PEOPLE VS CONRAD MURRAY JULY 6TH 2011

Summary taken from official court transcripts of hearing July 6th, 2011.

DEFENDANT CONRAD ROBERT MURRAY, NOT PRESENT, REPRESENTED BY NAREG GOURJIAN ESQ. (VIA SPEAKER PHONE) PEOPLE REPRESENTED BY DAVID WALGREN, DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY. ALSO PRESENT DEBORAH BRAZIL, DEPUTY DISTRICT ATTORNEY (VIA SPEAKER PHONE)

FOR THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. ALSO PRESENT VIA SPEAKER PHONE REPRESENTING SONY, KEVIN VICK, ESQ.

(THE FOLLOWING PROCEEDINGS WERE HELD IN CHAMBERS AND WERE NOT SEALED BY THE COURT:)

THE COURT: LET ME CALL THE CASE OF PEOPLE VERSUS CONRAD MURRAY. THE COURT IS CONDUCTING THESE PROCEEDINGS IN CHAMBERS IN DEPARTMENT 107, BUT THIS IS AN ON-THE-RECORD PROCEEDING. IT IS NOT IN AN IN CAMERA PROCEEDING. THE COURTROOM ITSELF IS BRUTALLY HOT, AND COURT IS ACTUALLY BEING CONDUCTED FOR OUR JURY TRIAL IN DEPARTMENT 103. BUT FOR THESE PURPOSES, I DECIDED TO COME BACK TO CHAMBERS. PRESENT IN THE CHAMBERS IS MR. WALGREN AND TELEPHONICALLY, MS. BRAZIL AND MR. GOURJIAN. I RECEIVED A NOTE FROM MS. BENSON A LITTLE EARLIER TODAY INDICATING THAT COUNSEL WANTED TO DISCUSS THE STATUS OF THE CASE IN VIEW OF THE UPCOMING APPEARANCE DATE, I BELIEVE, OF 12 JULY, AND I’M LED TO BELIEVE THAT MS. BRAZIL AND MR. GOURGIAN ARE AT SONY.

MS. BRAZIL: THAT’S CORRECT, YOUR HONOR. WE ARE ALSO JOINED BY SONY COUNSEL.

MR. VICK: THIS IS KEVIN VICK HERE FOR SONY.

THE COURT: GOOD AFTERNOON. COUNSEL, IS IT STIPULATED BETWEEN AND AMONG THE PARTIES THAT COURT CAN CONDUCT THESE ON-THE-RECORD PROCEEDINGS WITH MR. WALGREN HERE IN CHAMBERS AND OTHER COUNSEL TELEPHONICALLY FOR THE PEOPLE?

MR. WALGREN: YES, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: FOR THE DEFENSE, MR. GOURJIAN?

MR. GOURJIAN: YES.

THE COURT: AND FOR SONY?

MR. VICK: KEVIN VICK, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: WELL, I’M HERE, SO DO COUNSEL WANT TO GIVE ME AN UPDATE?

MR. GOURJIAN: SURE, YOUR HONOR. THIS IS MR. GOURJIAN.

THE COURT: THANK YOU FOR INTRODUCING YOURSELF SINCE YOU ARE ON THE PHONE. IT WOULD HELP WHENEVER WE HAVE A SPEAKER FOR THAT SPEAKER TO INTRODUCE HIMSELF OR HERSELF. MR. GOURJIAN?

MR. GOURJIAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE COURT SIGNED OFF ON THE STIPULATION, MR. CHERNOFF, MYSELF, AND DEBORHA BRAZIL FOR THE PEOPLE, YOUR HONOR, CAME TO SONY AND STARTED INSPECTING THE MATERIALS. WE STARTED ON JULY 28 AND HAVE BEEN HERE ALMOST EVERY DAY, EXCLUDING THE WEEKENDS, REVIEWING THE MATERIAL.

THE COURT: I THINK YOU SAID JULY.

