.

    All these witnesses on BOTH SIDES have their connections to the establishment. It's the same bullcrap that went on in 2005, just a different defendant. This is one of the reasons we are watching it. What can we learn from it?

    It also may serve another purpose . . . distraction, again the same reason for the 2005 trial.

    We have yet to see a brain toxicology. We have yet to see one posthumous document containing Michael's legally correct name. We dont' have a name on the crypt, we don't have the CORRECT California seal . . . so, lies can't hurt unless you let them hurt you.

    Your question as to where the syringe is, that is just one of the MANY discrepencies that they want us to believe they are going to convince us they are convicting Murray on.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks for the 'news briefs'. "I'm staying informed (somewhat) from yahoo/google etc. I thought the U.S. was going into Uganda to get Joseph Kona, leader of the LRA.

    With this case, (if Michael J has left us)either the/criminal-murders was extremely sloppy, or extremely crafty. All of these 'clues' leading to what?

    As a criminal, would'nt you leave the 'syringe' behind with 'fake' fingerprints'? Maybe I've watched waaay to many spy/espionage movies.

    Again, thank you so much for your trial 'narratives'. I seriously cannot watch them 'live', as I get faint/anxiety/fearful/
    increased heart rate. I have expressed to significant others, the impact this had on me; so, when I visit them, and they intentionally put the televisions on the trial, I pack up and leave, as they protest, "I'll change the channel, come back". I never even look back at them.

    Your blog allows me to stay informed on the trial, so that when folk bring it up, I can respond. I did look at 'the photo's'; I do'nt know how I did it, but I felt a sense of detachment from them, but not the live proceedings of the trial. Go figure.
    Hope all of you back east are staying warm.
    Let the Holiday Season begin.
    Peace & Blessings....Oyan

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dear Bonnie,

    Have you you read this article!

    http://abcnews.go.com/m/story?id=14857323

    Something about certain members of this family makes me sick. I just get this feelin.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Dear Bonnie,

    The Judge is paid and Murray is stupid, its because of asshloes like him people get away with murder. His a scared punk under somebody's control.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Bonnie - about the California seal with the wrong number of stars - I found this image on a death hoax site and I don't know the actual source of it - but you can see Walgren, the blonde lady, Flanagan (standing up), Chernoff, Murray, and Judge Pastor with the California seal on the wall above his head...

    http://img52.imageshack.us/img52/8141/courtroomview.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  9. Bonnie, you really have to stop calling Murray's statement "testimony". Murray has not given testimony. Testimony is given under oath either in court or in a deposition. What Murray has given is a statement or interview. It wasn't under oath, hence his misleading, contradictory statements, some of which don't make sense (he left the room for 2 minutes but Michael was able to self administer 8 Lorazepam and a syringe full of propofol??). That's what's bad about making statements like that, you're bound by them and then you can't get on the stand to testify, because if you say anything to contradict that statement, you're toast.

    Bonnie said "(This is what Murray testified to doing)"

    No, Murray did not testify. He made a statement to the police; there's a big difference.

    Bonnie said "Walgren comes back asking why Dr. Onellis didn’t provide the software she used in her models to the prosecution/defense. (Did we have a copy of Shafer’s software? No? Thank you very much)"

    Well, actually we do have a copy of Shafer's software & spreadsheet, see at 1:04 on this video
    http://www.youtube.com/user/JustMeSTKK?blend=1&ob=5#p/c/A76258A97288219B/2/7W8sr5ysqbE


    Bonnie said "That whole scenario that Walgren asked Dr. White about was STUPID and FALSE. But this is a scenario Walgren put together that he was asking White to answer."

    Yes, this is a stupid scenario but it's not Walgren's scenario, it's White's scenario. White is the one, since the time of his "preliminary thoughts", who has said there were only 2 scenarios that he thought were logical: Michael swallowing propofol or Michael self injecting propofol, in essence it's all Michael's fault that he died, according to White. Walgren asking White those questions and basically asking him how in the world Michael was supposed to have accomplished what White is saying he thought happened shows exactly how ludicrous White's theories are. In essence Walgren was saying "OK White, if the only way Michael could have died is if he self administered propofol then this is how it had to have happened", because be for real, if Michael self administered, he would have had to get up out of that bed, look for the syringe while dragging the iv stand and a urine bag attached to a condom catheter, get the syringe, get back in the bed, put the needle in the tubing and inject the propofol. There's no 2 ways about it. It's a ludicrous scenario which points to White's theory being equally as ludicrous.

