Daniel Wohlgelernter, M.D.
Expertise: Interventional Cardiology, Clinical & Preventive Cardiology
Dr. Wohlgelernter earned his medical degree from the Yale University School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut. He completed his internship and residency in Internal Medicine, as well as a fourth year as chief medical resident, at the Yale Medical Center.
He trained in cardiology at Yale, and served on the Yale medical school faculty for two years before joining the UCLA faculty in 1985. He is Board Certified in Internal Medicine and Cardiology (Cardiovascular Disease). He is a Fellow of the American College of Cardiology.
Dr. Wohlgelernter has authored numerous medical journal articles and textbook chapters on a variety of topics pertaining to the diagnosis and treatment of heart disease. His special interests include preventive cardiology, management of lipid disorders and hypertension, noninvasive management of arrhythmias, and interventional cardiology.
Dr. Wohlgelernter was a recipient of The Thomas L. Stern, M.D. prize for excellence in teaching, awarded by the Santa Monica-UCLA Medical Center Family Practice Residency Program. He is director of the PCCU at St. John’s Hospital in Santa Monica. Dr. Wohlgelernter was listed as a Southern California “Super Doctor” in the January 2010, 2011, and 2012 issues of Los Angeles Magazine and was named one of US News and World Report’s ‘Top Doctors’ in 2012. He has also appeared on The Discovery Channel as a cardiology commentator.
Typed by Anonymous
May 7th 2009
Discussion about filing motions to have Michael Bush and Kathy Hilton deposed. I was not in here when that was going on but a reporter told me. I missed first 5 minutes. Also there is attorney argument about showing jurors a picture of a CPR machine?
KJ and Trent present. Five fans present. (later a couple more are present)
Next witness is called out of order to accommodate his schedule, then will resume with witness (the Medical Examiner) from yesterday:
Plaintiff’s Counsel (same from yesterday, not Panish, not Boyle),
Direct Examination of:
Daniel Wohgelernter (I need to get proper spelling!)
He is a Physician Specialist in Cardiology
Santa Monica: He is part of Cardiology Consultants of Santa Monica
He discusses where he received his degree/medical degrees: He lists university, including Yale
**Questions are asked to establish this witness’s expertise, experience, background, and training. His background is VERY extensive** (Many answers are given regarding his background etc., too much to type, WOW)
UCLA included, He was director of Cardiac Catheterization Dept
And other hospitals throughout Los Angeles County, several…
Including working in Coronary Care Units
Currently: Director of Post Coronary Care Unit
Holds teaching positions/credentials
Has never been suspended from any facility
Holds Board Certifications (several)
Does not practice in criminal medicine
Has received awards in field of medicine: teaching award at Santa Monica Hosp., research grant awards, etc.,
He is considered a “super doctor” in 2010, 2011, 2012, in Cardiology, a term used by a Los Angeles Magazine…
Is connected to various pharmaceutical companies
Is involved in and a reviewer in various medical journals
Approx 29 articles published, some collaborative efforts: he mentioned some like “Circulation” and he listed others
This Doctor continues to outline EXTENSIVE experiences, particularly in Cardiology…
He is now answering questions about what kinds of patients he treats, how many patients, about the frequency of his treatments/meetings with them, the treatments,
Yes he has done consultation with attorneys and on cases over the years, some he rejects based upon not seeing any merit. He has consulted, accepted the case referrals from many sides, has done depositions, and has testified in about 30 live trials, approximately.
He has always been qualified to testify to do the above
Exhibit 175-1 is displayed: an email from Paul Gongaware, yes this doctor read PG’s deposition
Reads $150,000 per month for MJ re: CM and talks about how much time, about 10 months to wind down his own practice before coming on board fulltime for mj. Yes, this is a document that this doctor considered in forming his opinion in this matter.
Exhibit 177-1: defense objection because there are personal email addresses on it so it needs to be redacted (covered over) by a black marker first… done in court, now re-displayed. To CM, cc PG, and a blind copy to Mr Seagal (not sure of spelling), from Tim Wooley an accountant at AEG: Pltff reads the email, a section that mentions “probably needs” he reads list of things plus something called an “extra-corporeal” CPR unit, (not sure of spelling), one is needed at home base and at venue base (in London, in places during tour). Doctor explains that it is an external machine that circulates blood outside the body and then back into it, used in open heart surgery (just one example of its appropriate surgical uses) for oxygenating blood. This witness says It’s a mistake to list this because no one who is not a qualified person could use this…
Additional info read: AEG contract will not cover more than one month in lieu of notice of curtailing of cessation of tour… there was more wording here but Pltff atty read it so fast… couldn’t understand fully what was being said here….
Then reads a portion about $150k, and something about insurance. ****Exhibit 168-1: An Independent Contractor agreement:(Page 120. Click here) it is effective may 1, 2009, between AEG live Prodrucer LLC, the producer and GCA Holdings LLC, (Global Cardiovascular Associates, which is CM’s company), and Doctor CM. yes, these are parties stated in this introduction of the Contract/Agreement, per this doctor witness. Defense objects…
Paragraph 2: the term of this agreement: Shall commence as of may 1 2009 and continue through end of last performance of artist unless terminated sooner under terms of this contract , … yes, this doctor witness used this in determining his conclusion in this matter
Paragraph 7: terms may be terminated as follows: immediately by producer if concert series is cancelled or postponed at any time and for any reasons, including things beyond control of producer, acts of GOD, other reasons for grounds for cancellation were listed… yes, doctor used this info in reaching his decision in this case.