MR. GOURJIAN: I APOLOGIZE. JUNE 28. SO WE HAVE BEEN HERE APPROXIMATELY SIX DAYS AND SO FAR, WE HAVE ONLY BEEN ABLE TO GET THROUGH ONE BOX WHICH CONTAINED SEVERAL BACKUP DRIVES. THERE ARE IN TOTAL 21 BOXES, A LOT OF WHICH, BASED ON THEIR LABELS, WE FEEL IS CRITICAL TO INSPECT. INITIALLY, WE HAD BELIEVED THE RECORDINGS WERE APPROXIMATELY 100 HOURS. HOWEVER, THERE ARE ABOUT EIGHT TO TEN DIFFERENT CAMERAS THAT WERE RECORDING THE REHEARSALS AND EACH ONE HAS DIFFERENT VIEWS AND DIFFERENT FOOTAGE. SO IT IS CRITICAL THAT WE REVIEW THE FOOTAGE FROM EACH CAMERA. TO BE SPECIFIC, THERE ARE TWO SPY CAMERAS, TWO OVERHEAD CAMERAS. THERE ARE TWO LINE CUT CAMERAS, A WIDECAM CAMERA AND WIDESHUT CAMERA. THEN WE HAVE THREE PERSONAL CAMERAS. ONE BELONGING TO A TRAVIS PAYNE. THE OTHER, TIM PATTERSON, AND ONE FROM SANDRINE ORABONA. EACH OF THESE CAMERAS RECORDED THE CONCERT REHEARSALS FOR ANY GIVEN DAY SO THERE IS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF MATERIAL FOR US TO GO THROUGH. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY. WE HAVE NOT TAKEN ANY DAYS OFF, BUT ALL PARTIES AGREE THAT IT IS CLOSE TO IMPOSSIBLE TO GET THROUGH EVEN HALF OF THIS STUFF BY FRIDAY FOR SONY AND FOR THE PARTIES TO BE ABLE TO BRIEF THE ISSUES AND BE ABLE TO ADDRESS THE MATTER ON TUESDAY FOR THE HEARING THAT IS SCHEDULED BEFORE YOUR HONOR. I BELIEVE ALL PARTIES ARE IN AGREEMENT, YOUR HONOR, IF IT IS AGREEABLE WITH THE COURT, TO POSSIBLY VACATE THE COURT DATE OF NEXT TUESDAY AND PICK A DATE IN THE NEAR FUTURE.

THE COURT: I DON’T HAPPEN TO KNOW ABOUT THE CONCEPT OF THE NEAR FUTURE. I KNOW I HAVE A TRIAL DATE THE BEGINNING OF SEPTEMBER THAT IS A MUST-GO TRIAL DATE AND THE PARTIES ON THEIR OWN ARE ADDRESSING THIS ISSUE BECAUSE, ONCE AGAIN, I HAVE NOT RULED ON ANY MOTION TO QUASH. SO WHEN YOU SAY VACATE THE NEXT APPEARANCE AND SET A NEW DATE IN THE NEAR FUTURE, WHAT IS THE SUGGESTED NEW DATE?

MR. GOURJIAN: YOUR HONOR, INITIALLY WHEN WE HAD SUBMITTED A STIPULATION, WE HAD THE JULY 27 DATE IN MIND. HOWEVER, THE COURT WAS HOPEFUL WE COULD GET THIS DONE SOONER. IF THE PARTIES WANT, WE CAN, YOU KNOW, GO BACK TO THE JULY 27 DATE, BUT I DON’T THINK THAT IS EVEN ENOUGH TIME FOR US TO GET THROUGH ALL OF THE MATERIALS.

THE COURT: WELL, YOU ARE REVIEWING THE MATERIALS WITH A HOPE AND EXPECTATION THAT THE MATERIALS ARE GOING TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WITHOUT ANY CERTAINTY WHATSOEVER OF THAT. AGAIN, I HAVE NOT RULED ON ANY MOTION TO QUASH BECAUSE OF THE PARTIES’ AGREEMENT. SO WHERE DOES THAT PLACE THE COURT IN TERMS OF THE UPCOMING TRIAL DATE WITH JURORS WHO ARE GOING TO BE SUMMONED? WHAT IS YOUR TAKE ON THAT, MR. GOURJIAN?