    Bonnie said "We don't know that Murray left a syringe anywhere."

    No, we don't, but White was working on the assumption that Murray filled the syringe so if he filled the syringe and Michael then self injected (as White stated multiple times he thought was what happened), Murray must have left it where Michael was able to find it.

    ReplyDelete
  10. ran out of room

    Bonnie said "We don't know if someone else came into the room with their own syringe because NONE of these unidentified fingerprints have been addressed."

    Ahhh if the defense is smart (highly debatable, watching all the objectionable questions they let slide by and the objections that they did voice, Flanagan couldn't even get a foundation for the objection together, Pastor had to supply it for him) if the defense is smart, they will put reasonable doubt into the jury's mind by giving up this ludicrous idea that Michael self injected and give the jury those unidentified fingerprints, tell them ANYONE could have come into that room and killed Michael. I can't wait to hear each side's closing arguments.

    And that "preliminary letter/report/thoughts"? That was an underhanded way for the defense to basically run the show, or at least try to. That was the only report from White that the defense submitted to the prosecution during discovery. Now White is saying those were only his preliminary thoughts and he basically developed other theories with Flanagan "verbally"? How convenient. All written reports have to be provided to the prosecution by the defense and vice versa, it's called discovery, you can't hide stuff so that at trial one side can jump up and say "ah ha, we have this surprise evidence, testimony, witness, gotcha". It doesn't work that way, trial rules dictate full disclosure one side to the other. How convenient White did not update his "thoughts" with a final report. Very shady! Oh, and did you notice on Flanagan's redirect he (and White!) were now calling that report "an opinion"? You couldn't budge that word (opinion) out of White's mouth when Walgren was cross examining him, but for Flanagan, it's now an opinion? Yeah, ok.

    Bonnie said "Walgren taking shots mentioning White’s report including the drinking of Propofol when White already stated his opinion had been modified after viewing studies."

    White stated his opinion had been modified VERBALLY to Flanagan; his "opinion" was never modified in writing, he kept saying he never issued a "report". He was playing a good game of semantics. Walgren said that the 3-page letter that he was questioning White on (the one mentioning either drinking or self administering propofol as White's theories) was the ONLY report from White that the prosecution was provided. If White modified his opinion why wasn't the prosecution provided with that modification? Underhanded defense tactics.

    Bonnie said "Walgren keeps interrupting and not letting White finish his answers. When White tries to state what he actually said, Walgren runs over him with another question or repeats the question."

    Walgren's doing that because he is asking questions that require only a yes or no answer which White rarely does, he ALWAYS has a long winded answer that either has nothing to do with the question asked or gives a "yes but" or "no but" answer. That's what cross exam is, asking yes or no questions. White got his chance to blather on and on during the direct exam. When a witness doesn't answer questions yes or no on cross exam, the attorney has every right to cut them off...notice Pastor only admonishes Walgren to let White finish his answer when Walgren asks open ended questions.

    ReplyDelete
  11. last part

    Bonnie said "White is not directly answering and Walgren is again not letting him finish his answer."

    Again, Walgren is not required to let him finish a non-responsive answer, which is what "not directly answering" means.

    Bonnie said "Dr White is forced to answer only according Murray’s taped testimony and not private conversations White has had with Murray."

    Well, yeah, those private conversations White has had with Murray are called hearsay and are not allowed. White can say whatever he wants to about those conversations, how are we supposed to know if what he's telling us is true or not? AND Murray told him that Michael had a propofol stash? So we're supposed to take Murray's statement to White on face value & believe it's even true? Oh yeah, and we don't have the chance to cross-examine Murray because, surprise, he's not taking the stand and actually testifying.

    Bonnie said "Flanagan asks if he came in and found his patient presumably dead, would he have any reason to believe that Propofol caused that death. Walgren objects to “assumes facts not in evidence”. (??? So now he didn’t die from Propofol?)"

