Diane Dimond’s Media Coverage and Motivations During the Dr. Murray Trial

Diane Diamond just don’t get it does she?

Wrote an article questioning the kind of  evidence the judge won’t allow in the Dr. Murray Trial…
Her title… “Judge Michael Pastor has barred some key testimony and evidence about Michael Jackson—such as his child-molestation case—in the trial of Dr. Conrad Murray, charged with the singer’s manslaughter. Diane Dimond previews the trial, which starts Tuesday.”

It is no secret that DD has made it her lifetime work to torture MJ.  DD has consistently and intentionally distorted the truth, misrepresented information, sensationalized situations involving MJ and then presented “stories and claims” repeatedly as “truth”.  Many of DD’s “sources” have been discredited in court, but that does not stop her from resourcing back to them. DD seems out to dehumanize MJ all over again as that is what she has done over 17 years.  In this article, DD’s article, she is advocating for MJ’s 2005 trial information, and other areas of MJ’s past as focus and behaviorally speaking,  that IS putting MJ ON TRIAL and public scrutiny once again.

It would be one thing to want to talk about issues to find truth and expose it, however, truth is not DD’s interests. In this article,  DD harps about MJ’s finances, and other aspects of MJ’s past, appearing as genuinely asked, but all she will do with that information is to secure her self-proclaimed “MJ expert” position for future media fabrications.  Dr.Murray’s trial is just another opportunity for her to ensure that MJ remains on public trial.

In case they did not notice, Dr. Murray IS on trial, not MJ.

It does not matter if this was a case about the death of a homeless man who lived under a bridge, or MJ, or any other person on this planet.  Dr. Murray is on trial for the death of a HUMAN BEING.   DR MURRAY is the DEFENDANT in the Peoples vs. Dr. Conrad Murray.  Focus should then be on Dr. Murray:  the events revealed in testimony and what Dr. Murray did and did not do on the morning of June 29, 2009. 

People like Dimond, Grace, Dr. Drew, Joy Behar and the like want this case to be about MJ, his character and his past and by doing so, it takes the focus off Dr.Murray.  As that happens, at least in the minds of the public, they are systematically degrading the judicial process for Dr. Murray, and ensuring that MJ is being judged in the public once again.

Judge Pastor does not seem he will allow the focus to be obscured.  Kudos to him, that is for certain, for keeping everyone on topic.

DD does not seem the least bit interested in Dr. Murray, his care as a doctor or lack thereof, or anything about him as the man standing trial.  People like DD are responsible for the public torture MJ endured just as Dr.Murray is responsible for his lack of quality care given to MJ.  All DD’s written about here is all about MJ and how she can tie the events of the morning of June 29th to answer all her questions of MJ’s past – and so, she is implying that MJ’s past is responsible for his death and that Dr.Murray had nothing to do with “MJ’s demise”.   DD’s emphasis on MJ’s past is blaming MJ for all he endured, when the extremity of what MJ endured was hardly his fault.

Nothing can be further from the truth.  MJ deserved to have the truth represented in the media just as much as he deserved to have a doctor that would cause no harm to him.  MJ deserved to have a doctor provide care for him that was in his best interest and quality of health.  What doctor in their right mind would go against the very oath they promised to their profession?  What kind of doctor would administer propofol without having a license to do so? What kind of doctor would allow his patient to try it for sleep when Dr. Murray knew propofol is not a treatment for insomnia and there are other meds to use, ones that are non-narcotic but effective?  A doctor has an ethical responsibility to their patients on so many levels.  DD should be asking these questions.  Remember, DD is a COMMENTARY “reporter” and makes her career on her opinions that are based on pure sensationalism.  Her comments about MJ has inflicted more damage to him like a never-ending chain reaction.

Well, let’s talk FACTS.

Murray was the last person to see MJ alive.  Murray alone is responsible for his actions, lack thereof and for his own competence as a doctor-  so this is why he is on trial. Dr. Murray was giving MJ medications HE prescribed and was supposed to be monitoring MJ and THAT is also why Murray is on trial.

How about the FACT that MJ was found innocent on 14 counts in 2005 , which included some testimony from the 1993 allegations, BY A JURY of HIS PEERS?!! By insisting that it is evaluated again in the current trial,  DD is dismissing the outcome of 2005 and she does this to ensure that people doubt that verdict was genuinely derived.
WHAT does the MURRAY trial have anything to do with 2005?

Abso-frekkin-lutely NOTHING.  Judge in the present case did not allow it because that moment in time had no significance or relevance to June 25, 2009.

So, ok, Let’s backtrack a moment to 2005.  When the judge from 2005 trial allowed “alleged past prior acts” to be admissible, that meant that circumstances and information involved in the 1993 allegations was going to be analyzed during the 2005 trial. When the jury found MJ innocent of the 14 counts against him, respectively and retrospectively, he was also exonerated from the 1993 allegations as well.

Here is why:
When Tom Mesereau questioned witnesses of the 1993 allegations, they were effectively uncovered to have LIED, and never having actually SEEN any crime take place, and/or have had motivations to sell stories to the media to make some money.  People said they saw things happen to certain boys, and the very same boys testified that MJ did not molest them.  One boy said he mother had been trying to sell the story to the media tabloids.  The boy and his mother wanted money, and took money after denying it happened. (Mesereau, 2005, see video below). He was the one who claimed that MJ tickled him to the extent that he needed therapy over the incident…Tom Mesereau had people lined up ready to testify if Jordan Chandler was going to attend.  Mr. Mesereau stated on many occasions that his witnesses were going to testify AGAINST Jordan Chandler, all claiming that Jordan said to each of them that Michael never harmed him in any way.   Jordan stated in the Dr. Gardner interview that he feared cross examination.  A person who is telling the truth should never fear being questioned.  When the FBI asked Jordan about testifying, he stated, in paraphrase, that he would fight against having to testify and that he will do no more, because”he did his part” already.  In short, the “alleged prior acts” detailed in 1993 was NOT supported by witness testimony.