Paragraph 3: the equipment will include a pulmonary resuscitation unit, CPR machine, saline, catheters, needles, gurney, mutually agreed medical equip; producer shall pay fee for qualified assistant medical person, the qualified medical assistant shall provide required assistance to CM for services as required by the doctor- (meaning they were supposed to be paying for AN ASSISTANT FOR CM TO CARE FOR MJ!!)
Yes, this doctor read CM’s curricula vitae (his professional resume): his resume/his background information.
Yes this doctor is familiar with propofol and he explains under which circumstances propofol is used in surgery, as anesthesia, etc.,
NO cardiologists do NOT administer propofol themselves.
Only trained anesthesiologists administer.
NO cardiology doctors are NOT qualified to administer propofol,
Are cardiologists fit and competent to provide medical treatment for dependency, NO not unless they are specifically qualified through specialized training for it. NO they are not fit and competent to treat severe sleeping disorders. NO CM was not qualified per his curriculum vitae resume/background.
Are all doctors, do doctors receive training on how to deal with people who ASK FOR SPECIFIC DRUGS: YES. What is the training, what are you taught, what is the general good medical practice for when patients come to you asking for specific medicines: this doctor explains why any meds should be provided, and why they should NOT, including considering the proper indication, the benefits, the potential for addiction, there is obligation for doctor to determine if it’s appropriate based upon such potential addiction, consider careful surveillance.
Does it make a difference at all if the PATIENT SAYS I ALREADY KNOW THE RISK: NO, it does not make a difference! It is up to the DOCTOR to make this determination, not have the patient dictate what he should be receiving. This doctor further explains this…
Is it unusual for patients to come looking for certain drugs: unfortunately it is not unusual.
What is the oath that a doctor takes: it’s based upon Hippocrates, the Hippocratic Oath; and he listed another oath. The oath to do the patient NO HARM.
Earlier this doctor said he did consult with Plaintiff’s attorneys on this case
Yes this doctor reviewed the case information and doctor CM’s standard of care: my opinion is that CM repeatedly violated the standards of care in treating mj. It was NOT within the appropriate standard for using propofol for example, the doctor lists why!! CM used it in a way NOT APPROVED.
The setting in which the propofol was administered is that it WAS ABSOLUTELY NOT WITHIN STANDARD OF CARE
1) CM DID NOT HAVE APPROPR CREDENTIALS IN TERMS OF TRAIINING, KNOWLEDGE
2) ADMINISTRATION OF PROPOFOL MUST BE IN ENVIRONMENT OF CONTINUOUS MONITORING OF VITALS, AND THE DOCTOR WITNESS SPECIFICALLY LISTS THE VITALS TO BE MONITORED; NEED FULL RESUSCITATION EQUIPMENT IN EVENT OF RESPIRATORY FAILURE WHICH IS A KNOWN AND EXPECTED OCCURRENCE FROM USE OF PROPOFOL.
3) APPROPRIATE TRAINED PHYSICIAN(S), RESOURCES, APPROPRIATE PERSONNEL TO ASSIST IN MONITORING AND TREATMENT OF PATIENT. NONE OF THIS WAS PRESENT.
NO, CM did NOT adequately monitor mj during the administration of propofol. The most striking departure from standard of care by cm was the fact the cm left mj alone and unattended without any medical personnel while MJ was under propofol and other sedating agents.
My opinion is that it was NOT within standard of care to administer lorazepam and other sedating agents because of lack of appropriate equip. Also, cm’s actions once he discovered mj: it was not within standard of care once CM did discover mj. Given CM’s own description of what he did: cm did not provide airway breathing support, rather he did chest compression, even when there was a pulse. BREATHING ASSISTANCE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE FIRST. The appropriate first response should have been, if not patient breathing, if he has received intravenous sedatives and medicines, is to breathe for the patient, mouth to mouth or open up the patient’s airway or use a bag to connect to patient. Instead CM’s initial response was to do CPR, this was wrong because it was not his heart that needed to be addressed, but the breathing!!!
My opinion is that CM did NOT call 911 in a timely fashion given the fact mj had respiratory arrest and eventual cardiac arrest, and he didn’t have proper equipment and personnel so 911 SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONTACTED IMMEDIATELY!!!!!!!!
My opinion is that CM was not a fit and competent doctor to provide care for mj based upon the care, he was not trained, he administered medicines/drugs/anesthesia in a wholly unsatisfactory environment, he listed other reasons.
My opinion is that his departures from standard of care WERE THE SUBSTANTIAL CAUSE OF MJ DEATH.
My opinion is that CM was NOT an appropriate choice to serve as MJ doc for the THIS IS IT TOUR. Based upon his review of CM background. No he wasn’t board certified in cardiology and not in another one listed by atty…
A CPR machine would have been more appropriate than that “extra-corporeal” (spelling not sure) machine mentioned in that email above…
A picture of a CPR machine is shown: this doctor is going to describe it and its function. This machine provides automated cardiac massage, externally, so you don’t have to have a person doing it. it is more consistent more reliable more compressions to the chest, versus a human who can get tired. Can this machine be used by one person: yes. And then another person can do airway management and admin medic and call 911 (a scenario if there are two people present). Cardio Pulmonary Resuscitation (cpr)
A defibrillator: is it like a cpr machine: no. it is a device which delivers an electric shock to the chest wall to help restore normal rhythm for a heart that has stopped breathing. Will it assist NOW to show the jury a picture, yes, per the doctor, because defense had objected to showing it earlier.
