P V CM MAY 2/11

THIS SUMMARY IS TAKEN FROM ACTUAL COURT TRANSCRIPTS, 100% ACCURATE!

COURT NOTES TAKEN DIRECTLY FROM COURT TRANSCRIPTS FROM TODAY, TUESDAY MAY 2, 2011. HEARING COMMENCED AT 8.40 A.M.. PARTIES PRESENT: CONRAD MURRAY REPRESENTED BY ED CHERNOFF. J FLANAGAN. AND NAREG GOURJIAN.

FOR THE PEOPLE: DAVID WALGREN AND DEBORAH BRAZIL:

MURRAY WAS LATE FOR COURT DO TO TRAFFIC.

JUDGE MENTIONS YESTERDAY AT 5.49 P.M., HE GOT A DEFENSE MOTION EMAILED. IT WAS DUE AT 4:00 P.M.. JUDGE WAITING UP ALL NIGHT FOR ANY RESPONSE BY PEOPLE.

ASKED IF WALGREN HAD ANY WRITTEN RESPONSE. HE REPLIED NO.

THERE WAS A PAUSE UNTIL MURRAY ARRIVED.

JUDGE SAID GOOD MORNING TO EVERYONE, THEN ASKED DEFENSE WHY THE MOTION WAS NOT FILED BY 4:00 P.M. PREVIOUS DAY. GOURJIAN REPLIED: NO REASON, YOUR HONOR.

CHERNOFF REPLIED: IT’S NOT MY FAULT; NOT HIS FAULT. DR MURRAY WAS IN TRANSIT IN THE AIR, FROM HOUSTON TO VEGAS, THEN LA. BY TIME CHERNOFF WAS ABLE TO SPEAK TO MURRAY THEN RELAY TO GOURJIAN, IT WAS LATE, SO NOT GOURJIAN’S FAULT EITHER.

JUDGE SAID HE HAD GIVEN DEFENSE ALL WEEKEND TO FILE THE MOTION AND THAT PROSECUTION HAD TO FILE RESPONSE BY 6:00 P.M., SUNDAY.

WALGREN SAID HE HAD NO WRITTEN RESPONSE BUT WILL ADDRESS IT ORALLY NOW. HE DID NOT RECEIVE THE MOTION UNTIL 6:00 P.M. BY WHICH TIME HE HAD A RESCHEDULED COMMITMENT, SO DID NOT HAVE TIME TO READ AND RESPOND.

JUDGE ASKED IF PEOPLE HAD ANY SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS TO THE MOTION?

WALGREN SAID HE HAD NO OBJECTION, BUT HAD SAID ALL ALONG THIS WOULD HAPPEN. THERE IS MUCH THEY COULD DISPUTE IN THE MOTION, BUT DOESN’T THINK IT IS NECESSARY AT THIS TIME. DO NOT OBJECT TO CONTINUANCE, BUT AS OPPOSED TO DATES AND SCHEDULING FROM THIS DAY.

JUDGE SAID HE WILL NOT BE GUIDED BY TRYING TO “PLAY CATCH UP” AND UNDERSTANDS THE NATURE OF FUNDAMENTAL FAIRNESS AND RIGHTS ON THE PART OF DR. MURRAY AND OF THE PEOPLE TO HAVE A FAIR TRAIL AND THAT IS HIS OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION. HE IS AWARE OF EFFICIENCY AND COSTS IN THIS TERRIBLE TIME, BUT FAIRNESS IS MORE IMPORTANT. WITH THAT IN MIND, JUDGE SAID HE WOULD NOT DISPUTE THE CONTINUANCE BUT DOES DISPUTE SOME OF THE FACTUAL ASSERTIONS. “SO WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?”