When the 1993 allegations were allowed in court for the 2005 trial, MJ was standing against those allegations as well. When Michael Jackson was determined INNOCENT of ALL 14 COUNTS, additionally, he was also found NOT guilty of the 1993 allegations  because if any of that was true, the jury may have decided differently.  If she admitted all of that and moved on, then she would have to find someone and something else to talk about.

Therefore, since 1993 and 2005 both have nothing to do with the events on the morning of June 25, 2009, Judge Pastor’s decision to not allow the 2005 MJ trial or the 1993 allegations in the Dr. Murray trial was spot on because neither have nothing to do with Dr. Murray’s actions or…..lack thereof.  Dr.Murray is the man on trial, not MJ or his past.  At least the courts have prompted focus to the important topic on hand.

Continuing on in the article….

Diane States:

“There will be no intensive digging into Jackson’s past financial woes, as that would be a “salacious … battle of the accountants,” according to the judge. The jury will not get to see estate documents showing the entertainer was more than $400 million in debt when he died, nor the multimillion-dollar contract Jackson signed with AEG–Concerts West for a series of up to 50 comeback concerts in London. Lead defense attorney Ed Chernoff wanted to introduce such information to the jury to show the kind of financial stress Jackson struggled with at the end of his life—stress the defense claims that, when coupled with his long-time drug abuse, led Jackson to make bad choices in his life. “

Diane Dimond is saying that the defense’s stance that the “financial stress and long term drug use caused MJ to make bad decisions valid. But it is not a valid argument.  MJ may have had debt, but he did not have to do a tour to make more money.  MJ accomplished so much in his lifetime, broke down barriers and was extremely successful.  He could have done other things to bring in revenue if he needed it.  He had a vault full of music that he could have released if he wanted to, he did not have to do a tour to bring him revenue.  MJ once said, in his speech about Sony, that he had a vault full of material and all he had to do was put finishing touches on anything he had.  We know MJ had a vault of music, he left it to his legacy.

Second of all, it is no unknown secret that MJ was conscious about his health- he ate many organic and natural foods.  A person who is conscientious about the quality of foods they consume, is going to be conscientious about other things affecting their bodies.  Generally and behaviorally speaking.  How about looking into Dr. Murray’s past for financial motivations that could encourage him to risk his license, his freedom, his own reputation and gamble someone’s life away?

Dr.Murray was supposed to be treating and monitoring MJ’s health and condition during the preparation and tour for O2, which MJ’s main complaints were:  not being able to sleep, risk of dehydration and remaining healthy to complete his upcoming tour.  Dr.Murray’s stance that he was trying to wean MJ off of  drugs does not make sense.  Autopsy reports indicate that there was no long term drug abuse, his organs in particular, being VERY healthy and his arteries without cholesterol and disease.  His tissues were not saturated or damaged by or with ANY long term drug use.  The autopsy report confirmed that the only medications in MJ’s system were the ones administered by Dr.Murray that overnight and morning of June 29th.  Drugs by which Murray did not completely disclose to the ER doctors.  In fact, Murray didn’t acknowledge all the medications he administered until AFTER the fact.  The statements on the autopsy report is proof to what many do not want to acknowledge.  It means that MJ did not have the addiction or dependency problems with drugs at the time.  Fact is, MJ passed a 5 hour medical clearance evaluation and was determined healthy to be able to endure the demands of an up coming tour.  It has been said by many close to him that he wanted to do the tours.

Additional facts:  Dr. Murray did not immediately disclose to everyone what he had been giving him, so his story changed from scene to scene.  Dr. Murray left monitoring MJ for over 45 minutes making phone calls to many people.  Dr. Murray waited to call 911, as on the phone record, they were not called until 12:21pm, almost 30 minutes lapse from when it was said that Dr. Murray NOTICED something was wrong.  Dr.Murray claims that MJ gave himself the fatal dose, which is really a physical impossibility, considering how propofol works.  In the past, only medical personnel were known to have abused propofol to induce quick “naps”, and they called it “milk of amnesia”, it is not likely that a non-medical person would think to use propofol to “sleep” or call it “milk”.  Murray told police that he was weaning MJ off Propofol, but Murray ordered many narcotics including propofol- he was not obviously”weaning” MJ off of anything, and in fact, ordered enough propofol to suppply a small hospital OR for 3 months.  Murray claimed he had clinics, multiple patients that he was providing meds to. Nonetheless, Dr. Patrick Treacy has maintained that MJ would not have used propofol without proper medical professionals, licenses or equipment.  Furthermore, Dr. Treacy maintained MJ did not have a drug dependency and was very healthy in 2009.

While it may be true that  MJ may have had a dependency in the past, MJ told the world that he rose above that problem.  So what if it was said there were many prescriptions in his home, the truth is many of those scripts had not been taken and some were months old.  Having medications around for months on end are NOT behaviors of a drug addict or dependent, so obviously, he was not abusing or dependent on addictive medications.  A drug addict or individual dependent on addictive medications would have taken what Murray prescribed AND the other pills too.  Fact is,  MJ did not behave as such.