A picture is now shown of a vest on a dummy, the vest is attached to a pump that is apply constant pressure to the chest, similar to what a human does with his hand compression. Another pump is now shown, a more elaborate pump. Doctor describes this one…
Do you have an opinion, was a cardiologist was appropriate choice for mj. A conventional or general cardiologist was NOT trained in substance abuse, addiction medicine, sleep disorders is NOT an appropriate candidate for MJ’s THIS IS IT TOUR.
They are competent to treat heart attack, angina, blocked arteries, things typically treated in procedure in hospital. Cardiologist is trained to diagnose issues of the heart, blood vessels, angina, hypertension, heart disease, high cholesterol… lists others. Is a general or conventional cardiologist fit for MJ on this is it. NO MJ had NO history of heart disease so a cardiologist would NOT BE APPROPRIATE, it is not what mj needed. An internist would NOT have been appropriate either for MJ’s conditions listed here….
Based upon your review of the case, should AEG have known MJ’smedical history. DEFENSE OBJECTION. Now judge puts jurors on a break. OUTSIDE PRESENCE OF JURY: judge hears argument about this from counsel. Defense counsel cites a case law. Defense atty Cahan is speaking… then Panish responds, and Cahan interrupts again, and Panish asks her to stop interrupting as Panish did NOT interrupt her while she was talking, which is true… now they all take a break. …
OUTSIDE PRESENCE OF JURORS: The attorneys and Judge resume: Panish and the attorneys are back trying to determine how to properly phrase the LAST QUESTION that Pltff’s counsel was trying to ask right before the break. This is going on outside the presence of the jury. Atty Cahan, Panish and the Pltff’s atty doing the current questioning are involved in this discussion. They are discussing the emails, and newspaper articles; I can barely hear Putnam chiming in on this discussion… defense counsel does not want the witness “opining” about AEG’s knowledge, or basically she does not want this witness giving an opinion about what AEG’s knowledge should or should not have been… that’s the gist of it, it seems…
11:23, now with the witness resuming the stand….
Pltff’s atty resumes, pltff’s attorney has the doctor review his answers that he previously gave regarding CM NOT being competently trained. What exactly is it about MJ that made CM not competent. Doc says mj has history of substance use issues, sleep disorders. He explains HOW he knows this because atty cahan asked. Were there people from AEG that you received this information from. Yes, the doctor witness says he got information from PG, his deposition, which he reviewed.
The PG deposition testified about his involvement in the DANGEROUS TOUR IN 1993 AND ABOUT PROBLEMS THAT MJ HAD ON THAT TOUR WITH SUSPSECTED SUBST ABUSE, ADDICTION, PROBLEMS WITH PRESCRIPTION MEDS. PG ALSO TESTIFIED ABOUT HIS RELATIONSHIP WITH DOC FINKELSTEIN, DISCUSSIONS ABOUT MJ PROBS, AND THIS DOC WAS A SPECIALIST. Per PG testimony, were there other physicians treating during Dangerous tour. Yes, an anesthesiologist, providing sleeping assistance, medicines, this is knowledge this doc got from PG deposition. Yes, also there was a news article where this doc gleaned his information.
Is there a manner in which CM dealt with AEG that influenced your decision in terms of his monetary demands. Yes, cm was willing to leave his practices and become dependent upon AEG for his income during tour (I paraphrased this… because he said it so fast)
My initial understanding was that CM wanted 5 million, a very large number, and exceeds standard income for cardiologist. Then there was 150k issue raised.
They read a termination clause from the contract/agreement: #2: reviewing what was said above about cancellation. Why did this part influence you? This doctor witness said it influenced me because it meant that cm was entirely dependent on the continuation of the tour for his income/livelihood…. And that part about CM leaving his practice in 10 days, why did that influence you.
This doctor witness said well it speaks to cm being in a position to be entirely dependent on AEG and MJ. To shut down his practice, he would not have ongoing sources of income. What happens to a patient if a cardio closes his practice in 10 days. Defense objection. So atty asks what would happen if HE closed his practice. He said he has associates but it would be psychologically damaging to patients, and disruptive to their lives and care.
The cm request for a CPR machine influenced my opinion because it is AN UNCONVENTIONAL request for a patient with no heart disease or history of cardiac request, it is just not necessary for this patient. He listed the reasons…
What was wrong with what AEG did: cm was credentialed in internal med, cardio, interventional cardio, not trained in substance abuse, dependency/addiction, sleep disorder, MJ had no heart disease but did have the things just listed. No, CM was not the right doctor for this patient. MJ did not have respiratory disease, or need for ???
The termination clause: what position did this put CM in? defense objects. Sustained.
Why do you think the termination clause poses a problem for CM: because CM was wholly dependent upon AEG. He had to maintain mj to perform to maintain the contract and it poses a CONFLICT OF INTEREST in terms of being a medical doctor caring for a patient, but having the strain of worrying about, being bound by that contract. This is a summary, not word for word…. !!!
Defense objection!!!!!!!! SUSTAINED AND THE ANSWER IS STRICKEN. A HUGE ARGUMENT STARTED HERE!!!!!!!!!!!
WOULD THAT PROVISION, WHAT EFFECT WOULD THAT TERMINATION PROVISION HAVE ON A DOCTOR: ok now they go to side-bar because Judge directs counsel to approach side-bar.
In summary doctor: do you believe that cm was a competent and fit physic for aeg to hire: NO
He gives his pay rate for testifying. Plus hourly rate. $450 an hour to prepare for this testimony
Now it’s defense counsel doing cross-examination: defense atty cahan
Who is paying you to testify. Pltff’s counsel is paying him
Yes he has worked for that Pltff’s counsel 3 times previously
She is asking how much time has he devoted to expert witness testifying: about 20% of his income and 15% for … ?????
Has been retained as expert wit 400 times, 200 times deposed
For Pltff attys he has been retained more ??? he gave a percentage that I couldn’t catch
Over past 30 years I have made over 1million, yes….
You said that CM was not competent and fit to be mj’s doctor, and she recites his answers previously given
Any other basis other than his resume/curricula vitae: no
Do you know if defense knew about CM training and obligations before this case, no I don’t know what they did and didn’t know
Doctor recites what he understood about Dangerous tour, PG’s relationship with MJ back then and PG’s relationship with that tour doctor mentioned earlier, and referring to a newspaper article from 2008 that reported concerns/suspicions about mj still having substance abuse back then
Cahan says let’s take that apart: yes I reviewed doc finkelstein’ deposition.
Were you aware that at the end of dangerous tour, mj announced he was going to rehab
So the public as a whole knew that mj had a substance abuse problems as result of this announcement, not just PG: yes from back in 1993
No, doc finkelstein was not an addiction expert during 1993 dangerous tour, was later though
Another doc provided medic for sleep problems: this doc was mentioned in doc finkelstein deposition, because cahan asked this doc how he knew this. But I couldn’t catch the other doc’s name…
Yes, there are things from PG depo that I am relying on for my testimony: yes, that PG was aware of mj subst dependency and use issues during the 1993 Dangerous Tour.
So cahan gives a copy of Doc finkelstein’s deposition to the witness to reference: there are some objections by pltff… then there is argument. Can the atty’s stipulate that the information that this doc referred to IS somewhere in there…. they didn’t. (the other doctor is Dr. Forecast)
Judge says lets proceed, and let the witness try to find it…
Can you remember if doc finkelstein specifically testified about sleeping disorders: yes, there are specific references.
Doctor points to page 45: he reads from the deposition. question to doc finkelstein, was mj suffering from anything other than dehydration, I thought opiate, dependency, which opiates, did you understand what I was trying to ask. Try to answer it: doc finkelstein mj had Demerol and something else I couldn’t catch. Page 46: ….mj had high tolerance for medicines given…. Cahan’s objection was about no mention of insomnia and nowhere here did this doctor witness find it yet where doc finkelstein mentioned it, so the judge sustained it and the answer given earlier is stricken where this witness said it was there. so judge said to attys to review the depo., and find it.
…. LUNCH BREAK….
After lunch: aeg defense atty resumes cross-examination:
She asks doc W if he had a chance to review the deposition of doc Finkelstein, yes he did, and no, there was no mention of insomnia, sleep disorder in doc finkelstein’s deposition.
Aeg defense atty proceeds to review with doc W his previous testimony re: why CONRAD MURRAY was not appropriate doc for MJ. And doc W gives brief distinction between addiction and dependency… ??
Page 91: this page is not specifically about MJ but about opiates/opiods
Yes my expertise is in cardiology, not addiction, not substance abuse, not in internal medicine but did have some training??
From 2006 to june 2009 Conrad Murray was doing some sort of caring for MJ, this was aeg atty’s question, it wasn’t a clear question per this doctor witness.
You reviewed records re: Conrad Murray treating MJ. Yes I saw ways in which Conrad Murray was treating MJ other than as an internal med doc. Like heart and cardiac tests, other tests… ???
Is it your opinion that Conrad Murray was a competent internal medicine doc based upon your review of records: yes
Conrad Murray was board certified in internal medicine. aeg atty is asking questions about his certification in internal medicine, as an internist… aeg atty asks general questions about what Conrad Murray could do as an internal med doctor
Exhibit is displayed: the contract/agreement they reviewed earlier. Aeg atty asks doctor witness to read where and how Conrad Murray is certified…
To paragraph 1: GCA and Conrad Murray are mentioned, hereby agree that Conrad Murray will provide general medical care throughout the duration of the concert terms…. Yes it is my opinion that he was to treat as a general doctor and NOT for dependency, NOT for insomnia. aeg atty listed some other things…
Did you read info that MJ was receiving treatment from other doctors from 2006 to 2009: yes.
Do you know if they were treating MJ for psychological issues, drug dependency, sleep problems: no he didn’t know.
So it’s possible that MJ was getting treatment from other doctors for those: it’s possible, I am not aware.
Aeg atty wants to discuss further the contract: who drafted it: I don’t know, she asked other questions, and he said I have no knowledge of any of what she asked in terms of number of pages, when finalized, who was involved in drafting it, etc.