THE DEFENSE IS ASKING THAT COURT CONTINUE THE PRESENTATION OF ANY OPENING STATEMENTS AND EVIDENCE UNTIL MAY 23, 2011. JURORS ARE COMING BACK MAY 4, 2011, FOR THE TRIAL TO BEGIN MAY 9, 2011. HE IS TERRIBLY CONCERNED ABOUT PICKING MAY 23, 2011, AS START DATE WHERE THERE IS SO MUCH ON THE TABLE. FLANAGAN RAISED THE ISSUE OF CONTACTING EXISTING AND POTENTIALLY CONTACTING OTHERS TO ADDRESS THE DISCOVERY PROVIDED BY THE PEOPLE. GOUJIAN STRESSED FOLLOW-UP OF ANY OUTSTANDING SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM FOR RAW FOOTAGE FROM SONY. JUDGE DOES NOT KNOW WHERE THE DEFENSE HAVE COME UP WITH THE DATE OF MAY 23, 2011, TO BEGIN TRIAL AND WHETHER IT IS REALISTIC. HE DOES NOT WANT TO KEEP REVISITING THE READINESS AND PREPARATION ISSUES; WANTS TO WAIT UNTIL EVERYONE IS GENUINELY READY! SO IS THIS REALISTIC BEGINNING DATE? WHETHER THEY SHOULD HAVE ALL THEIR DUCKS LINED UP BEFORE THERE IS AN ANNOUNCEMENT OF READINESS, VACATE MAY 4, 2011, JURY SELECTION AND LET COUNSEL CHARACTERIZE A REASONABLE START DATE FOR COURT TO RESTART JURY SELECTION AND KNOW WHERE THEY ARE GOING AT THAT TIME.

SO JUDGE REPEATED HE WANTS TO STRESS HIS FUNDAMENTAL CONSIDERATION OF FAIRNESS FOR DR. MURRAY, SO MURRAY HAS EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL, MEANING COUNSEL IS WILLING AND ABLE TO BEGIN, AND ARE COMFORTABLE IN DOING IT WITH FULL AND FAIR DISCOVERY, AND FULL AND FAIR DISCOVERY TO THE PEOPLE ALSO.

CHERNOFF SAYS THE MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE IS FOR THOSE ISSUES. HE HAS BEEN FIGURING OUT HOW TO MAINTAIN THE WORK HE HAS ALREADY DONE SO FAR IN SELECTING THIS JURY BUT STILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO PREPARE AND ADDRESS THE PROSECUTION’S NEW WITNESSES, NEW EXPERTS. HE SAID HE ADDRESSED ALL THAT AND SPOKE TO HIS EXPERTS. HE NEEDS AN EXPERT TO ADDRESS SOME PHARMACOKINETICS AND LIVER ISSUES, HE MAY BE ABLE TO USE ONE OF THE EXPERTS HE HAS. THESE ARE THINGS HE WILL RESOLVE IN NEXT TWO WEEKS! LAST OR THE ONE BEFORE COURT HEARING, THE COURT NOTED IT WAS ACTUALLY A402 WHEN A LOT OF EVIDENCE HAS BEEN FORBIDDEN BY THE COURT.

CHERNOFF TOLD THE JUDGE; THE JUDGE HAS NOTED THE TRIAL MAY NOT TAKE AS LONG AS JUDGE THOUGHT. CHERNOFF THOUGHT IF THE TRIAL WONT BE THAT LONG, THEN DEFENSE COULD HAVE TWO WEEKS CONTINUANCE MEANING TWO WEEKS DELAY IN BEGINNING THE TRIAL, SO USING THAT TIME TO PREPARE. THEREFORE, THOUGHT TWO WEEKS FOR JURY TO WAIT TO HEAR OPENING STATEMENTS WOULD BE O.K.. THAT IS WHAT DEFENSE MOTION TO CONTINUE ADDRESSED. CHENOFF STAND BY THAT AND WILL BE READY BY MAY 23, 2011.