There is a difference to having treatments which you may need certain medications to get you through and once that is over, you cease taking the meds.  When someone needs it as a regimen, then that is a very different situation, a regimen means a daily practice….  Diane’s statement  is nothing but a sound bite, based on unproven rumors that MJ was still addicted to prescription drugs in 2009.

In conclusion, Michael’s finances have nothing to do with Dr. Murray’s actions or lack thereof on the early hours and morning of June 25, 2009.  If MJ needed money, all he had to do was release new material, he did not have to do a tour.  He chose to do a tour and that was HIS choice. I don’t think he would have wanted to do it if he felt he was not healthy enough.

The judge was right to not allow finances into the Dr. MURRAY TRIAL.  If there had been other drugs in MJ’s system, I assure you, the judge would have allowed more of MJ’s medical history to be evaluated in the Dr. Conrad Murray trial.

Next paragraph states:

“Even though Jackson’s ex-wife, Lisa Marie Presley, and his mother, Katherine Jackson, admitted during separate Oprah Winfrey interviews that Jackson had a profound drug problem, Pastor has ruled that the jury will hear only limited medical testimony. Neither of the women is on the witness list, nor is Jackson’s second wife (and mother of his two eldest children), Debbie Rowe.”

DD makes it seem like as if an “exception” has been made for MJ, when that is simply not true.  First of all, whatever the jury hears in court should only be PERTINENT testimony- It is why information is LIMITED and it has always been that way in the court system.  For as long as I can remember, courts weed out irrelevant information because it wastes time, wastes tax money and confuses the real circumstances surrounding a case.  No exception was made for MJ, but DD wants YOU to believe there was an exception for him.

Dr. Murray is on trial, not MJ, and therefore only SOME medical information would be PERTINENT, since the medications found in MJ’s system were ones prescribed by Murray.  Other doctors were investigated initially, but based on the information they obtained, Dr. Murray was the only doctor charged.  Obviously, DD does not think the investigators were doing their job appropriately.

In the next section of DD’s article, she lists certain people who she thinks should be witnesses.  I shall go through each one.

DD first mentions Katherine Jackson and Lisa Marie Presley.  I think DD needs to listen to those interviews with LMP and KJ once more because KJ stated that she was not aware of MJ having a problem with drugs in 2009.  She revealed that MJ stated he did not have a drug problem when she asked him.  When Oprah asked Katherine about MJ and drugs, Oprah stated that MJ died from an overdose of drugs.  KJ corrected her and stated that MJ died from propofol intoxication, not prescription drug overdose.

LMP intimates that MJ was on drugs when they were married, but that was just her suspicion and she said that clearly.  We know MJ said he had a dependency around that time, so that is no mystery; MJ told us he rose above that dependency problem.

On Oprah in 2011, LMP said that she had seen the Bashir video and said MJ was “high as a kite”, and assumed he was abusing drugs, but the truth is, LMP was not around MJ in his life every day to know whether he had received treatment for something or whether he was abusing drugs. There is quite a difference between the two circumstances.  LMP assumed MJ was having the same issues in 2009 perhaps because of her experience with her father and not believing MJ had beaten his dependency.

Let’s look at what LMP really said in the interview with Oprah in 2011.  LMP stated that she had seen MJ on and off for about 4 years after they divorced (from 1997-2002), so she was not close enough to MJ to know whether he still was having that issue in 2004, two years lapsed between without contact.  LMP stated that she spoke to MJ in 2005 so at either time (2004 and 2009), she was not that close to him to know he was still having the dependency issue in 2009. Fact is, she simply was not around MJ to know for a fact and she made assumptions based on memories of the past.

LMP (and Oprah) continually made contrasts between MJ and Elvis.  There is no reason to call LMP to the Dr. Murray trial because she had been out of MJ’s life since she last spoke to him in 2005.   LMP revealed on the Oprah show when they last spoke and that admission exempts her as witness, besides the fact that she obviously was not present the morning of June 25, 2009.

The sad truth is, people will take everything that LMP said as fact, when all she said was based on her OWN perception which was not always with first hand knowledge or presence or fact.  LMP recalled incidents of the past and other associations of sporadic involvement and tied it into the present and all the way to back to the time when she was with MJ daily.  But unfortunately, people will take only half of what she said, without really listening to ALL that she said and researching for the truth.

We KNOW that Jermaine Jackson had been talking about MJ using prescription drugs and having a problem around 2002, however, MJ never confirmed that to us.  But still, we must keep to the facts.  The autopsy confirmed -that there was no evidence of LONG TERM drug abuse and the only medications in MJ’s system were the ones administered by Dr. Murray. Dr. Murray was  inconsistent and not forthcoming regarding the list of meds he gave MJ.  Murray’s restraint to disclose precisely what was given to police OR medical/hospital emergency personnel raises serious questions to his liability to the events of the morning in question….  Plain and simple.

So when Diane Dimond makes the statement “a profound drug problem”, she plants the idea that a “drug problem” still existed in 2009 based on the words of LMP and KJ, but what LMP and KJ actually said, was very different.  One really has to listen carefully to what exactly is being said in the whole context and conversation.  Many in MJ’s past have been far too willing to come forward and give 1/2 of what they know, or give the appearance that they know more than what they do.  There are individuals on the witness list- limited ONLY to those who were with him daily or otherwise close to MJ more frequently than sporadically.

It is apparent that DD bases her information more on what people SAY, not caring to research thoroughly whether it is true or not, and she seems to have a difficulty remembering what incident occurred when, and this confuses the issues at hand.