Aeg atty refers to CONRAD MURRAY, GCA: was it signed by him, yes signed. But over by AEG’s signature section, no not signed. Then doctor witness reads language about what the “undersigned” is agreeing to… and there is a section for MJ, and aeg atty recites what that paragraph about agreement is, did MJ sign it: no. do you know if this contract was ever finalized and in effect: no, I don’t know.
Do you know which provisions were requested by CONRAD MURRAY, or by AEG, or by MJ : doctor witness said no, in don’t know to all of these questions.
Do you know who chose Conrad Murray: I know MJ requested him but the ultimate decision was made by AEG LIVE. Aeg atty asks doctor witness what’s your basis for that answer: I don’t recall where I saw it but the doctor witness refers to PG and his discussions re: physicians and MJ relationship with CONRAD MURRAY, doctor witness says it’s based upon PG indicating this information.
Aeg atty reads a section of contract: at the artist’s request, the producer: AEG has agreed to retain Conrad Murray per request of artist… does this affect your opinion about who made the decision: no it doesn’t change my opinion, I already conceded that MJ made the request.
Aeg atty reads another section: producer (aeg), shall remit payment of 150k to GCA (Conrad Murray), and she reads the timeframe when Conrad Murray would get paid. What do you make of this: it’s on the 15th day of month or five days after ???? something I couldn’t hear…
Do you know if Conrad Murray was ever paid by aeg: no I don’t know. would it change your opinion at all if he was paid by MJ: no it would not change my opinion.
Let’s go to section, the termination section: paragraph 7.2: you were asked about this. You said it was relevant to you re: Conrad Murray contract being subject to cancellation by the producer (aeg). There is other information in this section re: Conrad Murray right? yes. Aeg atty reads that also the artist can terminate Conrad Murray. does that affect your opinion at all : no.
You were asked about ??? section 7.4 says that the contract can be terminated immediately if Conrad Murray does not obtain appropriate….???? She read what Conrad Murray was required to obtain in terms of his licensing, do you understand this: it was re: appropriate licensing and other requirements per law, that if Conrad Murray didn’t have this, then the contract could/would be cancelled.
Aeg atty reads re: termination could result if Conrad Murray didn’t provide legal proof/documentation to aeg that he is licensed in the USA to practice medicine. What does this mean? The doctor witness explains his understanding that basically Conrad Murray needed to prove his medical practice license…
Aeg atty reads about further documentation re: CM having license to practice medicine in UK. What does this mean: the doctor witness says that it speaks for itself that if Conrad Murray does NOT have the documentation to practice in England, then he couldn’t fulfill contract.
Paragraph 9: artist’s content: the artist must approve. Without the artist’s express approval of this agreement… (there is more language), neither party can exercise the terms of this contract, benefit from it, and there is some other language. What does this mean: it means that MJ must approve of this agreement and that otherwise without MJ approval it basically can’t be a valid contract?… it can’t be something else aeg atty said, implied… ???
Independent contractor: do you know who that is. I can’t offer legal opinion on that.
Pltff atty objects to further questioning about this doctor’s opinion on what supervising a legal contractor means. Aeg atty moves on…
Now about the medical equipment portion language in contract: aeg atty mentions cpr equipment. are you aware of any mention anywhere else in contract… were you aware that the contract was subject to change? No I was not aware. do you agree that most other people not in medical field would not understand some of this (medical equipment) language: yes I agree.
Let’s talk about cpr machine: how much does it cost: I have no idea. Aeg atty says about 15k: yes.
How much does a defibrillator machine costs: aeg atty says some dollar amount…
How common are cpr machines. Very uncommon but I have used them in training….
Have you ever seen a non-doctor’s office with a cpr machine: no
Yes, it’s ATYPICAL (meaning NOT typical) to request a cpr machine
No, it’s not atypical to request a defibrillator machine, meaning it IS common to request a defib machine.
Did you read tim wooley’s deposition: yes part of it.
Did you read the part where he mentions cpr machine: yes.
Yes, It would change my opinion if TW had said a defib machine instead of a cpr machine.
Do you know who cathy jory is: no. aeg atty explains she is atty who was part of drafting this contract, so you don’t know her, no.
Do you know of doc steinberg: yes. Yes I knew he is an expert, yes that he gave deposition, no I didn’t read it. so you don’t know if what was meant to be said (in the contract) was “defib” instead of cpr machine when mentioned… no I don’t know.
You mentioned in testimony re: Conrad Murray departures/deviations from standards of care: yes. And it led to CM’s conviction: yes.
Aeg atty reviews this doctor witness’s previous testimony from earlier today (see above). She starts listing what this doctor witness cited as Conrad Murray’s deviations, the effects of CM deviations for MJ, all testimony mentioned above: yes.
What did you review to come to these opinions
Police report based on interview of Conrad Murray, depositions of witnesses. Other records/info was mentioned…
Did you read the transcripts of police interview of CM. Yes. Was that the primary basis of your opinion. Doctor witness gives an answer that indicates it wasn’t the complete basis….
Is it your understanding that only Conrad Murray and MJ were present in late evening of the 24th and early morning of 25th, per Conrad Murray interview: yes.
You reviewed the expert witness testimony: yes. And some of the experts’ testimonies were also based upon Conrad Murray’s interview: yes.
And you expressed opinion on Conrad Murray leaving his practice: yes….
What is a concierge physician, we asked you about that in your deposition: this doctor witness defines it. and he says he knows of a friend who has been doing it for 15 years. concierge physicians primarily rely on taking care of one patient or of one family? The doctor witness describes his friend as a concierge physician. Yes, I agree that just because a person is a concierge physician doesn’t mean they can’t be a good doctor.
And you know about Conrad Murray asking for 5 million dollars to care for MJ: yes.
Do you know about when Conrad Murray was asked to be doctor for MJ, it seems that doctor witness didn’t have exact timing… I think he said no.
If it was back in december 2008 would it change your opinion: no
Aeg atty asks about Conrad Murray closing down his practice and different timeframes and under which timeframes would it have affected this doctor witness’s opinion of Conrad Murray. sometimes this doctor witness said yes about changing his opinion based upon timeframe scenarios mentioned by aeg atty.
Atty aeg atty now gets into training of this doctor witness. Were you ever trained to administer propofol: no
How often do cardiologist doctors administer propofol: never. I agree that cardiologist doctors don’t do this. Aeg atty starts rattling off questions fast about who ever does this (administer propofol)….
Have you ever administered propofol: no. never. In over 30 years, no, never, not for any reasons… not for diagnostic, not for other cardiology, certainly not for insomnia, not in home, no never written prescription. A bunch of No No No No answers…
No never heard of a doctor giving written prescription for propofol. No never heard of any doctor recommending or giving prescription for propofol. Does your office keep propofol: no. do you know of any cardiologist, internist, primary care doctor, or of practitioners administering propofol: no no no. so only anesthesiologists, yes. In proper facility: yes. With propofol equipment.
no, an anesthesiologist has not administered propofol in home, for insomnia, no never. Not before this case. No, before this case, I never heard of anyone receiving propofol in a home for any reason.
Aeg atty asks about his training students at UCLA: areas of cardiology, cardiac catheterization, and some other areas stated by aeg atty, and doctor witness acknowledges types of training he gives to students… aeg atty asks him what he does train and what he was trained in himself…
Based on your experience, are most doctors trained to apply cpr: yes. How about cardiologists, primary care physicians: yes. So it’s reasonable to expect a cardiologist, an internist could administer cpr: yes. A primary care doctor can administer cpr, is that reasonable: yes
Aeg atty brings up Hippocratic oath and that you talked about patient not dictating the medical care
That it’s the doctor who ultimately makes decision: yes. And one expectation is that the patient will be forthcoming about his medical history, yes; yes doctors are dependent upon their patients being honest so that they can properly care for them, yes. Yes the doctor is dependent upon patients telling doctor what meds they are on… and other things along this line. If a patient is not forthcoming and something bad happens, who is responsible for that? pltff atty objects. A patient needs to fully disclose about his medications… it’s relevant for treatment, I agree….
You were asked about your assessment of Conrad Murray’s qualification: you based some of that on Conrad Murray’s curricula vitae: yes…
(note: sometimes aeg atty is talking so fast I couldn’t catch it all)
Exhibit displayed re: Conrad Murray’s curricula vitae: and reviews where Conrad Murray went to school. Describes where he was a med student; aeg atty points out Conrad Murray internship, residency training, she points out that these are respectable institutions; respectable places to do cardiology fellowship… so based on Conrad Murray credentials, yes I agree that Conrad Murray appears to be competent as a cardiologist.
(((even though earlier in testimony, AND in CM trial it WAS established that CM was NOT “board certified” as a cardiologist).
Yes, CM fit as cardiologist. Nothing about these credentials suggests that CM was unqualified to practice medicine, cardiology, internal medicine, or as primary care physician: yes I agree.
Do you see anything that suggests he had training for sleep disorders, insomnia: no. is there anything in his training that would indicate that he would treat MJ with propofol: no. nothing that would indicate he would do it in home: no. no, I don’t see anything that suggests that Conrad Murray would administer propofol anywhere else, to anyone else…. Aside from him doing it with MJ. did you see anything that suggests that Conrad Murray caused another patient to die from administering medicines: no. no, I didn’t see any proof of Conrad Murray having been sued for malpractice. She asks other questions along these lines to suggest that Conrad Murray’s resume would NOT give any clues or suggestions that Conrad Murray would have done what he did….
Do you know what a rock doctor (tour doctor is) . doctor witness defines his understanding.
Is there anything in Conrad Murray’s resume to suggest that he was qualified to be a tour or “rock” doctor: no.
Pltff atty resumes: re-direct examination
Going back to the contract: pltff’s atty points out the parties involved in the contract again.
Atty recites parts: at the artist’s request: The PRODUCER HAS AGREED TO HIRE/RETAIN Conrad Murray. Defense atty objects, PLtff atty says that defense atty opened this door. So Pltff atty says WHO IS RETAINING, WHO IS THE PRODUCER! Doctor witness says I understand producer to be AEG. Who is going to provide the medical equip: AEG Live would be providing the med equip. Pltff’s atty recites the equipment briefly. CONRAD MURRAY is a doctor so you assume that he would know what a cpr machine vs what a defib machine is: YES HE SHOULD KNOW. Then cites the “extra-corporeal” machine, and that that language was later changed in contract to say CPR machine, there are defense objections.
Pltff’s atty cites Tim Wooley email to CONRAD MURRAY: from TW. Subject is the concert tour: yes. Conrad Murray it is a pleasure meeting you on the phone. TW is talking about Contracting entity GCA, your contact info was: info from email is recited, gives tele number of CM, which is not stated in court; your mode of travel. And who does it say pays for professional costs including transportation? Aeg. Then it says need the home based, venue based “extra-corporeal” cpr unit. Later it says cpr machine. Is there a difference between those two: yes. Conrad Murray would know: yes. Do you know if AEG ever saw CONRAD MURRAY’s curricula vitae.
Did PG say he did anything at all to check him out, in fact it says they didn’t do anything to check him out- this doctor witness confirms all this!!!! Why is this important. doctor witness explains the obligation for AEG to do this, cites the request for use of cpr machine, MJ’s conditions, other reasons that would justify additional investigation into Conrad Murray by AEG….
Now back to “concierge” doctor: was this arrangement for Conrad Murray DIFFERENT FROM A CONCIERGE DOCTOR: yes. Let’s go back to the contract: where it lists responsibilities: perform services reasonably requested BY THE PRODUCER. So your friend, as concierge physician, who was he working for: the family. So here if Conrad Murray is providing services to the producer, is that different from a concierge physician: yes because my friend was obligated to serve the family. Here Conrad Murray was responsible to a third party, that being AEG live.
What would happen if the tour got postponed or cancelled: Conrad Murray is out of a job. Yes that entered into my consideration. You said that you didn’t know that aeg knew Conrad Murray would give propofol: yes, i said I didn’t know. So if they didn’t know this, why is it that you said they STILL should not have hired him: well Conrad Murray, a cardiologist, who would be willing to abandon that practice to provide service only for an individual, to take care of a patient who doesn’t need the services he was trained in. also it required to leave abruptly and abandon his patients, for a patient who didn’t require his specific skills. And Conrad Murray knew there was a contractual understanding that the contract could end at ANY TIME. also, that he requested a cpr machine, life support machines, what was this doctor PLANNING TO DO, all this points to red flags.
Would the fact the MJ requested him, does that matter. No, but what IS a red flag in terms of MJ is that MJ has a history of substance abuse and addiction, and he specifically is asking for a doctor who HAS NO TRAINING IN THIS AREA. WHY WOULD THESE TWO WANT EACH OTHER.
Now Plttf’s atty points to email from Randy Phillips: RP is saying have you read these (news article) stories. RP says that the reporter has done a lot of research: one article is dated Dec 15, 2008. Now Pltff’s atty scrolls into email to what the stories are: the ranch has been sold, the monkey moved out. The moonwalker…. (All this is being recited from RP’s email about news articles he read….)
Is there any truth that MJ is staging a comeback… I can’t hear all of what atty is reading. Now on to next page. MJ has problems with lower back, alcohol and pain killers for years. now Pltff’s atty asks doctor witness, would you consider that story in your opinion as to AEG’s knowledge about MJ: yes. Is there a non-invasive way that someone can be tested for drugs: yes. Have you heard of areas where people can find out if someone still has a drug problem. Yes. Based on this article, does it seem that RP is aware of MJ issues: yes. Did RP have to absolutely know that MJ had a problem to warrant more investigation: no, because given the suspicions, discussions, MJ history, those factors alone mean that they could have and should have done further investigations (on Conrad Murray).
Now showing Conrad Murray curricula vitae (resume): we don’t know whether AEG has seen it, Pltff’s atty says. Do you know when Conrad Murray composed this: no.
Now reviewing Conrad Murray’s resume again…. They go section by section of his training, fellowships, degrees etc., all about interventional and cardiology medicine… interventional cardiology, so between 1998 and 2006, Conrad Murray did nothing but interventional cardiology and cardiology: yes.
Now p.m. break. During break I could hear attys talking inside courtroom with no jurors, but I was outside to clean up these notes, so I could not hear what they were saying…
Resumes after 3p.m. break:
Pltff’s atty continues with re-direct examination:
Pltff’s atty says that aeg defense attys earlier asked you about the written contract signed: Conrad Murray signed it. do you know if it was ever even presented to MJ for signing: no I have no knowledge of that.
An exhibit is mentioned and is about to be displayed: but first, attys go to side-bar about this exhibit.
Resume at 03:27p.m.
Pltff’s atty continues: Doctor we have been asking about the unsigned agreement. Assume that Conrad Murray was operating under an agreement with AEG to provide services for MJ. And assume that terms of that contract began on may 1 2009. So Conrad Murray under that contract, did he operate within perimeters of standard of care: no.
You were asked about whether there was any evidence before Conrad Murray was hired that MJ suffered from insomnia: yes, I was asked. So Pltff’s atty pulls up records of Conrad Murray: Pltff’s atty refers to an exhibit. Date of this Conrad Murray record is 9-26-08: now exhibit is displayed. It is a report from Conrad Murray about MJ and it says patient complains of insomnia, he has no evidence of mood changes, no signs of depression, in general great health, reads other notes about MJ health… and the plan was to treat him with Restoril (Temazepam), (I think pltff’s atty read the word Restoril/Ristoril) Do you know if aeg even asked Conrad Murray what MJ’s problems were: no, not to my knowledge.