MR. GOURJIAN: YOUR HONOR, THAT IS PRECISELY WHY WE WANTED TO BRING THIS TO THE COURT’S ATTENTION NOW, SOONER THAN LATER, BECAUSE WE DIDN’T WANT TO BE IN A SITUATION WHERE JURORS WERE SUMMONED, THEN WE WERE FORCED TO FILE A MOTION TO CONTINUE. WE WERE HOPING WE CAN DEAL WITH THIS NOW AND TRY AND FIGURE OUT WHAT THE BEST WAY TO RESOLVE THIS IS I CAN REPRESENT TO THE COURT THAT IN OUR BRIEF REVIEW OF THE MATERIALS SO FAR, WE HAVE DISCOVERED SEVERAL ITEMS THAT IT IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR THE DEFENSE. I DON’T WANT TO SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE, BUT WE HAVE ALREADY PREPARED A LOG THAT WE HAVE PROVIDED TO SONY, A TENTATIVE LISTING OF THE MATERIALS THAT WE DO WANT TO BE PRODUCED FOR THE COURT TO VIEW AND MAKE ITS DECISION ON. BUT SO FAR, WE HAVE FOUND A LOT OF IMPORTANT STUFF.

THE COURT: MS. BRAZIL, YOUR THOUGHTS.

MS. BRAZIL: YOUR HONOR, I AGREE WITH MR. GOURJIAN THAT THERE IS A LOT OF MATERIAL YET TO BE REVIEWED AND WE WANTED TO ADVISE THE COURT AS TO OUR PROGRESS AS WELL AS WHAT WE BELIEVE WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US IN TERMS OF TIME TO VIEW WHAT IS IN THE BOXES THAT I’M LOOKING AT. REALISTICALLY, YOUR HONOR, WE DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO ESTIMATE FOR THE COURT HOW MANY MORE DAYS IT IS GOING TO TAKE US TO GO THROUGH THE MATERIALS THAT THE DEFENSE WANT TO SEE. IT JUST DOESN’T SEEM REALISTIC TO CONTINUE WITH THE DATE SCHEDULE WE HAVE RIGHT NOW WITH REGARD TO JULY 12 BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MUCH MORE IN FRONT OF US TO REVIEW. SO I AGREE WITH MR. GOURJIAN. WE FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO APPRISE THE COURT OF THE TASK THAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US AND THE PROGRESS THAT WE ARE ATTEMPTING TO MAKE AND LET THE COURT KNOW THAT WE HAVE A LOT OF TIME IN FRONT OF US THAT WE NEED TO DEVOTE TO REVIEWING MATERIALS.

THE COURT: DO THE MATH FOR ME. AT YOUR CURRENT RATE, HOW MANY MORE HOURS, OR DAYS, OR WEEKS WOULD IT TAKE TO REVIEW ALL OF THOSE MATERIALS? MAYBE, MR. VICK, I DON’T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO CHIME IN ALSO.

MR. VICK: SURE. YOUR HONOR, SONY TAKES NO POSITION WITH REGARD TO THE PARTIES’ REQUEST. HOWEVER, I DID WANT TO NOTE THAT IF THE BRIEFING AND HEARING WERE TO GO FORWARD AS CURRENTLY SCHEDULED, SONY COULD POTENTIALLY FACE SIGNIFICANTPREJUDICE. SONY’S DEADLINE TO FILE AN OPPOSITION TO THE PARTIES’ REQUEST IS NOON, THIS FRIDAY. YESTERDAY, WE RECEIVED THE PARTIES’PROVISIONAL LIST OF THINGS THEY WANT FROM LAST WEEK’S VIEWING. THOSE LISTS WERE VERY EXTENSIVE. I THINK THEY TOTALLED ABOUT 90 CLIPS COMBINED WITH MANY HOURS OF FOOTAGE REQUESTED. THAT FOOTAGE INCLUDED A LARGE AMOUNT OF CLIPS THAT WERE DUPLICATIVE AND CUMULATIVE, AND ALSO INCLUDED SOME MATERIALS THAT SEEMED TO BE OUTSIDE THESUBPOENA. NOW, SONY IS DOING ITS BEST TO EVALUATE CLIP REQUESTS AND TO RESPOND ACCORDINGLY. IF THE PARTIES WERE TO PROVIDE US WITH AN ADDITIONAL LIST TODAY OR TOMORROW FOR WHAT WE HAVE BEEN VIEWING THIS WEEK, I DON’T SEE HOW WE HAVE ENOUGH TIME TO ADEQUATELY RESPOND AND RESPOND TO THAT BY FRIDAY AT NOON. THAT IS PARTICULARLY TRUE IF WE GET, YOU KNOW, MORE EXTENSIVE REQUESTS FROM THE PARTIES. WE WOULD DO THE BEST WE COULD, YOUR HONOR, BUT WE WOULD BE IN A VERY TIGHT SPOT.