For Years, Diane Dimond has caused so much speculation regarding whether MJ really fathered his children, yet in that passage in her article she stated:

“Pastor has ruled that the jury will hear only limited medical testimony. Neither of the women is on the witness list, nor is Jackson’s second wife (and mother of his two eldest children), Debbie Rowe.”

I’ll allow that comment “and mother of his two eldest children” to stand on its own as it is.  Her own statement speaks volumes.  DD admits Prince and Paris are biological to MJ and Rowe.  Yes, DD has intentionally deceived people to believing otherwise.

Debbie Rowe admitted in interview that MJ had sole custody and rights over them.  Debbie Rowe has had visitation with Prince and Paris, however, she too was not there the morning of June 25, 2009, nor was she present consistently in MJ’s life after his 2005 trial.  That is more likely why she was not asked to testify.

DD stated:

“Grace Rwaramba, the Jacksons’ longtime live-in nanny, who spent more alone time with the entertainer and his three children than anyone else. According to court documents, Rwaramba told investigators she once got a frantic call from the children after they found their father on the floor unconscious and unresponsive. She also said she repeatedly had tried to stage interventions in a vain effort to stop Jackson’s drug abuse. Her warnings to the boss about his sobriety got her fired, and two months later Jackson was dead.”

Grace Rwaramba was dismissed as nanny weeks before the date of the incident on trial, so she was not around either to witness that morning’s events either.  GR is on as a possible witness though.  It does not mean she will be called because in reality, she was not there that morning or since a few weeks before.  Since the autopsy reports revealed that there was no long term drug abuse, there is no point in questioning her about it either.  Additionally, GR denied ever having said that she had to “pump MJ’s stomach on several occasions”.  GR also made a public statement against false media representation about her.  Please see references below.  DD stated that GR’s statement comes from “court documents”, refraining from revealing her exact document.  DD has rarely quoted court documents in their integrity, thus adding her own twists to suit her agenda.

Continuing on in the article, DD wrote:

“Jackson’s most often-visited doctor, dermatologist Dr. Arnold Klein, who is reported to have been the source of his frequent Demerol injections and some of his narcotic prescriptions, will not be allowed to testify about his most famous patient’s drug use. This, despite the revelation that in the three months before Jackson’s death, Klein injected him with Demerol 51 times. (Some of Klein’s medical records on Jackson will be allowed.)”

Dr.Klein was listed as a potential witness, however, the treatment MJ received from Klein was for his skin conditions and demerol was not in MJ’s system according to the toxicology reports.  Dr. Klein was not there the morning in question, and the autopsy revealed no LONG TERM DRUG ABUSE, which included a screen for Demerol, so those are probably some reasons why he won’t be testifying.  Apparently, the judge will not allow Klien to testify, however, his medical records are available for review.   MJ’s medical records will indicate when he had treatment administered by Dr. Klein.  In all fairness, Klein should be allowed to be questioned in case anything needs to be clarified in his medical notes about MJ’s treatments.

DD continues:

“Klein’s former office manager, Jason Pfeiffer, who was set to testify that Jackson had called him just two weeks before he died looking for a source of Propofol—and a willing anesthesiologist.”

Jason Pfeiffer is not exactly credible.  If you remember, he sold the story to tabloids that he was MJ’s lover, which was not true at all.  It does not matter, Pfeiffer was not present in the house on the morning in question.  Furthermore, any statement Pfeiffer has made regarding MJ asking him for propofol and anesthesiologist is simply hearsay.  MJ is not available to comment on any conversation between him and Pfeiffer.

The next person that DD mentions is Dr. Etok:

“Jackson friend Dr. Susan Etok, who told me in an interview after Jackson died that she had visited with him at the Lanesborough Hotel in London in March 2009 and had been stunned to find his bathroom a veritable pharmacy of narcotic drugs. Dr. Etok also said Jackson begged her to “find someone to supply him with antidepressants, hypnotic drugs, and Diprivan,” (the trade name for Propofol). Etok told detectives this happened just three months before Jackson died.”

Dr. Etok claims that upon a visit, MJ had many kinds of medication in his medicine cabinet, including Diprovan (propofol).   Dr. Etok also claimed that MJ asked her to “score” medications for him by asking her contacts to supply him.  Additionally, she said that MJ offered her Murray’s position….

First of all, Dr. Etok holds a PhD in biomedical engineering and by no means does that qualify her to be able to monitor anyone’s medical condition or be anyone’s primary care physician or prescribe medication.  She is NOT a physician.  It would be ridiculous for her to claim that MJ asked her to act as his personal doctor. Remember the story about Blanket and the dentist?  MJ had taken Blanket to the dentist for a procedure and he needed to go under anesthesia.  MJ would not allow the doctor to perform anything he was NOT licensed for AND he did not ask the doctor to deviate from ethical or standard practices.  Dr. Treacy has advocated repeatedly that MJ would not have any procedure by any doctor without proper training or licenses- for himself OR his children.  Dr. Treacy has been one of the most consistent and credible advocates for MJ.

The fact that DD states that this person revealed certain things in an “interview” with her does not inspire much confidence at all.  For all we know, DD could just be repeating what she had seen in Dr. Etok’s interviews.   It certainly would not be the first time DD has gravitated to “sources” with the least credibility. Please remember, just because “information” is repeated, does not automatically make it true.  The information has to be verified and researched, and since Dr. Etok’s claims involve what she “saw” in MJ’s medicine cabinets is hearsay because she has no proof and MJ cannot refute Dr. Etok’s claims.  As far as Dr. Etok’s other claims, regardless whether MJ had drugs in his medicine cabinet or not, the autopsy reports states that there was no indication of long term drug abuse.  This doctor was likely declined as witness perhaps because she was not witness to anything pertaining to the morning in question, and her conversations with MJ cannot be negated by MJ himself.