Assume that, in Conrad Murray’s reliance on contract with aeg, he sent a letter to all his patients in june 2009 saying I am not going to be your doctor, going on special trip… would that have put pressure on Conrad Murray, what is your opinion. Yes I have an opinion about Conrad Murray getting MJ on stage: yes Conrad Murray would have pressures to get MJ to perform…. (this is paraphrased) Doctor said more about his opinion on pressure on CM…
**NOTE: at times, aeg defense atty was hard to hear and hard to understand. Some of her questions were just confusing… sorry L
aeg atty: did you review any info/contract/something? re: between MJ and aeg… no.
Aeg atty cites something that says it was MJ’s expense to retain Conrad Murray.
Aeg atty cites section that says something about the contract language issues/confusion
Did anyone tell you what ms. Jory said about her testimony about this agreement: no
Atty aeg atty is asking some stuff I just can’t understand!!! L
Aeg atty cites language about atty jory and her deposition, and if this doctor witness knows anything about this… it was not clear to me what aeg atty is saying…????
aeg atty says: Hypothetically, assume that there is a typo (typing error) there in the contract where it says “producer” and it should have said “artist,” would that change your opinion: yes. And doctor explains why…. essentially that it would be between MJ and Conrad Murray, not so much between Conrad Murray and aeg, if in fact there was some sort of typing error in the contract in a certain section that atty aeg atty tried to point out??
aeg atty is asking questions about some confusion between contracts use of the word defibrillator machine and cpr machine… and asks this doctor witness about his opinion changes, if any, if the use of the machine words were changed in certain sections. She is implying that someone who drafted this contract was using the words as meaning the same thing when they are NOT the same things…. That is what she seems to be aiming at…
aeg atty raises issue again about this doctor witness friend being a concierge doctor.
Now to section 7.2: re: producer’s rights to cancel Conrad Murray contract… looking at the header for section 7, it says terms “may” be terminated under the following conditions, so it was not that they were required to terminate….
Now raises issues of MJ issues during tours: she raises Dangerous tour. Doctor witness says he is only referring to Dangerous.
Now re: news story from December 2008: aeg atty asks if this was part of his basis for saying MJ had issues with pain killers. *for some reason, another “doctor,” Doc tohmme is mentioned at this point, not Conrad Murray. But it was so mirky what aeg atty said!!!!!!
Fair to say that there have been a lot of stories about MJ over the years: some true, some false: yes.
Are you aware of MJ family denying any news as of 2007 stories saying that MJ had ongoing drug prob: no I’m not.
There is a brief pause, side-bar… about something aeg atty wants to show in court
Aeg atty continues: she says: Assume that in late 2007 that certain Jackson family members issued a statement denying MJ substance abuse, so would that change your opinion about assumptions about knowledge of (aeg, RP, PG, etc., ???) based upon the 2008 news article (mentioned above): no.
Is it appropriate for aeg to ask certain questions about MJ health, per HIPPA law, patient/doctor confidentiality & privacy: no. and if Conrad Murray answered, would that have been appropriate: no it would not have been appropriate.
—————————-***NOW PLTFF ATTY: Couldn’t AEG have gotten an authorization from MJ and/or Conrad Murray to get health info on MJ if they wanted to: yes. To your knowledge, did they: no. to your knowledge did AEG do anything to obtain medical information from CONRAD MURRAY about MJ: no. (it seems that the issue is AEG did not ask CONRAD MURRAY to get medical info on MJ…)
(note: this is *not* testimony, just an observation after hearing all of this back and forth on what AEG did or didn’t do’ knew or didn’t know: some people can say that by AEG not asking CONRAD MURRAY to get detailed medical info on MJ, for example about his medicines used for sleeping and pain, this might “work in aeg’s favor” to paint a picture that they DID NOT KNOW what Michael was taking… but that doesn’t fly because AEG DID KNOW, based upon their OWN executives’ depositions, their own past relationships with MJ, like PG during tours with MJ, and what they put in those emails. So even though we know that the AEG executives ALREADY knew that Michael needed sleeping and pain medicines during previous tours, it was STILL THEIR responsibility when hiring CONRAD MURRAY to have CONRAD MURRAY get medical information on MJ.
For one thing, it’s part of what THEY wrote in the contract about the doctor being able to provide the right care for MJ– how can a doctor provide the right care if that doctor doesn’t get adequate medical info, and if that doctor doesn’t even meet the qualifications to provide specific care needed by MJ (as clearly pointed out by today’s expert witness), and it seems that AEG didn’t push CONRAD MURRAY to get the info, and AEG didn’t do a thorough background check on CONRAD MURRAY, as pointed out by today’s expert witness.
AEG didn’t CARE about having CONRAD MURRAY get certain medical info because: 1) they knew about it already, at least in terms of MJ needing sleep and pain medicine, 2) AEG knew and ensured that they would get profit/millions, no matter what happened to MJ, and 3) they probably did NOT WANT an appropriately competent doctor for Michael’s specific needs, aeg would not want a doctor who WOULD ACTUALLY CARE AND ASK THE RIGHT QUESTIONS… They hired a doctor who DID NOT CARE, a doctor who would only care to get his money, no matter what it meant he had to do (or not do) to MJ to get it…
Court ends… but Panish requests a side-bar. They finished it at 4:07pm. To resume tomorrow at 10a.m