    Objection wasn't to Propofol killing him but that Murray spent 20-30 minutes observing him after he gave him the Propofol; I don't think that exact time is in his police statement.

    Bonnie, you seem very biased against the prosecution. They're not angels, but neither is the defense. The defense is doing some underhanded stuff too but you're focusing your attention on perceived or real wrong doing on the prosecution's side only. I understand you believe that Michael is alive, but I think that belief is coloring your impartiality, unless of course, you're not trying to be impartial.

    ReplyDelete
  12. @Oyan - Thank you Oyan . . . TRYING to stay caught up. I don't celebrate Halloween because I don't consider it a holiday, but thank you ♥♥♥
    ------------------------------------------

    @Nita - Yes . . . I know what you mean. It's almost like they are doing this to purposely tick off the fans, doesn't it? On the judge and Murray - They're probably all paid. But I stand by my assertion about the viability of that courtroom and this trial. California Seal - absence of Admiralty flag, etc...
    ----------------------------------------------

    @Anonymous - Well that's cute. Nice picture of it in the dark, LOL! What are they hiding? Why no DAYLIGHT pictures of it?
    --------------------------------------------

    Deb said - "Bonnie, you really have to stop calling Murray's statement "testimony"."

    What you do you want me to call it? Statement? Recording? I'll tell you what, YOU tell me what you want me to see and hear and I'll write it down. Walgren was TWISTING White's statements, he was quoting him out of context and he was asking him questions about articles he did not read and did not research as HE SAID because he was looking for studies in HUMANS not ANIMALS. And that's just ONE OF THE ABUSES.

    If you recall (from your own biased view) Kamangar did EXACTLY the same thing and answered questions the SAME WAY as White.

    I don't agree with everything White said and I don't like his long answers either BUT I SAID THAT IN THE BLOG ABOVE.

    Onellis . . . How is DOCTOR WHITE supposed to get software belonging to someone he's only talked to in email? He didn't have as much TIME as doctor SHAFER did in preparing.

    Do YOU think it's okay that the house was left unsecured for FOUR DAYS giving people a chance to go in and mess with evidence? (which they obviously did judging by the pictures FLEAK can't even remember if she took or not).

    These conversations between doctors on the prosecution side, and between the body guards, and between the body guards and Murray are HEARSAY going by YOUR DEFINITION. They were PRIVATE conversations where they not? Yet they were allowed in testimony!

    I'm going to leave the rest of your rant to itself because it's too freaking long for me to answer and I don't have time. Maybe if Walgren hadn't tried to BUY White from the defense in the first place, he wouldn't have been so RABID!

    I am BIASED against LIARS . . . on both sides.

    Let me ask you . . . are YOU impartial? Do YOU believe the evidence in this case is okay as it stands?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Deb said - "How convenient. All written reports have to be provided to the prosecution by the defense and vice versa, it's called discovery, you can't hide stuff so that at trial one side can jump up and say "ah ha, we have this surprise evidence, testimony, witness, gotcha". It doesn't work that way, trial rules dictate full disclosure one side to the other. How convenient White did not update his "thoughts" with a final report. Very shady!"

    ......... Guess what . . . I agree with this . . . it's kind of like a deputy D.A. changing a time on a Sprint Cell phone record right there in the court room while they are testifying about same said cell phone record.

    It's like the wrong time on a vial of blood collected from a decedent.

    It's kind of like taking a picture of a bottle of propofol on top of a saline bag and SAYING it was inside BEFORE you took the picture.

    It's kind of like showing a picture of the body at the coroner's with the wrong freaking date of death on it.

    I guess only the prosecution is allowed to pull stunts like that, huh? If that happened in 2005, Michael would have died in a Jail cell with BUBBA! Good thing you didn't get to watch THAT ONE huh? Sneddon would love to have you!

    ReplyDelete
  14. @Deb - '


    By the way . . . check out tonight's blog and you will DISCOVER that I am not on ANYONE'S SIDE but MICHAEL'S and GOD'S.