Continuing in DD’s article, she gets increasingly sensationalistic:

“Judge Pastor also has rejected the idea that the jury should see outtakes of the film This Is It!–a compilation of video taken of Jackson during rehearsals for his anticipated London concert stand. The prosecution had wanted the jury to see up to a dozen hours of outtakes (out of a stockpile of more than 100 hours) to underscore that the star looked healthy and in command in the weeks and days before his death.  Murray’s defense team, aware that the camera wouldn’t have been rolling during Jackson’s worst moments, had isolated about four hours of video that they claim showed the singer as distracted, disoriented, and feeble-looking. That video might have been the best evidence to buttress the defense theory that Jackson was a man worn down by his struggle with drugs, faltering finances, and performance anxiety—a man who may have been desperate enough to drink extra Propofol from a juice bottle at the side of his bed or inject it into his thigh, causing his own demise.”

First of all, hundreds of hours were recorded for TII, obviously that was not over a week’s time- it was said that was over the course of all rehearsals – from the beginning.  Four hours over the course of how many months is hardly enough to say there was an issue with MJ’s health.  There are plenty of witnesses to testify, such as Kenny Ortega and others around MJ often, but that is not enough for DD.

DD contradicts her own statements, also true to form.  If Murray’s defense team was “so aware that cameras would not catch MJ at ‘his worst’ moments”, but she won’t say directly that the cameras obviously were rolling to have 4 additional hours in outtakes, let alone more than 100 hours, so obviously, they taped MJ A LOT and were not apprehensive to either.  If MJ was in such bad health consistently, they would have been apprehensive to record on certain days.  DD wants you to believe there are 4 whole hours where MJ is frail, disoriented, and distracted.  Please.  They did not isolate anything of major magnitude of more than 4 hours of MJ being disoriented and frail.  I assure you, if MJ had been propofol’ing daily, there would have been more than four hours “isolated” of footage.   It is not possible for someone to self administer vast amounts of propofol that was found in MJ’s system and there was no indication of long term drug abuse according to autopsy reports, all of that content will be discussed in the Dr. Murray trial.

DD then comments on Karen Faye.

“Judge Pastor will allow one member of Jackson’s inner circle to testify. Makeup artist Karen Faye worked with the singer for 27 years and will be allowed to tell the jury her observations of his condition in the week before he died. She is on record telling detectives that Jackson openly worried about whether he was physically strong enough to complete 50 concert dates and he “was weak, extremely thin, and seemed to be under the influence of drugs.”

Karen Faye will testify, but she too is LIMITED to instances of direct experience, not hearsay.  No second hand information.  And rightfully so.

“It is not clear whether the judge will allow Faye to testify about Jackson’s reaction to a confrontational meeting with AEG officials and lead chorographer Kenny Ortega, held just five days before the singer died. During the session (described to this reporter as a “come-to-Jesus meeting” by a source who asked to remain anonymous), Jackson was reminded of his $40 million liability should he fail to perform. Dr. Murray’s defense say they believe this meeting was the catalyst to final irrational acts by a desperate Jackson—acts that include overdosing himself with various prescription drugs when Murray wasn’t watching.”

Ah, DD and her “sources who wish to remain anonymous”.  She uses that phrase a lot when her “sources” are not real ones or when she has repeated invalid information.  She knows she hides behind that “shield law”.  How odd to say that it was coined as a “come to Jesus” meeting, what is she trying to infer by writing that?  Makes no sense…..it can be interpreted in different ways.  Is she basically implying that AEG was PUSHING MJ to overstress, panic, and “make bad decisions” to take more drugs to “cope”?  Is she trying to imply/infer that MJ would do something so careless that could cost him his life?  Oh my, DD should know better than this.  We know she is not on MJ’s side, and will always say whatever it takes to get her some ratings and attention.  DD used a lot of sensationalism in her article and some pretty strong sound bites to ensure that MJ is placed “on trial” with the public.

DD’s next paragraph:

“Pastor has made it clear he wants this trial, scheduled to get underway Tuesday, Sept. 27, to focus primarily on what happened (and what didn’t happen) inside the bedroom of Jackson’s rented Holmby Hills mansion on June 25, 2009, the day the King of Pop was declared dead.”

Notice how DD inserts (what didn’t happen) in parentheses above.  In Martin Bashir’s “Living with Michael Jackson”, at one point of the interview, MJ was seated on a sofa.  When Bashir inquired about the allegations of 1993, about “what happened”,  MJ firmly stated (coupled with a gesture) “what did not happen”.  DD knows that MJ fans are very cognizant of MJ’s words and she knows we believe in MJ because we understand he was telling the truth.  DD using the same phrase here is mocking a phrase MJ stated previously.  It is possible that this was an “innocent” statement on her part, but her history in mocking MJ is well noticed in the MJ community.

It does not matter what she says about the trial.  The trial should be based on Dr. Conrad Murray and the events of that day.  She wrote the “court will bring out what happened/what didn’t happen, but all she has written here contradicts her statement that she wishes to have a fair trial- she certainly did not want that for MJ at any time of her career.  Again,  Courts allow only pertinent information for testimony in effort to uncover what happened or what didn’t, but her actions demonstrate alternatively:   DD’s whole article is  about bringing in information that has nothing to do with the events that happened that morning.  She is only interested in condemning MJ in the public eye once again.

