NOVEMBER 4TH 2010,

                                          SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

                                                          FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

                            DEPARTMENT 107                     HON. MICHAEL E. PASTOR, JUDGE

                            THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF                 )
                            CALIFORNIA,                                               )
                                                                                                  )
                                                                PLAINTIFF,             )
                                                                                                  )
                                                    VS.                                       )   NO. SA073164-01
                                                                                                  )
                            CONRAD ROBERT MURRAY,                           )
                                                                                                  )
                                                              DEFENDANT.               )
                                                                                                  )
                            ___________________________________)

                                              REPORTER’S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

                                                                  NOVEMBER 4, 2010

                            APPEARANCES:

                            FOR THE PEOPLE:         STEVE COOLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY
                                                                    BY:   DAVID WALGREN, DEPUTY
                                                                    210 WEST TEMPLE STREET
                                                                    LOS ANGELES, CA 90012

                            FOR THE DEFENDANT:   THE LAW FIRM OF JOSEPH H. LOW IV
                                                                    BY:   JOSEPH H. LOW IV, ESQ.
                                                                    ONE WORLD TRADE CENTER, SUITE 2320
                                                                    LONG BEACH, CA 90831

                            REPORTED BY:               MAVIS THEODOROU, CSR #2812
                                                                    OFFICIAL REPORTER

                                                                                                                                              1

                      1   CASE NO.:                                   SA073164-01

                      2   CASE NAME:                                 PEOPLE VS. CONRAD MURRAY

                      3   LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA       THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2010

                      4   DEPARTMENT 107                         HON. MICHAEL E. PASTOR, JUDGE

                      5   REPORTER:                                   MAVIS THEODOROU, CSR #2812

                      6   TIME:                                           1:45 P.M.

                      7   APPEARANCES:

                      8                           DEFENDANT CONRAD ROBERT MURRAY, NOT PRESENT,

                      9                           REPRESENTED BY JOSEPH H. LOW IV, ESQ.;

                    10                           PEOPLE REPRESENTED BY DAVID WALGREN, DEPUTY

                    11                           DISTRICT ATTORNEY, FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE

                    12                           STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

                    13

                    14                           (AN IN CAMERA HEARING, PAGES 2-3, HAS

                    15                           BEEN PREPARED UNDER SEPARATE COVER,

                    16                           BY ORDER OF THE COURT; SAID TRANSCRIPT

                    17                           HAS BEEN LODGED WITH THE CLERK IN A

                    18                           SEALED ENVELOPE MARKED CONFIDENTIAL – MAY

                    19                           NOT BE EXAMINED WITHOUT A COURT ORDER.)

                    20

                    21

                    22

                    23

                    24

                    25

                    26

                    27

                    28

                                                                                                                                              4

                      1   CASE NO.:                                   SA073164-01

                      2   CASE NAME:                                 PEOPLE VS. CONRAD MURRAY

                      3   LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA       THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2010

                      4   DEPARTMENT 107                         HON. MICHAEL E. PASTOR, JUDGE

                      5   REPORTER:                                   MAVIS THEODOROU, CSR #2812

                      6   TIME:                                           12:15 P.M.

                      7   APPEARANCES:

                      8                           DEFENDANT CONRAD ROBERY MURRAY, NOT

                      9                           PRESENT; JOSEPH H. LOW IV, ESQ.,

                    10                           REPRESENTING DEFENDANT (VIA SPEAKER

                    11                           PHONE); PEOPLE REPRESENTED BY DAVID

                    12                           WALGREN, DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY, FOR

                    13                           THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

                    14

                    15                           (FURTHER PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN

                    16                           CAMERA AND WERE NOT ORDERED SEALED

                    17                           BY THE COURT:)

                    18

                    19               THE COURT:   SINCE MR. LOW WAS HERE, AND I THOUGHT

                    20   MR. WALGREN WOULD BE IN THE BUILDING, I THOUGHT THIS

                    21   WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO GET A LITTLE UPDATE ON ANY

                    22   DISCOVERY ISSUES, SO I DON’T KNOW WHO WANTS TO SPEAK

                    23   FIRST.

                    24               MR. WALGREN:   I COULD SPEAK IN REGARD TO THE

                    25   TESTING ISSUE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP THE LAST CHAMBERS

                    26   MEETING, YOUR HONOR.

                    27                           IN THE INTERIM, MYSELF AND DEBRA BRAZIL MET

                    28   WITH THE TOXICOLOGIST FROM THE CORONER’S LAB.   FIRST

                                                                                                                                              5

                      1   THING I WANT TO SAY IS THE TESTING, IF IT IS EVENTUALLY

                      2   DONE BY THE CORONER’S OFFICE, IS A LITTLE MORE

                      3   COMPLICATED AND INVOLVED THAN I THINK MR. FLANAGAN

                      4   UNDERSTOOD.   THE CORONER’S OFFICE DOES HAVE SOME CONCERNS

                      5   ABOUT THE NATURE OF THIS TESTING.

                      6                           MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT IS NOT SOMETHING THEY

                      7   NORMALLY DO, NOR DO THEY NECESSARILY HAVE A PARTICULAR

                      8   PROTOCOL FOR.   WE DID MEET WITH THEM.   THEY EXPRESSED

                      9   SOME OF THIS TO US.

                    10                           I ADVISED THEM IT IS BETTER FOR EVERYONE —

                    11   COURT, DEFENSE AND PEOPLE — IF THEY WROTE THIS UP IN A

                    12   DOCUMENT SO WE COULD BE REAL CLEAR AND ON THE SAME PAGE

                    13   BEFORE WE TAKE THE NEXT STEP FORWARD.   THE TWO

                    14   TOXICOLOGISTS, JAIME LINTEMOOT AND HER SUPERVISOR, DAN

                    15   ANDERSON, AGREED TO DO THAT.   I KNOW THEY ARE WORKING ON

                    16   IT.   THEY DON’T HAVE A FINAL DRAFT FOR ME TODAY.

                    17                           I KNOW THEY GOT CALLED OUT, I BELIEVE, TO A

                    18   BODY DIG OUT IN SANTA CLARITA THAT WAS UNEXPECTED.   BUT

                    19   IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING IT IS BASICALLY DONE, AND I SHOULD

                    20   HAVE IT TOMORROW; AT THE LATEST, MONDAY.

                    21                           WHAT I EXPECT THAT TO FULLY LAY OUT IS THE

                    22   LIMITATIONS OF THE TESTING, THEIR CONCERNS ON THE

                    23   TESTING, THE RISKS THAT ALL PARTIES SHOULD KNOW REGARDING

                    24   THE TESTING, AND KIND OF THE PROTOCOL THEY WOULD FOLLOW

                    25   IF THEY WERE TO DO THE TESTING.   SO I WAS WAITING FOR

                    26   THAT DOCUMENT.   ONCE I RECEIVE THAT, I WAS GOING TO GIVE

                    27   A COPY TO THE DEFENSE AND THE COURT, THEN EXPECT THAT WE

                    28   COULD ALL MEET AND DISCUSS WHERE WE GO FROM THERE.   THAT

                                                                                                                                              6

                      1   IS WHERE WE ARE AT.

                      2               THE COURT:   MR. FLANAGAN EXPRESSED THE REAL

                      3   CONCERNS ABOUT TIMING, AND HE INDICATED THIS MATTER IS

                      4   DESERVING OF IMMEDIATE ATTENTION BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL

                      5   FOR DETERIORATION OF THE EVIDENCE, AS I UNDERSTOOD IT.

                      6   IT WAS AT THAT POINT THAT MR. WALGREN AND I BOTH

                      7   INDICATED WE NEED TO GET A HANDLE ON EXACTLY WHAT IS

                      8   INVOLVED.

                      9                           SO YOU ARE INDICATING, MR. WALGREN, IT IS NOT

                    10   ALL THAT EASY TO DISCUSS?

                    11               MR. WALGREN:   NO, AND THAT IS WHY I THOUGHT IT BEST

                    12   IT BE IN A WRITTEN DOCUMENT WE COULD ALL REVIEW AND HAVE

                    13   THE SAME INFORMATION TO EVALUATE HOW WE GO FORWARD FROM

                    14   HERE.

                    15               THE COURT:   IS THIS THE FIRST YOU ARE HEARING ABOUT

                    16   THIS, MR. LOW?

                    17               MR. LOW:   IT IS THE FIRST I’M HEARING OF THE

                    18   UPDATE.   IT SOUNDS LIKE SOUND REASONING BY MR. WALGREN.

                    19   I DON’T THINK WE HAVE ANY ISSUES ON GETTING THAT DONE.

                    20               THE COURT:   DO YOU FEEL PRETTY COMFORTABLE YOU WILL

                    21   HAVE IT BY MONDAY?

                    22               MR. WALGREN:   YES.   YES.   I ESTIMATE TOMORROW.

                    23               THE COURT:   IS THAT THE 8TH?

                    24               MR. LOW:   THAT IS THE 8TH.

                    25               THE COURT:   THE 8TH OF NOVEMBER 2010.

                    26               MR. WALGREN:   I MAY HAVE IT TOMORROW.   I JUST DON’T

                    27   KNOW BECAUSE, LIKE I SAID, THEY ARE NOT EVEN IN THE

                    28   OFFICE RIGHT NOW.

                                                                                                                                              7

                      1               THE COURT:   WE PROCEED ON THAT BASIS AND, IN ALL

                      2   LIKELIHOOD, WE WILL HAVE TO HAVE A PHONE CONVERSATION

                      3   ABOUT IT.

                      4                           WITH REGARD TO DISCOVERY, WAS THERE ANYTHING

                      5   ELSE THAT WAS ON THE TABLE?

                      6               MR. WALGREN:   I DON’T KNOW.   I MEAN, I HAVE SPOKEN

                      7   TO MR. CHERNOFF INFORMALLY A FEW ITEMS.   I’VE BEEN IN

                      8   COMMUNICATION WITH HIM.   I DON’T THINK THAT WAS ANYTHING

                      9   THAT WAS DISCUSSED BACK HERE.

                    10               MR. LOW:   I’M UNAWARE OF ANYTHING NOW THAT REQUIRES

                    11   YOUR ATTENTION, SIR.

                    12               MR. WALGREN:   MR. CHERNOFF E-MAILED ME AS RECENTLY

                    13   AS TODAY ON A COUPLE THINGS WE ARE DISCUSSING.   I DON’T

                    14   THINK THERE IS ANYTHING ELSE THAT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED

                    15   AS FAR AS THAT.

                    16               THE COURT:   SHOULD WE ACTUALLY SET A TELEPHONE

                    17   CONFERENCE TIME SOMETIME NEXT WEEK?

                    18               MR. WALGREN:   YES, I THINK SO.

                    19               THE COURT:   I WANT THE DEFENSE TO REVIEW THIS

                    20   DOCUMENTATION AND TALK TO THE PEOPLE ABOUT IT, BUT I

                    21   DON’T WANT TO LOSE TIME IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT IS

                    22   COMPELLING.

                    23               MR. WALGREN:   I’LL JUST SAY THE PEOPLE DON’T

                    24   CONCEDE ANYTHING IN REGARD TO MR. FLANAGAN’S STATED

                    25   CONCERNS ON TIMING.

                    26                           PEOPLE’S POSITION IS THIS REQUEST COULD HAVE

                    27   BEEN MADE BY THE DEFENSE MUCH SOONER.   SO HAVING SAID

                    28   THAT, I’LL JUST SAY THAT WE ARE TALKING.   THERE IS GOING

                                                                                                                                              8