    ReplyDelete
  15. off topic but didn't want anyone to miss this wonderful opportunity to Occupy !!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2JlxbKtBkGM&feature=player_embedded Cathy/PalmDreams/Islands

    ReplyDelete
  16. Hi Bonnie, I have been loving your blog since last winter when I found it. I think you are a courageous soul with heart felt dedication to this work. I love that you have provided the world with so much information about the world that was secretly lurking around Michael. We would have never known most of it! This trial though I am at a loss as to what you see. I have really followed it constantly and just don't agree with most of what you see as happening. I don't think this jury and judge are on a payroll and acting....I believe that Michael is tragically dead and that Murray is a narcissistic man that ended up taking Michael's dear life. I hope the trial finds him guilty. I am at least glad he has had to endure this trial..because I know a true narcissist will not feel guilt. I want to continue to follow your work. I so appreciate it...but I imagine there are some others like me that don't follow all of this and yes, I KNOW you know that...!! I just wanted to say it...also it is fine if you don't decided to post this..no biggy. I hope that we can agree to disagree and continue our cyber friendship and journey in discoveroing what is out there in this world. I really enjoy our emails and sharing.....Cathy/Palmdream/IslandsIsle

    ReplyDelete
  17. I agree with Deb and Islandsisle. Bonnie, I, too, admire your tenacity in trying to dig deeper into what happened to Michael over all these years. This is your blog, you control it, but to maintain discourse and keep your invited readers, I ask that you please be more understanding in accepting dissenting opinions. This trial is not a farce, this is really happening, and though there are others involved, the only justice we are going to see for Michael is to keep Murray, this greedy drug dealer in a white coat, out of the medical profession permanently.
    Maryann

    ReplyDelete
  18. Islandisle said - "off topic but didn't want anyone to miss this wonderful opportunity to Occupy !!"

    ........ Yes, and you have the spoilsports out there trying to make them look bad (the PAID protesters that the news people miraculously keep finding in the crowd . . . pathetic)

    You said - "This trial though I am at a loss as to what you see."

    ......... Well then forget what I see. Listen to what the Jackson's have asked us to do . . . 'read between the lines" "Murray is the fall guy there's more to it". Then listen to the attorney's . . . "He was excited about the illusion to be performed the next day" (chernoff paraphrasing ortega), "the man behind the curtain" (that was said on Thursday), and the witnesses, "he came back a different Michael" (Ortega again), repeating Michael on the tape "my show", "no one's ever seen nothing like this before", "this is amazing", Orgega "he gave me a hug and then LEFT THE BUILDING". That's not to mention the fake California seal the the wrong name being used on all the pertinent documents posthumously of Michael Jackson. The judge did it again today, this morning opening the day saying "Michael JOSEPH Jackson". All his 2005 court documents say MICHAEL JOE JACKSON and that his how they referred to him in THAT court . . . so did he change his middle name?

    The discrepancies were covered today by Chernoff in the closing arguments. If you cannot see the horrendous handling of the evidence and how incredibly similar this is to EXACTLY WHAT THEY DID TO MICHAEL in 2005, I can't help you. You can disagree with me all you want but I do not believe he is dead . .. there is NO EVIDENCE presented that he is dead . . . NONE. They can't even get a date on a coroner's picture right. They can't even get the PICTURE ITSELF right.

    I'm not going through this trial with blinders on just because I want SOMEONE . . . ANYONE to pay for what was done to Michael. Will ANYONE DO???? Then put me in jail, because it is wrong to convict Murray for a crime that did not happen.

    Justice has to MATTER, Cathy, REGARDLESS OF WHO IS BEING ACCUSED AND REGARDLESS OF WHO THE VICTIM IS.

    Murray is guilty of using propofol in a home setting according to his own testimony. That DOESN'T make him guilty of murder. There are fingerprints that can't be explained, there is a FOUR DAY UNSECURED CRIME SCENE and I've shown the connections with some of the witnesses. If you want to convict Murray for the death of Michael Jackson REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU DON'T SEE, then put the handcuffs on ME. I'LL PAY IT!

    Maryann that goes for you too. I'm not angry with either one of you, but that is how STRONGLY I believe Murray did not kill Michael.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.