“Some veteran court watchers believe the state has the upper hand in this case, and if prosecutor David Walgren’s medical experts repeatedly hammer on one simple fact—that no ethical medical practitioner would ever use the hospital-only anesthetic Propofol in a private home, and especially not without the proper monitoring equipment—then the seven-man/five-woman jury will surely see Murray as a guilty man.”

You see, this is what the court process is for:  to determine in a jury of peers of guilt or innocence and the outcome is supposed to be honored with the public, whether the public agrees with it or not.  DD is not willing to live with the outcome thought, she was not ever willing to believe the verdict in 2005.  The medical experts are correct, a medical doctor makes an oath to first and foremost “do no harm”.  They are bound to mandatory ethics, policies, procedures and PROTOCOL to standards of care.  The court proceedings are happening to determine guilt or innocence based on FACTS, not sensationalism or irrelevant topics.  Then DD really sticks it to the reader by an intimidating manner by saying at the end: “then the seven man jury will surely see Murray as a guilty man”.  She sure pulled out all the stops there.   DD saw MJ as guilty, wrote it as such and has spent her lifetime career ensuring that the public believed MJ was guilty, yet she intently warns and intimidates the public if they were to condemn Dr. Murray guilty before his trial, reminding them of a sense of responsibility and conscience.  DD surely knows the difference, but it only applies to whomever she likes.

Continuing along:

“This case is about Murray’s (overall) substandard care of his patient,” says Beth Karas, former prosecutor and senior correspondent for In-Session on truTV who has followed the case since the beginning. “Murray left an anesthetized Jackson alone for about 45 minutes—taboo in the medical profession. It’s called abandonment—an anesthetized patient must never be abandoned. Murray did not call 911 as soon as he found Jackson not breathing. He did not disclose to the paramedics (and two ER doctors) all the medications he had given Jackson.”

Well, from what we know so far, this IS true, but this part is what court is for: to uncover what the standard procedures are in the medical profession, as Dr. Murray is on trial and his competence should be of prime interest.  It is part of the facts involved in the case, kudos to Beth Karas for reporting on the truth.  DD’s inclusion of this statement is not meant as reporting the facts, she wrote this part rather condescending.  Beth Karas has been more supportive of facts and less supportive of sensationalism, old tabloid rumors, and hearsay than DD.  IT IS a fact that leaving a patient unattended while under propofol is against regulation and protocol.  It is written in medical references under the drug description, uses, method of treatment etc such as in a drug and medication reference book.  It is the same information that is inside the Propofol drug pamphlet.  Well DD’s statement here shows that DD KNOWS HOW to report on the truth and facts presented in the case by quoting Beth Karas, however, she put that in there to appear as if her writing is UNBIASED.  Nothing can be further from the truth, read the rest of her article.

“Murray also ordered and received four gallons of Propofol in an apparent attempt to stockpile the anesthesia, not available to him in London, in advance of the approaching concert tour.”

Now, the operative phrase is “apparent attempt”…a moment ago, she warned intently of deeming a man guilty before a trial of his peers, and here she goes.  This may be her “attempt” at writing a “balanced” article…DD plants the idea that all that medication Dr. Murray ordered was solely for MJ’s use.

Fact:  Dr. Murray stated was running FOUR practices…and Dr. Murray is NOT an anesthesiologist, nor is he licensed to administer, why was it allowed for him to order so much Propofol for his offices, when it is supposed to be used in a hospital setting?  If offices use anesthesia, there has to be a licensed anesthesiologist administering it and the facility has to have a license to perform anesthesia on the premises in most states.  Did Murray have all the appropriate licenses?  WE know HE did not have a license to personally administer it.   Can pharmacies deny orders that include what is considered a “hospital setting only” medication for delivery of a home setting without verification or proof it is needed and warranted?  If not, there should be a regulation rule, with a stipulation that if it were to be used in the home, the doctor must provide details of the case he is treating for appropriate evaluation of proper use and if not, the pharmacy can deny sending it.   I hope the prosecution has investigated whether Murray was accustomed to ordering medication for his “office use” in incredible amounts too.   Perhaps my questions will be uncovered in court proceedings.

Next paragraph in DD’s article:

“L.A.-based jury consultant Marshall Hennington agrees that Murray’s team has an uphill battle, and that it will be difficult for them to convince the jury that Jackson accidentally killed himself with Propofol. “Most medical professionals have no idea on how to properly administer the drug … so how would MJ know how to do this? The argument will be weak, but I have seen weaker arguments create reasonable doubt in jurors’ minds.”

DD creates a loud soundbite here by saying that the “argument is weak” and that she had “seen weaker arguments create reasonable doubt in juror’s minds.”  Oh, DD is very PROFICIENT at creating doubt in the PUBLIC’s MIND.  DD wrote that “Murray’s team will have an uphill battle”- oh my, yes, because there is a STRONG case against him and if the chance he really IS innocent, then YES, that will be an uphill battle. Oh my.  Yes, we believe that everyone deserves to have their day in court, Dr.Murray should have his day in court and have a fair trial.  This is why it is ever so important for the media to report on testimony and FACTS only, without ANY attempt at INTERPRETATION.  (the very definition of journalism as a profession)

Continuing to the next paragraph DD wrote:

“Questions remain about how jurors can arrive at the truth if they don’t fully understand Jackson’s world, his pattern of behavior and the various stressors he faced as he readied himself for what would be a grueling set of concerts. There are already whispers that the judge’s restrictions on witnesses could make an appeals point for Murray’s team should the doctor be convicted.”