IF TRIAL STARTS MAY 9, 2011, THERE IS NO WAY DEFENSE CAN GET THE EXPERTS, ARRANGE FOR EXPERTS, PREPARE EXPERTS FOR TRIAL. THEN IT WOULD LEAD THEM INTO THE MIDDLE OF THE TRIAL AND LEFT TO DO THIS WORK. CHERNOFF UNDERSTAND HE HAS EVENINGS AND EARLY MORNINGS AND THAT STUFF WHILE THEY ARE IN TRIAL. BUT, THEY WILL BE IN TRIAL, WONT BE ABLE TO DO THAT, SO WANTS TO MOVE FOR JUST TWO WEEKS. IT WILL GIVE DEFENSE TIME TO FOCUS ON JUST THAT. IF THEY ARE IN THE MIDDLE OF MOTIONS, TRIALS, AND ETC., THEN THEY WILL BE INFFECTIVE.

JUDGE ASKED CHERNOFF WHEN WILL WALGREN GET IT FROM THEM?

CHERNOFF SAYS HE WILL COMPLY WITH ANY GOOD FAITH DISCOVERY RULE THE COURT IMPOSES (This is my NOTE: GOD, I have heard that so many times. Judge needs to give the Defense a boot up the back side. He is letting them get away with so much. The Defense have challenged the Judge like this too many times). AS SOON AS HE GETS REPORTS, HE WILL GIVE THEM TO WALGREN. UNTIL THEN, THEY CAN’T. AS SOON AS HE GETS THEM, HE WILL GIVE THEM TO PROSECUTION. HE WILL TURN IT OVER NEXT DAY. NOW DEFENSE HAS TO GET NEW EXPERT AND TELLS COURT HE HAS ALREADY ADDRESSED THAT LAST SESSION. HE NEEDS TO GET NEW EXPERT TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE THINGS AS SOON AS THEY HAVE THEM, ROSECUTION WILL KNOW ABOUT IT. AS SOON AS CHERNOFF GETS IT, PROSECUTION WILL HAVE IT.

JUDGE ASKS WHAT WALGREN THINKS ABOUT THESE STATEMENTS BY CHERNOFF?

WALGREN TELLS JUDGE AS MUCH AS HE WANTS TO START THE CASE ASAP, WALGREN IS CONCERNED HE WILL FIND HIMSELF IN THE SAME POSITION AGAIN AFTER TWO WEEKS. DEFENSE ARE NOW GETTING ALL NEW EXPERTS. HOW LONG WILL THAT TAKE? NO ONE KNOWS AND WHETHER THAT WILL RAISE MORE 402 RULES AND IT SEEMS LIKE DEFENSE IS IN THIS “ARTIFICIAL RACE” WHEN HE KNEW ALL ALONG THEY ARE NOT READY TO PROCEED! TWO WEEKS IS NOT ENOUGH, AT WHICH POINT THEY WILL BE BACK TO THIS POINT.

PEOPLE ARE READY TO GO TO TRAIL, WANT THE TRAIL, BUT BECAUSE THEY ARE GETTING NEW EXPERTS AND EXPERT’S REPORTS, WALGREN WANTS TIME TO LOOK INTO THOSE REPORTS, SO ITS BEST TO HAVE EVERYONE READY BEFORE SETTING A DATE. BUT PEOPLE ARE READY, THERE ARE JUST UNKNOWN 402 ISSUES; THE UNKNOWN DISCOVERY ISSUES. “THERE IS A LOT OF UNKNOWN.” IT RAISES A LOT OF CONCERN WHETHER IT WILL BE READY TO GO.

JUDGE ASK CHERNOFF TO RESPOND.

CHERNOFF SAID PROSECUTION SHOULD HAVE BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT THAT WHEN THEY DECIDED TO GIVE THE NEW DISCOVERY TO THE DEFENSE AT THE LAST MINUTE, AND THAT WALGREN WASN’T APPARENTLY CONCERNED THEN! IF THEY ARE WORRIED WHETHER WE WILL BE READY IN TWO WEEKS, THEN THERE IS NO WORRY. WE WILL BE READY IF YOU ALLOW US THE TWO WEEKS.

JUDGE TELLS CHERNOFF HE WILL GET THAT TIME BUT SUGGESTS IN THE STONGEST TERMS: RE-EVALUATE THE ISSUES OF READINESS AND ANNOUNCE READY ONLY WHEN ALL DISCOVERY HAS BEEN COMPLETED AND ALL MOTIONS ADDRESSED IN LIMINE. IF THAT MEANS LETTING GO OF JURORS AND RESCHEDULING LATER THEN MAY 23, 2011, WHEN WE HAVE THAT POSTURE, THAT IS PREFERABLE.

THAT IS WHY JUDGE WANTED MURRAY IN COURT TODAY. MURRAY HAS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT RIGHTS. E HAS A CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL. THAT IS THE OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION. HE HAS A RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL, AS WELL, BUT THAT IS DEFINED, STATUTORILY DEFINED IN CALIFORNIA, AND RIGHT TO EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE OF COUNSEL, TO BOTH CALIFORNIA AND USA. I CAN ONLY TELL AFTER EVERY THING IS READY JUDGE DOES NOT LIKE IDEA OF STARTING THEN STOPPING. IF DEFENSE IS TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE THIS COURT, THEN COURT WOULD BE IN DOING AN ABSOLUTE “BANG UP” BY BOTH PARTIES.

CHERNOFF SAYS THEY ARE WAIVING RIGHTS TO SPEEDY TRAIL AND WHATEVER COURT DECIDES THEY WILL AGREE. OF COURSE, THEY ARE WORRIED ABOUT THE JUDICIAL ECONOMY AND DR. MURRAY HAS SPENT A LOT OF MONEY TOO.

JUDGE SAYS: “ABSOLUTELY.”

CHERNOFF WANTS TO “CRAFT” OUT A SOLUTION WHICH WOULD ALLOW FOR BOTH EFFECTIVE ASSISTANCE AND JUDICIAL ECONOMY TO PREVAIL.

JUDGE SAYS THIS COURT AND FLOOR JUDGES ARE NOT IN THE HABIT OF INVITING CONTINUANCE BECAUSE OF THE PRESSURE OF CASELOAD. BUT, MUST REEVALUATE; IS VERY LEARLY AT PICKING TWO WEEKS TO BE IN SAME SITUATION, “DO YOU AGREE WALGREN?”

WALGREN AGREES.

JUDGE HAS HAD THIS THOUGHT FOR SOME TIME. SO, THE DEFENSE IS ENTITLED TO CONTINUANCE. IT IS NOT OPPOSED BY THE PEOPLE. JURORS HAVE MADE SACRIFICES, BUT JUSTICE TRUMPS THAT. JUDGE IS TRYING TO RESCHEDULE OTHER CASES, HAS A CAPITAL CASE, HAS THIRD TRIAL IN AUGUST, COUNSEL IN THAT CASE IS NOT PREPARED TO RESCHEDULE, SO I AM LOOKING AT JULY OR SEPTEMBER. ASKS IF WALGREN WILL BE READY.

WALGREN WANTS TO CONFER WITH, WANTS RECESS.

JUDGE AGREES TO RECESS BUT IN NOT IN-MINDFUL OR DR. MURRAY’S CONSIDERABLE FINANCIALLY, TIME WISE AND EMOTIONAL WISE, AND PRESSURE WISE, THIS IS SIGNIFICANT FOR DR. MURRAY AND FOR THE FAMILY OF MR. JACKSON.

RECESS!!!!!!!!!

JUDGE SAYS MR. BENSON CONTACTED HIM AND COUNSEL WANTS TO DISCUSS IN CHAMBERS, BUT JUDGE THINKS IT BEST TO DISCUSS IN OPEN COURT.

CHERNOFF AGREES TO DATE OF SEPTEMBER 7, 2011, FOR PREQUALIFICATION.

JUDGE HAS CASE ON A MUST TO BASIS. IT IS A THIRD TRIAL ON A PARTICULAR CASE WHICH IS SET FOR JULY 27, 2011, IT WOULD LAST THROUGH MIDDLE OF SEPTEMBER, WHICH I WILL ADVANCE, WHAT ABOUT IN JUNE OR JULY? IS THAT REALISTIC CHERNOFF?

CHERNOFF SAYS JULY IS HIS MONTH TO BE WITH HIS 14 YEAR OLD. WAS EXPECTING THE CASE TO BE OVER BY THEN. HAS NOT SEEN HIS KID IN A WHILE BECAUSE OF THIS CASE

JUDGE SAYS “WE ALL HAVE LIVES.” ASKS IF THEY START IN JUNE, IS THAT REALISTIC IN TERMS OF DISCOVERY?

WALGREN THINKS THAT IS NOT REALISTIC, IT RUNS THE SAME RISK AGAIN, WHICH WE WANT TO AVOID.

CHERNOFF AGREES THAT IS TOO SOON. IT’S A TWO-MONTH TRIAL. IF PREQUALIFICATION IS IN JUNE, WE HAVE A DEAD WEEK; IT WILL EAT UP JULY.

JUDGE SAYS OK, BUT DOES NOT AGREE IT WILL BE A TWO-MONTH TRIAL AT THIS JUNCTURE, BUT DOES NOT KNOW WHAT WILL HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE!

IF DEFENSE AND PROSECUTION ARE OF THE OPINION SEPTEMBER 9, 2011, IS REALISTIC, THEN THE JUDGE CONCURS! AND GENUINELY BELIEVES ALL EVIDENTIARY MATTERS WILL BE RESOLVED.

WALGENS SUGGEST SEPTEMBER 7, 2011, THEN THEY HAVE 7/8/9 CONSECUTIVE DAYS FOR THREE GROUPS OF PROSPECTIVE JURORS.

JUDGE SAYS JURY SERVICE WILL PREFER THURSDAY AND FRIDAY. NOT SURE IF THEY HAVE WHOLE WEEK TO REVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE EITHER.

(They discussed jury selection days for a while).

CHERNOFF AGREED WITH DATE. MURRAY REPLIED: “THIS IS FAIR, YOUR HONOR.”

JUDGE DOES NOT WANT TO BE ANY “HESITANCY.” ASKED IF MURRAY DISCUSSED WITH HIS COUNSEL? MURRAY REPLIED: “YES, YOUR HONOR.”

JUDGE TELLS MURRAY, HE IS ENTITLED TO SPEEDY TRAIL AND THAT THE TRIAL WAS SUPPOSED TO BEGIN MARCH 24, 2011, WHICH WAS WITH JURY SELECTION?

MURRAY REPLIED “YES, YOUR HONOR.”

JUDGE CONFIRMED WITH MURRAY HE GIVE UP HIS RIGHTS TO SPEEDY TRIAL.

MURRAY REPLIES: “I DO.”

JUDGE SAYS, YOU ARE GIVING UP THIS RIGHT BECAUSE YOU BELIEVE IT’S IN YOUR BEST INTEREST?

MURRAY REPLIES: “I BELIEVE IT IS IN THE BEST INTEREST OF ALL PARTIES INVOLVED.”

JUDGE SAYS HE IS LESS CONCERNED ABOUT THE PEOPLE THEN ABOUT MURRAY, ASKS MURRAY: IT’S SO YOUR ATTORNEYS

CAN HAVE THE CASE FULLY PREPARED?

MURRAY REPLIES “YES”

JUDGE ASK MURRAY, YOU GIVE UP YOUR RIGHT UNTIL SEPTEMBER 8, 2011?

MURRAY REPLIES: “YES, YOUR HONOR.”

JUDGE REPEATS: YOU SPECIFICALLY AGREE THAT FOR PURPOSE OF SPEEDY TRAIL WILL COMMENCE ON DAY OF JURY SELECTION AND IT MAY TAKE TIME TO GET TO OPENING STATEMENT?

MURRAY REPLIES “YES, YOUR HONOR.”

JUDGE THANKS MURRAY AND ASKS IF ALL COUNSEL JOIN IN THE WAIVER?