THE COURT: DO YOU HAVE SOME THOUGHTS, MR. WALGREN?

MR. WALGREN: I THINK IT IS CLEAR WHAT HAS BEEN REPRESENTED BY ALL PARTIES IS CLEARLY THE FRIDAY AT NOON AND JULY 12 DATE ARE UNREALISTIC, WHICH I’M CONCERNED ABOUT BUT I UNDERSTAND. BUT I’M MORE CONCERNED ABOUT GETTING SOME FINALITY ON THE TRIAL DATE BECAUSE IF THAT IS UNREALISTIC, I RATHER HAVE THAT RESOLVED SOONER RATHER THAN LATER AND IT IS SOUNDING LIKE THAT MAY BE UNREALISTIC. HOWEVER THE COURT IS GOING TO DEAL WITH THAT SITUATION, I THINK IT IS IN THE INTERESTS OF ALL PARTIES, AND THE COURT, AND THE JURORS, AND EVERYONE THAT THAT BE RESOLVED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

THE COURT: I’VE CERTAINLY HEARD FROM ALL OF YOU. I’M PREPARED TO VACATE THE JULY 12 APPEARANCE AND CONTINUE IT FOR ONE WEEK AFTER THAT FOR COUNSEL TO COME INTO COURT AND GIVE ME AN UPDATE AS TO STATUS. WHAT CAUSES ME SOME CONCERN IS THE LACK OF CERTAINTY OF ALL THIS, AND IT IS ONE OF THOSE ISSUES I CERTAINLY SEE ON THE HORIZON. I WAS PRESENTED WITH A MOTION TO QUASH WHICH TALKED ABOUT BURDENSOMENESS AND VOLUME AND HAVEN’T BEEN CALLED UPON TO RULE ON IT. THAT CAUSES ME GRAVE CONCERN BECAUSE, FROM WHAT I HEAR, YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT MASSIVE MATERIALS, EXTRAORDINARILY LABOR INTENSIVE, AND WHERE THESE PLACE THE OVERALL CASE IF WE ARE STILL AT THIS VERY EARLY STAGE OF PROCEEDINGS. MR. GOURJIAN?

MR. GOURJIAN: YOUR HONOR, I UNDERSTAND AND

APPRECIATE THE COURT’S CONCERNS. BUT, UNFORTUNATELY, FOR US TO ADEQUATELY DO OUR JOB IN REPRESENTING DR. MURRAY WE FEEL IT IS NECESSARY FOR US TO REVIEW THESE RECORDINGS. I KNOW IT IS A LITTLE DIFFICULT FOR THE COURT BECAUSE WE DON’T HAVE ANY DATE CERTAIN. BUT WHAT I AM CERTAIN OF IS EVEN VACATING TUESDAY’S COURT DATE AND GIVING US AN EXTRA WEEK WILL NOT BE SUFFICIENT TIME FOR US. AT A MINIMUM, I WOULD ASK THAT THE COURT AT LEAST CONTINUE IT FOR TWO TO THRE WEEKS OUT WHERE WE CAN THEN COME IN AND UPDATE THE COURT. I JUST THINK WE WILL BE IN THE SAME POSITION A WEEK FROM NOW.

THE COURT: THEN YOU WILL BE IN THAT POSITION A WEEK FROM NOW, BUT I NEED MORE OF A HANDLE ON THIS BECAUSE I MAY GET INVOLVED ON MY OWN. I’M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THE STATE OF AFFAIRS AND NEED WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS ABOUT VOLUME AND THE AMOUNT OF WORK YOU HAVE PUT INTO THIS. I’VE BEEN LED TO BELIEVE THAT BECAUSE THE PARTIES HAD NARROWED THE REQUESTED TIMES AND DATES, THAT IT WOULD MAKE THE WHOLE PROCESS A LOT EASIER. BUT, MR. VICK, THIS IS REQUIRING THAT EVERY SINGLE AUDIO AND/OR VIDEO BE REVIEWED?