                      1   TO BE NO PROBLEM.   THERE IS NO PROBLEM OF ANY DEGRADATION

                      2   IN THE MATTER OF SOME DAYS.   I’VE SPOKEN DIRECTLY TO THE

                      3   CORONER’S OFFICE ABOUT IT, BUT PROPOFOL IS A UNIQUE

                      4   PROPERTY THAT DOES DEGRADE.

                      5               MR. LOW:   BEING A FORMER CHEMIST, I USED TO BE A

                      6   CANCER RESEARCHER, I CAN AGREE WITH MR. WALGREN THAT WE

                      7   ARE TALKING DAYS HERE, NOT MONTHS.   SO I THINK WE CAN

                      8   CERTAINLY WORK WITH MR. WALGREN BECAUSE YOU WANT TO GET

                      9   DOCUMENTATION THAT WILL PROVIDE FOR AN ACCURATE TEST SO

                    10   THAT IT DOESN’T BECOME A DIFFERENT ISSUE LATER.

                    11                           I THINK TAKING THE TIME TO MAKE SURE WE ALL

                    12   UNDERSTAND WHAT THAT PROTOCOL WOULD ENTAIL AND WHO IS

                    13   BEST SUITED TO CONDUCT THAT PROTOCOL IS A GOOD IDEA.   I

                    14   THINK WE SHOULD DO IT FROM THE DEFENSE END AS WELL SO WE

                    15   ALL HAVE TO COME TO AGREEMENT ON IT.   AND I THINK TAKING

                    16   TIME TO REFLECT UPON THAT IS IMPORTANT.   SO I THINK THAT

                    17   I CAN AGREE WITH MR. WALGREN.   WE CAN GET THAT DONE IN A

                    18   NUMBER OF DAYS.

                    19               THE COURT:   I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THIS, ESPECIALLY

                    20   SINCE THE PARTIES HAVE INDICATED THAT THE TESTING ISSUE,

                    21   WHILE IT IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT, IS NOT RELEVANT TO ANY

                    22   PRELIMINARY HEARING, FROM WHAT I GATHER FROM WHAT I

                    23   HEARD.

                    24               MR. WALGREN:   NO, NOR DO THE PEOPLE NECESSARILY

                    25   CONCEDE IT IS RELEVANT TO ANYTHING OR IMPORTANT.

                    26               THE COURT:   I UNDERSTAND THAT POSITION.   I’M JUST

                    27   WONDERING, NEVERTHELESS, IF I SHOULD SET A DATE AND TIME

                    28   WHEN WE SPEAK OVER THE PHONE TO GET AN UPDATE.

                                                                                                                                              9

                      1               MR. LOW:   I THINK THAT IS A GOOD IDEA SINCE I’D

                      2   LIKE TO SAY THAT WE HAVE A DATE IN THE CASE TO HAVE A

                      3   CONVERSATION.

                      4               THE COURT:   WE CAN EITHER DO IT BEFORE THIS COMING

                      5   WEDNESDAY, WHICH IS THE 10TH, OR AFTER THE 15TH OF

                      6   NOVEMBER.   SO EITHER THE BEGINNING OR MIDDLE OF NEXT

                      7   WEEK, AND I REALIZE YOU MAY HAVE PERSONAL AND

                      8   PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITIES, OR THE BEGINNING OR MIDDLE

                      9   OF THE WEEK THEREAFTER.   WE HAVE THE VETERAN’S DAY

                    10   HOLIDAY ON THE 11TH, WHICH IS THURSDAY, AND I’LL BE OFF

                    11   THURSDAY, FRIDAY, AND MONDAY.

                    12                           SO MY FEELING IS WE SHOULD HAVE A STATUS

                    13   REPORT AS QUICKLY AS REASONABLY POSSIBLE.

                    14               MR. LOW:   WOULD THIS BE ALL RIGHT.   WHAT IF WE

                    15   TENTATIVELY MAKE IT FOR WEDNESDAY.

                    16               MR. WALGREN:   WEDNESDAY, THE —

                    17               MR. LOW:   SHOULD BE THE 10TH.

                    18               MR. WALGREN:   OKAY.

                    19               MR. LOW:   THAT WOULD GIVE MY TEAM, IF I COULD SAY

                    20   THAT, AND MR. WALGREN AND HIS TEAM A CHANCE IF WE CAN’T

                    21   GET IT WORKED OUT DOCUMENT-WISE, THEN MAYBE WE DON’T HAVE