Jurors don’t need to understand “Jackson’s world” in order to arrive at the truth.  They NEED to understand the testimony revealed in court and decide what evidence is true and what is not.  DD reinforces her previous soundbites regarding MJ’s behavior and past, as if to say, MJ is responsible for his own “demise”.  There are many people who appeal guilty verdicts, Dr.Murray would be one of many, and it would be anticipated that he would appeal if convicted.  She just wants the public to start thinking about it now, to create heightened emotions and great anticipation now.  She’s hooked on the drama herself.

Grueling concerts?  Well, that is based on point of view.  There was at most 2 shows scheduled a week at the O2…and no rehearsals when they had been doing the show without more than a week between shows and there were days off between to ensure MJ and the dancers had adequate rest.  The concerts were scheduled in ONE country at ONE venue. The only persons who can answer whether that schedule was grueling, are MJ and his dancers.  I bet they practiced more than the time in the show 5-7 days a week!  I know at least when at rehearsal or practice otherwise, you can take a break in between, but still.  Only they can say whether it was grueling or not.  DD attempted to reinforce her idea that perhaps MJ could not handle two shows a week in one country at one venue…but the truth is, only he could answer that.

This next part is really interesting admission by DD:

“During voir dire every juror candidate admitted he or she was familiar with the facts surrounding the Murray/Jackson case, and while they are instructed to put aside all prior knowledge, Jackson’s money and drug problems have been widely reported for years. That information may already be indelibly ingrained in jurors’ minds.

Yes, DD knows what she has done.  She sure ensured that people would believe the lies DD (along with many others) has helped circulate worldwide…not anything to be proud of, if you ask me… This is why journalists should be REQUIRED to report on verified facts, TRUTH, and UNBIASED reporting and allow the public to decide what they will believe or not.  Here, DD ADMITS that the things SHE has said has influence over what some people THINK worldwide, and really again, that is NOT something to be proud of when she KNEW she was spreading lies.  She’s made a career out of it!

And so they may wonder why they aren’t hearing more evidence about Jackson’s personal circumstances. The lack of such testimony could cause the jury to have reasonable doubt—the prosecution’s worst enemy.  

DD laid it thick here, by strongly suggesting that MJ’s past had anything to do with Dr. MURRAY’s behaviors that morning.  Everytime she places the focus on MJ’s past, the lies, and incredible amount of BS out there about him and his life, the focus comes off Murray, who is ON TRIAL for a man’s life….DD is attempting to cause reasonable doubt in the people’s minds.  DD is really good at enforcing the BS and spinning the truth.

Just ask the prosecutors in the Casey Anthony case.    

Like The Daily Beast on Facebook and follow us on Twitter for updates all day long.

Investigative journalist and syndicated columnist Diane Dimond has covered all manner of celebrity and pop culture stories. Her latest book is Cirque Du Salahi which uncovered the full story behind Tareq and Michaele Salahi, the so-called White House gate crashers. Dimond has written extensively about the John Edwards sex scandal for The Daily Beast and she first broke the news that King of Pop Michael Jackson was under investigation for child molestation. She is the author of the book, Be Careful Who You Love—Inside the Michael Jackson Case. She lives in New York with her husband, broadcast journalist Michael Schoen.

For inquiries, please contact The Daily Beast at editorial@thedailybeast.com.”

And whomp there it is…like I said, THERE is HER motivation and agenda.  She wants to keep as she has against MJ.  She has made quite a career at his expense and it has benefited her tremendously.  DD KNOWS she personally has influenced MANY in what they believe.  If she reported the truth, I’d say that was honorable, but SHE KNOWS she has lied about MJ, helped circulate them and ensure that it REMAINS in the minds of the public.  And that is very shameful, and dishonorable to do to someone.  She did it to MJ for over 15 years, she would do it to anyone else.  Is that the kind of reporting you want?  Well, I say, leave the drama for the movies and the story-created lines for that as well.  This is the real world we live in and we the public deserve the truth, and the people written about in the media deserve FAIR and ethical treatment in their writings.

NOW you see how DD has made a lifelong public trial on MJ?

People should be OUTRAGED with her tactics…but many still feed on it.  It is what she counts on to keep her job.

I will say it one more time.

Dr.Murray is on trial for the responsibility of HIS ACTIONS that could have resulted in a loss of a life.  MJ is the VICTIM, not the man on trial.  MJ’s past has NOTHING to do with June 25, 2009, and the judge residing over the case agrees with that enough to allow ONLY pertinent information in testimony.  DD wants to put MJ on trial, and she has put him on public trial throughout her career. Dr.Murray deserves his day in court and to have a fair trial.  DD is not the least bit interested in whether Murray is really guilty or not, and for that, she does him and his other patients a disservice too.  If this doctor is really incompetent, he stands to cause harm to anyone.

And that IS the truth.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2011/09/25/michael-jackson-conrad-murray-manslaughter-jury-won-t-see-some-key-evidence.html DD daily beast article – the foundation for MJJJP response in this post on our wordpress.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mallika-chopra/statement-by-grace-rwaram_b_223471.html  Grace Rwaramba denies media statements attributed to her.