MR. VICK: NO, NOT EVERY ONE, YOUR HONOR. BUT THUS FAR, WE HAVE FOUND A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FOOTAGE THAT APPEARS TO BE WITHIN THE POTENTIAL RANGE OF THE SUBPOENA OR AT LEAST IS AMBIGUOUS ENOUGH, WE HAVE HAD TO REVIEW IT TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER IT FALLS WITHIN.

MS. BRAZIL: YOUR HONOR, DEBORAH BRAZIL. IF I MAY PROVIDE THE COURT WITH SOME INFORMATION REGARDING VOLUME AND HOURS, I CAN DO THAT NOW SO THE COURT HAS A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT IS TAKING PLACE HERE. WITH REGARD TO THE HOURS EXPENDED, WE ARE — MYSELF, MR. GOURJIAN, MR. CHERNOFF HAS BEEN HERE, MR. VICK HAS BEEN HERE, OF COURSE, EVERY DAY — WE HAVE WORKED THROUGH LUNCH ALL DAY FROM 9:00 TO 5:00 EACH DAY.AND WHEN WE ARE REVIEWING THESE HARD DRIVES THAT CONTAIN CLIPS OF DAYS WITHIN THE PARAMETERS SET BY THE COURT AND AGREED UPON BY THE PARTIES, WE ARE FAST FORWARDING THROUGH ANY MATERIALS THAT DO NOT CONTAIN MR. JACKSON OR ACTUAL REHEARSAL FOOTAGE. FOR EXAMPLE, THERE IS A GREAT DEAL OF FOOTAGE CONCERNING INTERVIEWS WITH WARDROBE PERSONNEL OR LIGHTING TECHNICIANS THAT OCCURS BACKSTAGE. WE FAST FORWARD THROUGH THAT. RATHER, THE TECHNICIAN DOES IT ON OUR BEHALF. WE ARE LOGGING EVERYTHING THAT WE ARE VIEWING IN TERMS OF THE DATE, AND THE FILE, AND THE LOCATION, AND SO FORTH. BUT I DON’T WANT THE COURT TO BE MISLED AND BELIEVE THAT WE ARE WATCHING IN REALTIME OR WATCHING EVERYTHING THAT IS ON THE FOOTAGE. RATHER, WE ARE VERY NARROWLY FOCUSING OUR EFFORTS TO CAPTURE ONLY THAT VISUAL OR AUDIO MATERIAL THAT IS RELEVANT TO THE DEFENSE’S INQUIRY. AND WITH THAT, YOUR HONOR, WE HAVE GONE THROUGH PART OF FOUR HARD DRIVES. THREE HARD DRIVES NOW. FIVE HARD DRIVES. YOUR HONOR HAS TO UNDERSTAND THOSE HARD DRIVES CONTAIN A VOLUME OF MATERIAL THAT IS IN THE TERABYTE WORLD. I KNOW THE COURT HAS CONVEYED TO US THAT HE IS NOT PARTICULARLY TECHNOLOGICALLY SAVVY, BUT A TERABYTE CONTAINS A TON OF INFORMATION.

THE COURT: SO THE DEFINITION OF TERABYTE IS TON?

MS. BRAZIL: A TON. IT’S A LEGAL TERM I’M USING.

THE COURT: WHAT IS A TERABYTE? MR. VICK, DO YOU KNOW?

MR. VICK: I DON’T KNOW.

MR. WALGREN: A THOUSAND KILOBYTES.

MR. VICK: IN TERMS OF THE AMOUNT OF FOOTAGE WE HAVE WATCHED, I DON’T KNOW.

MS. BRAZIL: I’M SORRY, YOUR HONOR. I CAN GOOGLE IT FOR YOU.

THE COURT: THANK YOU. NO. WHAT THE PARTIES CAN DO IS THE PARTIES CAN COME IN ON THE 19TH, GIVE ME AN UPDATE. I’LL VACATE THE APPEARANCE ON THE 12TH AND ANY BRIEFING DATE, MR. VICK, BECAUSE I REALIZE WHAT YOU HAVE SAID TO ME. IT SIMPLY WOULDN’T BE FAIR THAT COUNSEL BE HELD TO A BRIEFING SCHEDULE AT THIS POINT. BUT I NEED A COURT APPEARANCE, AND I NEED YOU TO BE ABLE TO COME INTO COURT AND SHARE STATUS WITH THE COURT IN OPEN COURT. THAT IS ABOUT AS GOOD AS I CAN GIVE YOU RIGHT NOW. HOW IS THE 19TH? WHAT DAY OF THE WEEK IS THAT?