                    22   TO SPEND THE COURT’S TIME.   I’LL TRY TO KEEP YOU FROM

                    23   DOING A LOT OF DISCOVERY REFEREE STUFF.   IF WE CAN’T FIX

                    24   IT UP, THE LAWYERS ON MY SIDE HAVE A DATE WHERE THEY CAN

                    25   TALK TO YOU IF THEY NEED TO.

                    26               THE COURT:   I DON’T HAVE A PROBLEM.   I JUST

                    27   REMEMBERED THAT WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON, I HAVE A SEMINAR ALL

                    28   AFTERNOON.   I COULD BE AVAILABLE AT NOON.   I HAVE A

                                                                                                                                              10

                      1   JUDGES’ MEETING AT NOON, AND I CAN CERTAINLY WORK AROUND

                      2   THAT IF YOU WANTED TO CALL IN AND WE COULD HAVE A

                      3   CONFERENCE CALL AT 12:00 NOON ON WEDNESDAY, IF YOU WANT,

                      4   OR EARLIER IN THE DAY.

                      5               MR. LOW:   EARLIER IS GOOD.   TUESDAY EVENING IS

                      6   GOOD.

                      7               MR. WALGREN:   I CAN DO WHATEVER WORKS FOR EVERYONE.

                      8   I MAY NOT BE IN THE BUILDING, BUT I COULD CERTAINLY CALL

                      9   IN.   SO WHATEVER DAY WORKS WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT

                    10   I’LL PROBABLY HAVE TO TELEPHONE IT IN IF IT IS NEXT WEEK.

                    11               THE COURT:   YOU TELL ME IF YOU THINK IT IS BETTER

                    12   TO CALENDAR THIS FOR TUESDAY OR WEDNESDAY OF NEXT WEEK OR

                    13   THE FOLLOWING TUESDAY.

                    14               MR. WALGREN:   LET ME ASK MR. LOW.   DO YOU WANT TO

                    15   BE IN RECEIPT OF THE DOCUMENT FOR A FEW DAYS BEFORE YOU

                    16   MEET, OR DO YOU WANT TO MEET AS SOON AS POSSIBLE WITH THE

                    17   UNDERSTANDING YOU MAY HAVE ONLY HAD THE DOCUMENT FOR A

                    18   FEW MINUTES EVEN?

                    19               MR. LOW:   I PREFER TO HAVE IT FOR A FEW DAYS.   I

                    20   LIKE TO BE PREPARED, ESPECIALLY ON SCIENTIFIC ISSUES.   I

                    21   THINK MY TEAM SHOULD BE AS WELL.   IT MIGHT GO FASTER THAT

                    22   WAY, IF YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN.

                    23               THE COURT:   THE PEOPLE MAY NOT BE GETTING IT UNTIL

                    24   MONDAY AND THIS IS ALWAYS A POTENTIAL OF A LITTLE BIT OF

                    25   A PROBLEM.

                    26               MR. LOW:   LET’S WAIT THEN.   THAT IS FINE.

                    27               THE COURT:   DO YOU WANT TO WAIT UNTIL THE FOLLOWING

                    28   TUESDAY?

                                                                                                                                              11

                      1               MR. WALGREN:   YES.   I COULD DO THE FOLLOWING MONDAY

                      2   OR TUESDAY.

                      3               THE COURT:   I WON’T BE HERE THAT MONDAY, THE 15TH.

                      4   THIS IS IMPORTANT, AND I WANT EVERYBODY TO BE UP TO SPEED

                      5   BUT I ALSO WANT TO GET IT MOVING.

                      6               MR. WALGREN:   THE FOLLOWING TUESDAY IS FINE, IF

                      7   THAT IS FINE WITH THE DEFENSE.

                      8               MR. LOW:   WE WILL AGREE TO THAT.

                      9               THE COURT:   THE 16TH.   HOW ABOUT AT NOON, WE HAVE A

                    10   CONFERENCE CALL?

                    11               MR. LOW:   YES, SIR.

                    12               THE COURT:   I DON’T KNOW WHO CAN SET IT UP.

                    13               MR. LOW:   WE HAVE PHONE EQUIPMENT TO DO THAT.   I’M

                    14   SURE YOU DO AS WELL.   WE DO HAVE IT IF YOU NEED US TO DO