Dr. Treacy about MJ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QG8bR87NA0 Segment on Dr.Drew- Dr. Drew cut off Dr. Treacy bc this is how the media wants to shape public’s mind.  Drew cut Dr. Treacy off when he said what Drew didn’t want to hear.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xL7zvkwdHk&feature=related Interview on 1st Anniversary June 25, 2010 (Humanitarian)
https://mjjjusticeproject.wordpress.com/2011/01/19/keeping-the-faith-speaker-dr-patrick-treacy/ 3 hour Interview on A Place In Your Heart Radio with Rev. Dr. Catherine Gross

Dr. Treacy, a vanguard for MJ wordpress article on MJJJusticeProject
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xL7zvkwdHk&feature=related Interview With Dr.Patrick Treacy about Media coverage on MJ over years
www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOcB_M_Cqpc Dr. Partick Treacy on Aphrodite Jones

transcribed in case video disappears:

Aphrodite Jones (AJ from here out):  There is going to be a smear campaign…
Dr. Patrick Treacy (Dr. PT from here out):…mmm hmmm..
AJ: …against Michael Jackson
Dr. PT: mmmhmmm..
AJ:…by the defense of Conrad Murray team.
Dr. PT:  I think it is starting out already and that is predictable.  One of the reasons I am making this interview now in NY is the fact that I think Michael Jackson’s legacy is tainted and as somebody that was a brand, I feel very sad to think that nobody really knew the Michael Jackson I knew.
AJ:  The fact that all kinds of evidence is going to be put forward to say that he was a drug addict, as a physician and his only attending physician when he lived in Ireland for all those months, you did not get approached by Michael for any kind of narcotics?
Dr. PT: Absolutely not.
AJ:  And somebody who knows and understands what the symptoms or signs would be for someone who is an addict, did you see any of that in Michael Jackson?
Dr. PT:  Absolutely not.  I can only talk about the period that I knew him in Ireland and certainly during that period, he never asked me for any sort of controlled substances. He never had any in the house that I was aware of and he certainly never acted as if he had any.. that ..in my..um humble opinion medical or otherwise.
AJ:  What was your  gut reaction when you realized Michael Jackson was really gone?
Dr. PT:  I think one of astonishment that somebody so young, 50 years of age, you know, sort of had and passed away, Iknew there had to be some reason for it.
AJ:  Is it possible that he became a drug addict and a completely different person after he left Ireland?
Dr. PT:  You know, of course that is possible, I mean I couldn’t see why it should happen, but I mean it would be inappropriate of me to not take into account every single aspect of it.
AJ:  The autopsy report says Michael Jackson was basically fine all the way around, other than something to do with his lungs that had to do with a bronchial condition…
Dr. PT:  mm hmm mmm hmm
AJ: ..um this was a person who was dancing, moving, singing ..um he had a dancer’s body, he was limber…he from all record and all accounts, was a healthy man.
Dr. PT:  Yes, by the autopsy report, I would contend to concur with that.  And certainly, during the period I knew Michael, he certainly was in good physical health, so for a 50 yr old to die out of the blue, you would almost have to be something that would have happened- the fact that he sort of had been killed by a drug in a way that made sense to me. I knew he was in good enough of health, he was not going to die of a heart attack out of the blue.
AJ:  The inconsistency of  calling 911, the idea that there are a the number of minutes that passed between the time that Michael Jackson was rendered not breathing…
Dr. PT: mmm hmmm
AJ: …according to Conrad Murray’s own mouth, to the time that the paramedics were actually called…
Dr. PT: mmm hmmm
AJ: … there was a lot of time lapse there.
Dr. PT:  Absolutely.
AJ:  What does that tell you about the standard of care?  What was this doctor really required to do if he was uhhhh…practicing medicine the way umm..we expect a doctor to have practiced medicine?
Dr. PT:  I suppose we don’t fully know the circumstances surrounding it and will probably come out in the court.
AJ:  The guard who appeared first on the scene in Michael’s bedroom, described Conrad Murray as performing CPR with one hand- is that even logical?
Dr. PT: Again, I was not there when sort of Murray was in the room trying to perform CPR but  normally uh you would need 2 hand to do it and we know from the autopsy report that at some state, somebody did do proper CPR because he had a fractured sternum and at least three other ribs fractures.  If the evidence is true, then it would seem to me to be a little unusual for a cardiologist perform cardiopulmonary recussitation in that manner. So I am sure we should prepare ourselves for rocky waters ahead.  He’s going to be “Wacko Jacko the drug freak” and you know there is a lot of people who is going to believe that…

youtube.com/watch?v=6xL7zvkwdHk&feature=relatedBE Dr. Patrick Treacy on Aphrodite Jones that was blocked in America due to upcoming trial Uploaded by MARIANNASARTE on Apr 15, 2011

Aphrodite Jones intervista il dottore Patrick Treacy, amico e medico di Michael Jackson, fra il 2006-2007, durante il suo soggiorno in Irlanda.E anche nel 2009.
Intervista per il programma TRUE CRIME with APHRODITE JONES
* Scusate l’intervista è di aprile 2011
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlzC71kAoeE Dr. Patrick Treacy from Ailesbury Clinic Dublin (+3531 2692255) http://www.ailesburyclinic.ie discusses the death of Michael Jackson on Breaskfast TV. Michael recorded five of the worlds’ best selling albums: Off the Wall (1979), Thriller (1982), Bad (1987), Dangerous (1991) and HIStory (1995). He was probably the greatest musical artist of all time. Dr. Treacy who knew Michael personally supported his memory and hoped to putt an end to those shameful attempts at character assassination.
Tom Mesereau interviews/references regarding MJ
https://mjjjusticeproject.wordpress.com/2011/02/04/tom-mesereau/ MJJJP wordpress with additional references

https://mjjjusticeproject.wordpress.com/2011/02/09/phraseology-part-2-propofol-milk-of-amnesia/MJJJP article on Propofol and how professionals have used it to “pronap”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty32L1ocVJc on Jay Leno 2005
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JHdHtDoPujU on Jay Leno 2005

This entry was posted in Deconstructing Dimond, Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s