MR. WALGREN: CAN WE MAKE IT THE 20TH.

THE COURT: WHAT DAY OF THE WEEK IS THAT?

MR. WALGREN: WEDNESDAY.

THE COURT: I’M STARTING A VERY COMPLICATED CASE ON THE 21ST WITH PRESCREENED JURORS, AND I’M IN A COMPLICATED TRIAL RIGHT NOW. SO I’M IN A BIT OF A BIND SCHEDULING. SO THE 20TH.

MR. GOURJIAN: THE 20TH IS FINE WITH THE DEFENSE, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: WITH SONY?

MR. VICK: YES. THAT IS FINE, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO SUBMIT SOMETHING IN WRITING. IT IS NOT THAT THE POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN OPPOSITION, ET CETERA, THAT I WAS CONTEMPLATING, BUT SOMETHING IN TERMS OF STATUS THAT I CAN REVIEW SEPARATELY FROM ANY VERBAL REPRESENTATIONS. THAT CAN BE DONE BY 4:00 P.M. THE AFTERNOON BEFORE, THE 19TH.

MR. VICK: THAT IS SOMETHING YOU WANT FROM THE PARTIES, OR WOULD YOU LIKE SOMETHING FROM SONY AS WELL?

THE COURT: ABSOLUTELY, BECAUSE SONY HAS A POSITION IN THESE SITUATIONS AS WELL.

MR. VICK: YES, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU.

THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MS. BRAZIL?

MS. BRAZIL: SORRY TO INTERRUPT. DEBORAHBRAZIL. YOUR HONOR, WITH RESPECT TO THE UPDATE THAT YOU WERE ASKING FOR FILED BY 7-19, ARE YOU REQUESTING THAT FROM THE DEFENSE AND SONY?

THE COURT: WELL, I MEAN EVEN THE PEOPLE. I MEAN THE PEOPLE ARE NOT PART OF THIS WHOLE SUB ISSUE, BUT I WOULD CERTAINLY HEAR FROM YOU AS IT AFFECTS THE OVERALL COURSE OF THE TRIAL.

MS. BRAZIL: I UNDERSTAND, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU.

THE COURT: OKAY. SO AT THE REQUEST OF THE PARTIES, GOOD CAUSE SHOWN, I’M VACATING THE APPEARANCE ON 12 JULY AND SETTING FURTHER PROCEEDINGS ON 20 JULY 2011, PROMPTLY 8:30 A.M., AT WHICH TIME COUNSEL ARE ORDERED TO APPEAR. WOULD YOU ANTICIPATE, MR. GOURJIAN, THAT DR. MURRAY WILL BE PRESENT?

MR. GOURJIAN: I DO NOT, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: WE WILL NOTE THAT IF SOMETHING CHANGES, PLEASE ADVISE THE COURT.

MR. GOURJIAN: I WILL, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE ON BEHALF OF DR. MURRAY, MR. GOURJIAN?

MR. GOURJIAN: NO, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU.

THE COURT: ON BEHALF OF SONY, MR. VICK?

MR. VICK: NO, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU.

THE COURT: ON BEHALF OF THE PEOPLE, MS. BRAZIL?

MS. BRAZIL: NOTHING, YOUR HONOR. THANK YOU.

THE COURT: MR. WALGREN?

MR. WALGREN: NO. THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: ONCE AGAIN, THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE PUBLIC PROCEEDINGS. SO MS. THEODOROU, THE COURT REPORTER, HAS BEEN TAKING DOWN THESE PROCEEDINGS AND THE PROCEEDINGS WILL BE AVAILABLE IN TRANSCRIPT FORM FOR ANYBODY WHO WANTS THEM. THANK YOU. WE WILL SEE YOU ON 20 JULY.

MR. GOURJIAN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.

THE COURT: THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE CONCLUDED.

MR. WALGREN: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR.