that testified for the defense. they were good. i thought they were better than the expert witnesses who testified. megyn: the one guy kissed him on the head after he left the witness stand. he loves dr. murray. we heard the judge tell the jury, i never heard this jury instruction. if the character evidence is so compelling you could find reasonable doubt from that. that s what you gather from that instruction. jurors can say there is a reasonable doubt. megyn: that s why the prosecution has to push this, it was all about money. they have to counter that. no. i disagree. that s too much. you don t have to go about with the money. megyn: but they have gone there. i want to ask about this. we have been talking about whether they are going to
relationship for services rendered. what they are argue is he cared a lot, he cared about the $150,000 a month he was getting. all the character witnesses that testified for him, they don t stack up to much because those people were in hospitals when they were taking care of him. and conrad murray was mailing to his girlfriend. he knew of he wasn t supposed to have it. if they push that argument too hard that would be my only criticism of the prosecution. they don t have to proffer that he was money hungry, insensitive. there is a lot of evidence showing that this guy was otherwise a compassionate guy who gave to the poor, who didn t care about money. now, they don t have to prove that so why go there. i think it takes the sting away about character witnesses
not guilty because they care about him, could say it fell short of a willful and wanton disregard. megyn: will the jurors believe conrad murray cared about michael jackson or will they believe was motivated by money, $150,000 a month, and doing whatever it was his employer/the addict asked of him. i want to play a little bit more sound top that point from the prosecutor. conrad murray sought payment for services rendered. services rendered being the provision of propofol to michael jackson in his bedroom on an almost nightly basis for over two months, according to conrad murray s own word. for services rendered. not for proper medical care, not for the sake of doing no harm, but an employee-employer
company. but then after that company failed there was a lot of evidence that somebody showed somebody should have known this was a firm with a very bad prospect in front of it that did not look like it was going to get taxpayer s money back. one of the things the house republicans are focused on has to do with there was considerable resistance to making this loan inside the administration. the folks in the treasury department fought with the people in the energy department saying you can t make this loan. their economic model isn t viable. it isn t going to happen, and the republicans want to know why. megyn: what is it they want that the white house is not giving? the white house dropped 20,000 emails or so on this subcommittee on the house energy committee saying we are doing everything we can to cooperate. but in talking to staffers on