CHERNOFF: YES

FLANAGAN: YES

GOURJIAN: YES

JUDGE ASKS IF PEOPLE AGREE? IT IS IMPORTANT EVERYONE AGREES.

WALGREN AGREES.

JUDGE THANKS THEM ALL.

THERE IS AN EXPRESS AND EXPLICIT, KNOWING AND UNDERSTANDING, FREE AND VOLUNTARY WAIVER BY DR. MURRAY OF THE AFOREMENTIONED RIGHT TO A SPEEDY JURY TRIAL.

JUDGE WILL LET ALL PREVIOUS JURORS KNOW TO VACATE. APPEARANCE DATE FOR MAY 4, 2011. WILL THANK THEM FOR THEIR WILLINGNESS TO SERVE, BUT THEY ARE NO LONGER REQUIRED (BLAH BLAH BLAH). WILL SEND THEM A PERSONAL LETTER. THE QUESTIONNAIRES WHICH WERE FILLED OUT WILL BE DESTROYED, PARTIES ADVISED TO DO THE SAME, AND ANY RANDOM LIST THEY HAVE, SO ORDERED!

ALL PARTIES ACKNOWLEDGE THE ORDER.

JUDGE IS THINKING OF FURTHER PROCEEDING TO BE AT LEAST A MONTH AWAY FOR DISCOVERY, MAYBE JUNE.

CHERNOFF SAYS MAY 30, 2011.

JUDGE SAYS ITS BEEN A ROUGH FIVE MONTHS NOW, SETS IT FOR FRIDAY, JUNE 3, 2011.

ALL COUNSEL AGREES.

JUDGE WANTS TO MAKE IT FOR 8.30 A.M.. MURRAY CAN BE PRESENT OR WAIVE HIS RIGHT TO APPEAR. THIS WILL BE ACCEPTABLE. PRETRIAL STATUS AND CONFERENCE, SAME FLOOR FRIDAY, JUNE 3, 2011, AT 8:30 A.M.. ASKS WHAT DO WE ANTICIPATE DISCUSSING, ANY NEW DISCOVERY, EXPERT REPORTS, FURTHER MOTIONS IN LIMINE, ETC.?

CHERNOFF SAYS HE ASSUMES SO, BUT WILL MEET TO DISCUSS.

WALGREN SAYS THEY WILL ALSO MEET TO DISCUSS SHORTENING OF QUESTIONNAIRES OR MODIFYING, IF COURT AGREES.

CHERNOFF ASKS IF JUDGE CAN PROVIDE RELIEF FROM SUBPOENAS THAT HAVE BEEN ISSUED, TO EXTEND THEM.

JUDGE AGREES ABSOLUTELY. DON’T WANT TO LOSE JURISDICTION, SUBPOENAS, BODY ATTACHMENTS, ETC. FOR VARIOUS WITNESSES WERE HELD UNTIL MAY 9, 2011; WILL BE HELD UNTIL SEPTEMBER 8, 2011, THAT WAS SUBPOENAS, BODY ATTACHMENTS HOLDS FOR TOHME TOHME, ARNOLD KLEIN, PHILLIPS.

CHERNOFF POINTS OUT THERE WAS ONE FOR BRANCA, BUT BRANCA IS A DIFFERENT ISSUE.

JUDGE SAYS, WHATEVER THEY WERE, THEY WILL ALL BE HELD UNTIL SEPTEMBER 8, 2011. COUNSEL MUST NOTIFY THEM, AND NOT LET THEM RELY ON FINDING OUR FROM THE MEDIA.

CHERNOFF SAYS HE WILL BEGIN TO CALL THEM NOW.

JUDGE ASKS IF THERE IS ANYTHING ELSE THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED NOW? ALL PARTIES ANSWER “NO.”

JUDGE REMINDS MURRAY OF HIS BOND STANDING, THEN REPEATS, SAME TO MURRAY, EXPENSE , EFFICIENCY, BLAH BLAH BLAH.