                    15   THAT.   WHAT WE WILL DO IS CALL MR. WALGREN, GET HIM ON

                    16   THE LINE, ON A SECURE LINE, AND CALL YOUR OFFICE OR CALL

                    17   YOUR CHAMBERS.

                    18               THE COURT:   WE WILL HAVE IT REPORTED.   I WANT

                    19   EVERYBODY TO KNOW THAT UP FRONT THAT WE ARE NOT

                    20   EAVESDROPPING, AND I’LL INDICATE THAT AT THE TIME BECAUSE

                    21   I WANT THIS ON THE RECORD.   IT IS, OBVIOUSLY, IMPORTANT.

                    22               MR. LOW:   DO YOU HAVE A SPEAKER PHONE HERE?

                    23               THE COURT:   YES.

                    24               MR. LOW:   GREAT.

                    25               THE COURT:   WOULD YOU ANTICIPATE MR. FLANAGAN AND

                    26   MR. CHERNOFF ALSO WILL BE ON THE PHONE?

                    27               MR. LOW:   I SHOULD SAY YES, BUT PROBABLY NOT.

                    28               THE COURT:   OKAY.   THEN CAN YOU MAKE ANY

                                                                                                                                              12

                      1   REPRESENTATION ABOUT THEIR —

                      2               MR. LOW:   I’LL BE PREPARED.   WHOEVER IS ON THE

                      3   PHONE WILL BE PREPARED TO ANSWER AND HAVE A DECISION.   IT

                      4   WON’T BE SOME FOOL LIKE ME WHO SAYS, “I DON’T KNOW.”   LET

                      5   ME ASK SOMEBODY.

                      6               THE COURT:   I HOPE BETWEEN NOW AND THEN THE

                      7   DEFENSE AND THE PROSECUTION TEAM WILL BE IN CONTACT SO WE

                      8   DON’T HAVE ANY SURPRISES.

                      9               MR. WALGREN:   CERTAINLY, YES.   THEY WILL HAVE THE

                    10   DOCUMENT WELL AHEAD OF THAT DATE.   THEN WHETHER WE HAVE

                    11   AN AGREEMENT ON ANYTHING IS ANOTHER QUESTION.   THEY WILL

                    12   CERTAINLY HAVE THE DOCUMENT, HOPEFULLY BY MONDAY.

                    13               THE COURT:   AND, HOPEFULLY, HAVE TALKED ABOUT IT SO

                    14   WE DON’T HAVE A LINGERING DISCUSSION.

                    15

                    16                           (FURTHER PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD

                    17                           IN CHAMBERS, OUTSIDE THE PRESENCE

                    18                           OF DEFENDANT.)

                    19

                    20                           (THE IN CAMERA HEARING, PAGES 13-41,

                    21                           HAS BEEN PREPARED UNDER SEPARATE COVER,

                    22                           BY ORDER OF THE COURT; SAID TRANSCRIPT

                    23                           HAS BEEN LODGED WITH THE CLERK IN A

                    24                           SEALED ENVELOPE MARKED CONFIDENTIAL – MAY

                    25                           NOT BE EXAMINED WITHOUT A COURT ORDER.)

                    26

                    27

                    28

                                                                                                                                              73

                      1                           (EX PARTE PROCEEDINGS WERE ADJOURNED.)

                      2

                      3

                      4

                      5

                      6

                      7

                      8

                      9

                    10

                    11

                    12

                    13

                    14

                    15

                    16

                    17

                    18

                    19

                    20

                    21

                    22

                    23

                    24

                    25

                    26

                    27

                    28